9/11 Third Tower mystery "solved".

Status
Not open for further replies.
NeilFawcett said:
LOL! From the moment I saw this guys first post, in the back of my head there was a little voice saying, 'I bet he even thinks the lunar landings were fake'... And then a few posts later I was proved right.
Click to expand...

I think most people have missed this absolute pearler -

groen said:
the cover up operation was as big as the operation on the day itself, they had to collect all the video and pictures that showed missiles and fake the planes on tv.
Click to expand...
 
Hatter The Mad said:
Doubt it. In my experience, the 'truthers' always exaggerate, misrepresent and misquote. I'm afraid I am bundling you in the same group, so assuming you set out the purposely exaggerate. Sorry :(



Exactly.
Click to expand...

No need to appologise, I couldn't possibly care less what you think. I've bundled you into a group too.
But it is sad that we can't even discuss this without people assuming others are willing to lie to further their own argument.
 
Werewolf said:
... They know why it happened, they knew when it was built what could cause it to happen, hence they went to the effort and cost of building it with a lot of redundancy in the supporting structure** and fire retardant materials - what they didn't expect was for an aircraft considerably bigger than any around at the time of construction to be flown into it, removing most of the redundancy that had been planned/built in, and for the foam insulation to be in such a poor state ...
Click to expand...
Was a plane flown into Tower 7 :confused:
 
johnyccc said:
No need to appologise, I couldn't possibly care less what you think. I've bundled you into a group too.
But it is sad that we can't even discuss this without people assuming others are willing to lie to further their own argument.
Click to expand...
I'd happily discuss it if people stuck to hard facts, but they don't. Look at the thread - littered with assumptions, misinformation and outright made up ****.
 
AcidHell2 said:
Street lamps did get taken out by the plane, there is also plane wreckage at the pentagon, visible in photos and guess what the engine parts match the engines on flight 77.
Click to expand...

thats what i dont understand....how did this terrorist manage to fly the plane so fast and so low to the ground that it took out street lights. this guy would put the red arrows to shame he can do what they are capable of in a Boeing 757.
 
gambitt said:
How can you be sure? Unless you went there yourself with a team of forensic scientists, you are basing this on a few photographs and what you saw in the media.
Click to expand...

that;s the worst argument ever., Photos and plenty of eye witnesses.

UncleBensSauce said:
-Some owner or other getting them both insured seperately before the event
Click to expand...

The insurance was part of the contract of sale and had to be purchased and had been for years.

Amnesia said:
thats what i dont understand....how did this terrorist manage to fly the plane so fast and so low to the ground that it took out street lights. this guy would put the red arrows to shame he can do what they are capable of in a Boeing 757.
Click to expand...

No, that is totally different flying techniques. They aren't trying to fly near the ground with out crashing. They are trying to hit the ground at full throttle. Something which isn't particularly hard to do. Aim and go.
 
Last edited:
Amnesia said:
thats what i dont understand....how did this terrorist manage to fly the plane so fast and so low to the ground that it took out street lights. this guy would put the red arrows to shame he can do what they are capable of in a Boeing 757.
Click to expand...

not really... the red arrows would have flow just high enough that they didn't hit the lamp posts and as such hit at a higher speed.


It crashed a few seconds later is it surprising he managed to get low to the ground?
 
Amnesia said:
thats what i dont understand....how did this terrorist manage to fly the plane so fast and so low to the ground that it took out street lights. this guy would put the red arrows to shame he can do what they are capable of in a Boeing 757.
Click to expand...
Because he was aiming to crash the plane into the ground, whereas Red Arrow pilots....... aren't?

Goodness me.
 
Amnesia said:
thats what i dont understand....how did this terrorist manage to fly the plane so fast and so low to the ground that it took out street lights. this guy would put the red arrows to shame he can do what they are capable of in a Boeing 757.
Click to expand...

The red arrows normally try very hard not to crash their planes and so have some limits as to how close to street lights they prefer to go. It may suprise you but virtually every single 757 pilot manages such a "close to the ground" maneover every time they fly. They normally call it "landing on a runway" but it generally doesn't involve a large building to assist breaking.
 
RDM said:
The red arrows normally try very hard not to crash their planes and so have some limits as to how close to street lights they prefer to go. It may suprise you but virtually every single 757 pilot manages such a "close to the ground" maneover every time they fly. They normally call it "landing on a runway" but it generally doesn't involve a large building to assist breaking.
Click to expand...
 
Tefal said:
It crashed a few seconds later is it surprising he managed to get low to the ground?
Click to expand...

yeah thats the bit im finding hard to get my head around...im guessing he aimed for the building but it would take some skill to fly so low without hitting the ground with a plane of that size.
 
Amnesia said:
yeah thats the bit im finding hard to get my head around...im guessing he aimed for the building but it would take some skill to fly so low without hitting the ground with a plane of that size.
Click to expand...

Why, pilots do it every day when landing.
WW2 pilots did it most days when dive bombing ships. It's not as if there are many obstacles to avoid and they don't care about crashing, that's their plan.
 
Amnesia said:
yeah thats the bit im finding hard to get my head around...im guessing he aimed for the building but it would take some skill to fly so low without hitting the ground with a plane of that size.
Click to expand...

He was trained in flying such a plane so will have landing training, all he had to do was aim for the building and naturally to get that low (because the plane can't really do a divebomb run) as if he was landing.
 
RDM said:
The red arrows normally try very hard not to crash their planes and so have some limits as to how close to street lights they prefer to go. It may suprise you but virtually every single 757 pilot manages such a "close to the ground" maneover every time they fly. They normally call it "landing on a runway" but it generally doesn't involve a large building to assist breaking.
Click to expand...

no they dont go close to the ground...they actually touch it...it's called landing.
 
Amnesia said:
no they dont go close to the ground...they actually touch it...it's called landing.
Click to expand...

but for a long time before then they're petty close to the ground, all you have to do is a landing procedure and slam into a wall halfway through.
 
Amnesia said:
no they dont go close to the ground...they actually touch it...it's called landing.
Click to expand...

OK, work it out really slowly. Before they touch the ground, they get close to the ground, otherwise landing after going on holiday would be really incomfortable with a 500 foot drop right before touchdown...
 
Amnesia said:
no they dont go close to the ground...they actually touch it...it's called landing.
Click to expand...

and the pentagon wasn't touch down?

What do you think they are doing before touch down. Flying extremely close to the ground and when needed even put full throttle back on and climb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom