ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags pentagon , popular mechanics

Reply
Old 15th March 2008, 07:01 PM   #1
tanabear
Critical Thinker
 
tanabear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 286
What caused the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon?

This is a question I posed to Totovader at his website and I did not get an answer. Totovader usually responds to questions with same general answers..."contradiction"..."Ockham's Razor"..."non-sequitur." I thought I might pose the question here so I could receive a greater variety of responses. Since the people here at JREF believe in consensus science as opposed to the experimental method, maybe we will be able to finally put an end to all the conjectures. So please pick your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon.

A) The nose of the plane caused the hole in the C-Ring. Lee Evey, the Pentagon Renovation Program spokesman stated, “the nose of the plane just barely broke through the inside of the C Ring, so it was extending into A-E Drive a little bit.” Donald Rumsfeld stated, “I’m told nose is - is still there.”

B) The hole was made by one of the planes engines. “a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane.” MDW News service.

C) The hole was created by a shockwave from the plane's impact.
National Geographic special, “Seconds to Disaster."

D) A "circle or ball of energy." Purdue University

E) Popular Mechanics claimed that the hole was created by the plane’s landing gear. "The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide, not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage."

F) In the History Channel Documentary, “9/11 Conspiracies Episode: Fact or Fiction”, Allyn Kilsheimer’s explanation was, “The plane became almost like an artillery shell or tank round.

G) Rapid Wall Breaching Kit

H) Unknown

So please nominate your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring.

Last edited by tanabear; 15th March 2008 at 07:04 PM. Reason: spelling
tanabear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:07 PM   #2
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,901
Excellent OP Tana. This is an important point, and I'm just as curious as you are as to what are the prevailing theories for this interesting piece of evidence. For those who would like to review, this is the first picture of the exit hole. You can tell by the smoke. All other subsequent images were taken over the course of the next few days.

__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:16 PM   #3
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,359
I've heard a few different theories. Some suggest the landing gear, some suggest some kind of...I guess "percussion" for lack of a better word from this layman. It could be many things. What it doesn't appear to me is to discredit the 'official story'.

ETA WOW. Something that can actually have more than one explanation.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

Last edited by twinstead; 15th March 2008 at 07:18 PM.
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:18 PM   #4
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,901
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
It could be many things. What it doesn't appear to me is to discredit the 'official story'.
I am so shocked I slowly took another sip of my Bell's Special Double Cream Stout. No lie.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:20 PM   #5
LastChild
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,062
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
This is a question I posed to Totovader at his website and I did not get an answer. Totovader usually responds to questions with same general answers..."contradiction"..."Ockham's Razor"..."non-sequitur." I thought I might pose the question here so I could receive a greater variety of responses. Since the people here at JREF believe in consensus science as opposed to the experimental method, maybe we will be able to finally put an end to all the conjectures. So please pick your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon.

A) The nose of the plane caused the hole in the C-Ring. Lee Evey, the Pentagon Renovation Program spokesman stated, “the nose of the plane just barely broke through the inside of the C Ring, so it was extending into A-E Drive a little bit.” Donald Rumsfeld stated, “I’m told nose is - is still there.”

B) The hole was made by one of the planes engines. “a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane.” MDW News service.

C) The hole was created by a shockwave from the plane's impact.
National Geographic special, “Seconds to Disaster."

D) A "circle or ball of energy." Purdue University

E) Popular Mechanics claimed that the hole was created by the plane’s landing gear. "The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide, not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage."

F) In the History Channel Documentary, “9/11 Conspiracies Episode: Fact or Fiction”, Allyn Kilsheimer’s explanation was, “The plane became almost like an artillery shell or tank round.

G) Rapid Wall Breaching Kit

H) Unknown

So please nominate your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring.
Come on you can't make them commit to one of these. What if the one they commit to gets found out to be wrong? Besides it's not important to a debunker what did cause it. It's only important to pretend to know what didn't cause it.
LastChild is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:24 PM   #6
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,000
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
I am so shocked I slowly took another sip of my Bell's Special Double Cream Stout. No lie.

Why are you shocked? Do you actually believe that any of the explanations provided by tanabear would cast doubt on the whole of the generally accepted account of events on 9/11, or even just the events at the Pentagon?

