Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > Conspiracy theory corner

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-23-2009, 07:48 PM
elwood127's Avatar
elwood127 elwood127 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 85
9/11 conspiracy nuts

For those who believe that the one jet couldn't have crashed in the field, here is a video explaining why there was no noticable hole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWdcVo6zIYI
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-23-2009, 07:53 PM
Boreas's Avatar
Boreas Boreas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by elwood127 View Post
For those who believe that the one jet couldn't have crashed in the field, here is a video explaining why there was no noticable hole.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWdcVo6zIYI
Okay, now explain why there was such a small hole and no wreckage at the Pentagon.

John

[EDIT] Well, now that I've watched the video it might explain what happened at the Pentagon but it hasn't anything to do with a plane going down in a field.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.

Last edited by Boreas; 12-23-2009 at 08:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-24-2009, 07:21 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
Did the jet in PA 'crash' or were the people on board trying to keep it airborne but were unable to do so. There is a big difference between a large jet going in at a dive (Flight 418 north of Montreal) and going in as a gliding angle (craash back in the 70 at Malton near Toronto).
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-24-2009, 08:29 AM
Boreas's Avatar
Boreas Boreas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander View Post
Did the jet in PA 'crash' or were the people on board trying to keep it airborne but were unable to do so. There is a big difference between a large jet going in at a dive (Flight 418 north of Montreal) and going in as a gliding angle (craash back in the 70 at Malton near Toronto).
I don't remember whether we ever learned if the passengers were trying to save the plane or crash it but didn't the hijackers kill the pilots? I do remember that the plane went nearly straight in.

John
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-26-2009, 01:38 AM
elwood127's Avatar
elwood127 elwood127 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 85
All three 9/11 planes were traveling faster than the video jet. Atomization is going to occur either way. The planes were reduced to dust on impact.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-26-2009, 09:52 AM
Boreas's Avatar
Boreas Boreas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by elwood127 View Post
All three 9/11 planes were traveling faster than the video jet. Atomization is going to occur either way. The planes were reduced to dust on impact.
Well, the 747 is the fastest jetliner. It cruises at 550 mph, not a lot faster than the plane in the video but do you actually know how fast the three 0/11 jets were traveling on impact?

Also, atomization depends on many other factors, including what the plane hits and at what angle. The WTC isn't the same as a massive concrete block mounted on shock absorbers. Neither is a field.

John
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.