where is the airliner crash debris in the 911 Pentagon attack?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by geistkiesel, Jun 23, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    :shrug:
    Are they still giving out degrees in physics from cracker jack boxes? The wingspan of the 757 is over 100 feet. The impact of the aircraft would have been spread out over this distance, and expecially the exposive power of the jet fuel would have been in three separate events as the right wing, fuselage and left wing impacted the building and ruptured fuel tanks in all three locations.

    Of over 2000 visits to this thread, few if any have the challenged level of mental talents that are suggested by your use of arithematic. :shrug:
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Yes. Buffalo and I are contract employees of the CIA Lizardoid command centre. Buffalo has seniority though - he's such a cranky old fellow. He gets mad at me. I'm always stealing his invisible ink pens. Just too lazy to phone Regulon-5 for more.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    The impact of the alleged aircraft would have been spread out over more than 100 feet of fuel containing wing and center fuel tanks. The 757 allegedly impacted at 45 degrees, which wiould result in three explosions, not one.Sure a KC-97 is different from the 757, but you asked the question regarding my flight experience and I answered.

    I have never seen a crash site or photographs of one where the tail section was not recognizable. Take your simpleminded arithmetic and make us laugh at that.:shrug:

    Have you ever worked in ALexandria, Virginia?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    More silliness points of a most serious matter.:shrug: Your not Aussies are you? This would be my 4th guess.
     
  8. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    Do you actually think that truth and secrecy are essentiall to those with manipulative control of communication and propaganda systems? The public naturally believes in their gopvernment and the people responsible fopr operating that govern,ment. Sure we all habe out political and philosophical differences, but so what about your claimn the perps were amateurs? Not so, they were extremely professional and had the American and World opinion reaction measured accuarately down to a very accurate number.

    "who would believe it?" I did at first and then a funny thing happened to me on the on the way to the forum when I suspected that some political forces were attempting to knife me and my country in the back.

    Too many of my friends, family and just plain old AMerican citizens have had everything taken from them in defending our country. You ,may think this is just an exercise in "opinion exchange" and proving who is the smartest one in the room don't you? You waller in the putrid soup of demonstrating superior egos and cleverness in down grading personalities in your pompous posturing for those visiting this thread. What possible value is there in your attempt to distract others from investigating 911 and scenarios other than that officially spoon fed us?

    Haven't you ever been aware of tyrannies, despots and evil political systems?

    Treason doth never prosper. The reason for this is that if it did prosper none would dare call it treason.

    Doth statements like this 16th century English wit uttered have any effect on you?
     
  9. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    To all concerned. here is my reply to Moderator James R, who dinged me with '4 points of bad behavior' complained of by Geoffp after reading a post of. I think the matter is cogent and appropriate to this thread.


    Methinks you have misconstrued a metaphor with an actual threat of violence or such. There is a common saying going around that when a person is "done" as GeoffP said he was, actually "done, done" together with the "accidental pun" you cannot reasonably consider the 'pitchfork' statement as anything other than what it obviously was, to wit a metaphor castigating one involved voluntarily in a very serious discussion, exceeding by orders of magnitude topics such as the validity, or not, of Einsteins's SRT, for example.
    You must take the whole statement in constext and not focus on just one word or restricted set of words. Remember I stated that a farmer friend using a pitchfork for spreading hay loaned me the pitchfork and then I stated so "hey bend over..." etc., duh, "hay" and "hey" OK?
    I suggest you use some of your in depth legal expertise here and look at the totality of the the post and see that it was truly an exercise in restraint and that any complaints from Mr. GeoffP is merely an attempt to gain points in the discussion by having me declared as having exceeded reasonable or acceptable limitations in the exercise of my speech. There was no shouting of "fire" in a crowded theater here; that from the totality of his posts one can see clearly that Geoffp is not an overly sensitive man cowering in his corner in fear of an assault by an anonymous and obviously fictional pitchfork wielder.

    Mr. GeoffP has on numerous occassions insulted my sensitive person, he has SCREAMED AT ME, and attempted to lower my reputation regarding those interested in the thread, which is over 1400 at the present time. I take this as part of the game and could not seriously complain to Mr. Geoffp regarding his surly and unsavory criticisms of myself. So what?