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 15th March 2008 at 07:26 PM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:24 PM   #7
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
This is a question I posed to Totovader at his website and I did not get an answer. Totovader usually responds to questions with same general answers..."contradiction"..."Ockham's Razor"..."non-sequitur." I thought I might pose the question here so I could receive a greater variety of responses. Since the people here at JREF believe in consensus science as opposed to the experimental method, maybe we will be able to finally put an end to all the conjectures. So please pick your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon.

A) The nose of the plane caused the hole in the C-Ring. Lee Evey, the Pentagon Renovation Program spokesman stated, “the nose of the plane just barely broke through the inside of the C Ring, so it was extending into A-E Drive a little bit.” Donald Rumsfeld stated, “I’m told nose is - is still there.”

B) The hole was made by one of the planes engines. “a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane.” MDW News service.

C) The hole was created by a shockwave from the plane's impact.
National Geographic special, “Seconds to Disaster."

D) A "circle or ball of energy." Purdue University

E) Popular Mechanics claimed that the hole was created by the plane’s landing gear. "The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide, not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage."

F) In the History Channel Documentary, “9/11 Conspiracies Episode: Fact or Fiction”, Allyn Kilsheimer’s explanation was, “The plane became almost like an artillery shell or tank round.

G) Rapid Wall Breaching Kit

H) Unknown

So please nominate your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring.
Terral is that you?
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:27 PM   #8
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
wasnt the original hole created by the landing gear and then firefireghters knocked out some more bricks?

but oh, i forgot, the FDR says the plane didnt even hit the Pentagon. So the hole must have been caused by Darth Vader's ray O'Death.

Last edited by Thunder; 15th March 2008 at 07:28 PM.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:27 PM   #9
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,901
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Why are you shocked? Do you actually believe that any of the explanations provided by tanabear would cast doubt on the whole of the generally accepted account of events on 9/11, or even just the events at the Pentagon?
Do you prefer one of the options? This is the point of the OP.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:32 PM   #10
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,163
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
A) The nose of the plane caused the hole in the C-Ring. Lee Evey, the Pentagon Renovation Program spokesman stated, “the nose of the plane just barely broke through the inside of the C Ring, so it was extending into A-E Drive a little bit.” Donald Rumsfeld stated, “I’m told nose is - is still there.”
I'd hardly go to Rumsfeld as a source for disaster info.

Quote:
B) The hole was made by one of the planes engines. “a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane.” MDW News service.
Source?

Quote:
C) The hole was created by a shockwave from the plane's impact.
National Geographic special, “Seconds to Disaster."
Sorry, I'm going to need an exact quote in context on this.

Quote:
D) A "circle or ball of energy." Purdue University
Ditto

Quote:
E) Popular Mechanics claimed that the hole was
created by the plane’s landing gear
. "The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide, not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage."
Sounds like Pop Mech wasn't the only one. ASCE says it as well.

Quote:
F) In the History Channel Documentary, “9/11 Conspiracies Episode: Fact or Fiction”, Allyn Kilsheimer’s explanation was, “The plane became almost like an artillery shell or tank round.
Is this specifically referring to that hole, and does it contradict other theories in any way?

Quote:
G) Rapid Wall Breaching Kit
All kids got 'em these days.

Quote:
H) Unknown
Bunnies.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:32 PM   #11
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,259
The correct answer is A through F: The hole was caused by the jet's impact. Which part of the jet specifically is something we depend on primary sources to tell us about, and those sources provide a range of answers, not a specific one. However, those sources are all in agreement that the hole was ultimately a product of the jet hitting the Pentagon.

If you want more detail, we're the wrong ones to ask; to the best of my knowledge, none of us here were there that day. I certainly wasn't. That question should be directed to the people who actually dealt with the damage and debris.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."

Last edited by ElMondoHummus; 15th March 2008 at 07:34 PM. Reason: Added text; the first paragraph was a bit thin.
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:34 PM   #12
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,901
Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
The correct answer is A through F: The hole was caused by the jet's impact.

If you want more detail, we're the wrong ones to ask; to the best of my knowledge, none of us here were there that day. I certainly wasn't. That question should be directed to the people who actually dealt with the damage and debris.

This is anti-logic. You are suggesting that the nose, landing gear, and engine all made that hole, which you can see for yourself in the pic above. Yet, in the pic, we do not see a nose, landing gear or engine.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:40 PM   #13
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,000
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
This is the point of the OP.

But it wasn't the point of your post, to which I was responding. Again: Why are you shocked? Do you actually believe that any of the explanations provided by tanabear would cast doubt on the whole of the generally accepted account of events on 9/11, or even just the events at the Pentagon?
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:44 PM   #14
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,329
Options A, C, D, E and F are not mutually exclusive. Options B and G are unlikely and/or stupid. Option H is meaningless.
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:45 PM   #15
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,901
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
But it wasn't the point of your post, to which I was responding. Again: Why are you shocked? Do you actually believe that any of the explanations provided by tanabear would cast doubt on the whole of the generally accepted account of events on 9/11, or even just the events at the Pentagon?
The fact that you, nor anyone else, can point to a conclusive explanation for the hole is cause for concern and further investigation. At best, you have an unsubstantiated hypothesis. That should ring your curiosity bell, sadly, it obviously does not.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:47 PM   #16
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,259
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
This is anti-logic. You are suggesting that the nose, landing gear, and engine all made that hole, which you can see for yourself in the pic above. Yet, in the pic, we do not see a nose, landing gear or engine.
By taking that answer too literally, you miss my point. What I'm saying is any one of them could have been the cause. Whichever one of them is responsible happens to be irrelevent, because the hole was created either by some component of the plane or by some effect of the impact. Either way, the hole is a result of the jet hitting the Pentagon, regardless of the specific component or effect.

And, my ultimate point was completely ignored: The ones who dealt with the wreckage and building debris are the ones who'd know what caused the hole. They're the ones to ask. None of us here need that level of detail; it's only the conspiracy peddlers who obsess with minituae in their quest to uncover inconsistencies.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:49 PM   #17
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,259
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The fact that you, nor anyone else, can point to a conclusive explanation for the hole is cause for concern and further investigation. At best, you have an unsubstantiated hypothesis. That should ring your curiosity bell, sadly, it obviously does not.
Incorrect. We know from FDR, ATC radar, and witness testimony that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. The fact that none of us here knows the specific component or effect that caused the hole is irrelevant. We already have all those other pieces of evidence.

You'll also note that choices A through F are either components of an aircraft or consequences of one impacting. Or in short, they actually point at the same overall cause: A jet impacting the building.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:51 PM   #18
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The fact that you, nor anyone else, can point to a conclusive explanation for the hole is cause for concern and further investigation. At best, you have an unsubstantiated hypothesis. That should ring your curiosity bell, sadly, it obviously does not.
Wow again...Red you are on a roll tonight. First you admit WTC 7 was a CD, then you admit you buy into the idiocy that Silverstein admitted the CD on TV and now here you admit that you don't think a plane hit the pentagon. Your woo would make Rick Flair jealous.
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:55 PM   #19
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,000
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The fact that you, nor anyone else, can point to a conclusive explanation for the hole is cause for concern and further investigation. At best, you have an unsubstantiated hypothesis. That should ring your curiosity bell, sadly, it obviously does not.

You're confusing curiosity with suspicion. I am curious, but you seem to want me to be suspicious. Yes, it would be nice to know precisely what caused that hole, but not knowing precisely in no way casts suspicion on the events of 9/11, or the events at the Pentagon specifically.

You apparently disagree. Why?

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 15th March 2008 at 07:58 PM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 07:59 PM   #20
Mangoose
Muse
 
Mangoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 923
Considering that the mound right outside the hole had the highest concentration of ground-up passenger remains (see the flash exhibit), I would be comfortable with saying "the plane" made the hole -- fuselage debris, a landing gear, bodies -- they all came through that hole. A miscellany of stuff.
Mangoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:03 PM   #21
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,329
This is another example of the ridiculous argument "Unless every single detail can be explained perfectly, any alternative explanation immediately becomes equally valid".