    I remember making some comment a couple of years back regarding an "Australian" characteristic that was considered, or taken, inititally, as a serious and scurilous attack on one's national identity. If I remember I did at that time explain that the statement, whatever it was, was intended as a joke and was not in any way intended as if it were racists, or sexist, or anti-nationalist in that truly unacceptable form. Myself and this "Aussie" have had many serious discussions and have traded many sharp and stinging barbs that exceeded by orders of magnitude that pain reasonably considered as suffered by Mr. GeoffP. Finally, as I remember, the Aussie, while not doubling over in acute painfull spasms felt in his rib cage, I did suspect, at the very least, a not alltogether successful repression of an Aussie smile, such that one might expect from the Average Downunderone when observing a kangaroo with an expression of disbelief on its face as a railroad station accelerated away from it when the kangaroo thought, in fact, that it was she accelerating from the railroad station!!!
    Would Mr. Geoffp have any real understanding of this example, do you think?
    For the sake of maintaining harmony I would accept a stern castigation, but shy other than one measured by any number greater than zero (I assume you are restricting your degree of seriousness with the use of integers).
    Your respectfull colleague amd Yank admirer,
    Geistkiesel (As OJ unbelievably intimated, "I was in Chicago when all that stuff went down." )
    P.S. Please publish this reply in the thread from which the complaint originated.
    Also, I suspect you and I have opposing views on the matter of the "domestic black bag scenario" regarding 911 and I likewise could never consider your judgement in this matter as tarnished or biased by that difference. I only bring this matter to your attention in the event that a small, but significant bias had the slightest scintilla of effect in reaching your decision. I truly believe that you would not want, in your own soul, to have erred in any meager degree in this matter. While you have, by virtue of your position as a moderator, been accused of exceeding the best of reasonable judgement from time to time (See MAcM discussions), those criticisms go with the territory [of moderator] though you would not want to see yourself in a light dimmed by any such perceptable bias, of this I am unconditionally and unqualifiedly certain.
    GK
     
  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    the nose hits long before the wings, making the leading hole, and the inner section of the wings hit first, folding the wings back. The fuel followed the plane inside, and burned the skin of the plane etc.

    If you look at pictures of the Pentagon immediately afterwards, you can see the scars left by the wings on each side of the main hole.

    Cruise missiles arent as big as that hole, and don't have wings like that.

    So the plane all those eyewitnesses saw coming in low to the Pentagon seems to have hit it - although of course the Pentagon is clever enough to have rigged a very complicated story of hijacking etc, to avoid having to admit to terrorists having missiles. Or something.
    The building did not collapse in free fall - time it yourself, on the videos. It's important, btw, to catch the very first motions of fall, because that's where most of the time is used up. It started slow. It's also important to realize that the videos don't show the whole fall - the last stories are hidden, by buildings and smoke. You have to add time at the end, to get it to the ground. I got well over 11 seconds, maybe even 13 + , with freefall being about 8.

    Crashing a jetliner into the complex, touchy, very delicate setup necessary to do a controlled demolition of such a large building would be the height of foolishness - bound to screw it up. The guys that do that for a living - who were nowhere around, btw, so it was amateur hour - even measure the exact lengh of their connection wires, to handle and time millisecond electrical delays. And the slightest screwup would spell disaster. Yet the buildings began their falls just above the impact story, right in the maximum heat of the fire - exactly where the complicated controlled demo stuff would be most likely to have been damaged and fail.

    Too bad they didn't just think of having a set of terrorist bombs in the building, and save themselves enormous risk and hassle. But the combination of supreme competence and Mission Impossible timing with the utter stupidity of concocting such an elaborate cover plot in the first place is characteristic of mythical plotters.
     
  11. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    Now I must rest a bit from the traumatic exercise. Neddy, I bid you, please enter the fray, one side or another, and give it your deepest and most acute scrutiny, OK ol' chap?

    Remember lend lease!!!!
     
  12. Dunn11x Jesus Christ is The Messiah! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    183
    Good point!
     
  13. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    No, the wings would not swivel and fold against the airplane. The wings would rupture when striking the buildinf and would spew jet fuel immediatelly.

    There is no visible mechanical damage to the building on both sides of the airplane centerline.

    No, the Pentagon wasn 't covering up an embarrassing situation, they were, and continue to, cover up acts of treason.

    It was Donald Rumsfeld who first uttered the "cruise missile" theory in his freudian slip. But a cruise missile with explosives could blow such a hole. The wings would hardly be an issue.

    ]

    The rapid fall of the TT and Tower 7 has been analyzed by several engineers and scientists. The roof of Tower 7 falls to earth in less than 6.6 seconds, while an object dropped from the roof in a vacuum would hit the ground in 6.6. seconds (this follows from an equation for free fall). The Twin Towers fall very rapidily to the ground with , with the upper part falling nearly as rapidly as ejected debris, which demonstrates the free fall speed through the air. Where is the delay that must be expected due to the Law of Conservation of Momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics? That is, as higher falling floors strike lower floors, including intact steel supports columns, the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. If the central support columns remained standing , then the effective resistive mass would be less, but this is not the case: somehow the enormous support columns failed or disintegrated along with the falling floors. How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing building? This cintradiction is ignored by FEMA, NIST abd The 911 commiaaion reports, none of which analyzed conservation of momentum and fall times. The contradiction is esily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, according to which explosives quickly removed lower floor material, including steel support collumns and allowed near free fall speed collapsing.

    There was months of time available to install the explosives before 911. The architects and perpetrators of 911 were hardly amateurs and the demolition sequencing is not an overly sensitive situation. The "connection wires" are no problem when considering the availibility of a computer program to modulate the explosion sequences. The technology is not secret.

    There is no evidence in the North Tower that support columsn were damaged in such a way that would prohibit protection of the explosive charges. Certainly the South Tower support columns were not impacted at all as the aircraft exited the building adjacent to the side of aricraft entry. Therefore virtually all mechanical damage here can be discounted as significant as well as discounting support column failure due to heat from burning jet fuel. Kerosene, jet fuel, burns at a maxiomum temperature, in diffuse conditions at 650 degrees C. Experts have determined that the maximum temperature expected was around 450 degrees C. At 650 degrees C the support columns could still support 3 times the overhead weight of the buildng. This is brought to us by MIT Professor Thomas Eager. Others, including Frank Gayle, stated that jet fuel burning did not, and could not, reach steel melting temperatures under the conditions existing at the time. The considerable amount of molten metal is not discussed in the FEMA, NIST or 911 Commission Reports and the embarrassing fact is exacerbated when considering the collapse of Tower 7 which was not struck by an aircraft and had no source of jet fuel to heat the support structures, yet this building collapsed in the same mode as did the Twin Towers

    How do you think the explosives got into the Twin Towers and Tower 7, by magic? There was ample time and opportunity pre 9/11/01 to set up the explosive and coordinate the collapsing sequence. You think, do you, that the explosion scenario requires superhuman technological competence do you? They did set up terrorist bombs in the Twin Towers and Tower 7. The President's brother was Director of security for the TT after all - coibcidence?

    This statement above is not rational or even reasonable, it is a reflection of your inability to accept topics for rational discussion to which you strongly disagreed with before the conversation began.


    Now in the Pentagon situation there is some interesting media coverage.
    See the second gpicture in this link showing support structures in the Pentagon bulging outward from the building, so your cynical sketicism may have hit on the tuth of the matter, though in a manner least to your liking.

    Some have made a case for the"hole being made by engineers from the 3rd Infantry DIvision as an exit point for cleaning out rubble interior to the Pentagon. Look at the debris, and look at the outward bulging support structures above.

    Some interesting pictures and discussion and questions - such as altered photos

    For those of you that question the ability of a conspiracy to succeed because of the large number of persons that would jeoprodize the security of the treachery, well the answer is simple. You have been fooled. Right before your eyes you see proof of treason yet you are unable to digest the data and information as it occurred. If you can be lead by the propaganda string tied to your noses, and that you have become avid supporters of the cabal that is unable to entertain the slightest, even hypothetical, possibility of a domestic black bag operation, then Mr. and Ms. Average Trusting Citizens could be easily fooled also.

    This is not to say the mentality of the public is challenged, but most folks have no skills, talent, training , education and even interest in going through the laborious analysis, they, in general, rely on what the see on TV, the news shows, the fictional accounts, the propaganda. Propaganda does not require a tightly held control over what is made available for public consumption. Believers, such as those opposing this thread spread the rumors.
     
  14. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    "Complained of"? I don't remember complaining about anything of the kind. I remember taking the piss out of you, but not complaining.

    OK no one cares. No, really.

    This is totally false. My brother was killed in a pitchfork accident when I was six. I witnessed the entire thing. Your pitchfork comment was very *sniff* hurtful.

    Yep. Also your spelling, "occassion"ally.

    True. Sometimes in the text too.

    One cannot lower what is already at the asymptotic bottom.

    Bots, miscreants and Buffalo.

    Meh. Go ahead. Make my disinterest.

    Like what? Personally, I would never insult the Australian character or any of its sometimes questionable culture, including but not being limited to: dwarf tossing, drunken tavern brawls, snake juggling, crocodile wrestling, spider swallowing, shark surfing, theft, murder, the persecution of foreigners or Brisbane.


    :bugeye: Allll rightie...

    He probably would have, if it made any bloody sense.

    While I have no doubt as to the lunacy of this last comment, I don't agree with castigation. What would you pee with? It seems very harsh.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    uke:

    Sincerely,

    Geoff
     
  15. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Infraction. Keke.

    Now go seek the assistance of the psychiatric branch of medicine.
     
  16. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    I find 9/11 suspicious but if you think that our incompetent government could pull this cover up off you are wrong. Plus I in the aviation industry and can tell you that a plane is made up of mostly lightweight honeycomb and aluminum and plastic. so any debree from such a horrific crash would be small and mininal, I would aslo imgaine that the pentagon is heavely reinforced, have you ever seen the video of that jet hitting a brick wall? Not a whole lot left there, I imagine thats what this crash was like.
     
  17. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Yeah I remember that one. Flattened the jet to nothing. Remember the Russian jet that went down at that airshow? Almost nothing left.
     
  18. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Here's a side point: does it strike anyone as odd that geist has what is clearly a pic of himself but with his hat pulled down to hide his eyes, yet is almost certainly posting from an unprotected IP address? It's characteristic of these "Troofers", I think: wanting the world to listen to them and adore them, all while staying in the shadows.

    Paranoid monomanical lunacy. Hey! everyone has it. Just don't let it run the show, okay?
     
  19. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    So if a plane didn't hit the pentagon...what happened to flight 77 and all the people on it?
     
  20. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    It never existed man....-puff puff- think about it man....woaaaahhh
     
  21. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    wow...man...like.. for real? (reaches for doobie from shi) puff..puff....thats like...farout man.
     
  22. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Denialists, the both of you.
     
  23. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,471
    do you know hoiw many people were on the plane?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page