The OP reflects the mentality of someone who just does. Not. Get. It.
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:24 PM   #22
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,865
Originally Posted by LastChild View Post
Come on you can't make them commit to one of these. What if the one they commit to gets found out to be wrong? Besides it's not important to a debunker what did cause it. It's only important to pretend to know what didn't cause it.
Absolutely, 100% without doubt, I shall here rule out G. There was no wall-breeching charge involved in the creation of the punch-out hole.

Wall breaching kits rely on a shaped explosive charge. It does not matter whether you use a shaped charge or a lump, any explosive charge is going to radiate outward in every direction unless blocked by something. Thus, a wall breaching charge would spread bricks a good distance in all directions from the punch-out. This is not the case. Very few bricks seem to have moved much beyond the cneter of the pile. Sitting right on top of the bricks on the ground is what appears to be a sheet of dry wall from the interior of the building. This would suggest to me that whatever force removed the bricks removed the dry wall at the same time.. Since both bricks and drywall are closely associated and close to the building, it is obvious that the force was applied rather evenly across the entire failed area of the wall. This is not the least bit consistant with the plastic explosive doughnut used in the wall breaching kit.

That so much debris consistant with an aircraft or office furniture is piled on top of the drywall would suggest that the force which caused the failure of the wall also directed this debris out through that hole. Obviously, such force could not have been applied between the wall and the aircraft parts and office furnishings.

No breaching kit, period. end of story. If you wish to continue consideration of this theory, evidence can be found only at the outer limiits of the twilight zone and would not survive transportation back into this time/space continuum.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:45 PM   #23
tanabear
Critical Thinker
 
tanabear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 286
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
I've heard a few different theories. Some suggest the landing gear, some suggest some kind of...I guess "percussion" for lack of a better word from this layman. It could be many things. What it doesn't appear to me is to discredit the 'official story'.

ETA WOW. Something that can actually have more than one explanation.
Actually, there should be one explanation for the cause of the hole. "It could be many things," is another way of saying that you are uncertain. I'll nominate you for Unknown.

Originally Posted by ~enigma~ View Post
Terral is that you?
No

Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
I'd hardly go to Rumsfeld as a source for disaster info.
Lee Evey, project manager for the Pentagon Renovation Project made the same claim as Rumsfeld

Quote:
Source?
The source was right under the quote. Military District of Washington News Service. http://web.archive.org/web/200206011...ored_dead.html


Quote:
Sorry, I'm going to need an exact quote in context on this.
It was from a National Geographic special. I'm not sure if it is on youtube or not. I don't have the documentary with me. I think it originally aired sometime back in 2004.

Quote:
Sounds like Pop Mech wasn't the only one. ASCE says it as well.
The ASCE's Pentagon Building Performance Report mentions the hole, but they do not posit a cause. They simply state, "There was a hole in the east wall of Ring C, emerging into AE Drive, between column lines 5 and 7 in Wedge 2 (figure 5.16). The wall failure was approximately 310 ft from where the fuselage of the aircraft entered the west wall of the building." Popular Mechanics was incorrect when they said that this also was the conclusion of the PBPR.


Quote:
Is this specifically referring to that hole, and does it contradict other theories in any way?
Yes, it is specifically referring to the hole in the C-Ring. If you go to youtube it is under, History Channel - 9/11 Myths Part 5. There is no mention of the landing gear explanation that was promoted by Popular Mechanics. Why was the explanation dropped, even though they interviewed many people from Popular Mechanics?

Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
By taking that answer too literally, you miss my point. What I'm saying is any one of them could have been the cause. Whichever one of them is responsible happens to be irrelevent, because the hole was created either by some component of the plane or by some effect of the impact. Either way, the hole is a result of the jet hitting the Pentagon, regardless of the specific component or effect.
How do you know it was created by some component of the plane or by some effect of the impact? Regardless of the debate over what hit the Pentagon how do you know that what impacted the E-Ring caused the hole in the C-Ring? There could have been two separate events. Something impacted the E-ring, then a secondary device caused the hole in the C-Ring. To assume that all the damage was caused by the plane impact is reasoning backwards(i.e. start with the conclusion then look for explanations.)
tanabear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:50 PM   #24
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
No
Good enough for me. Terral was suspended and it seems that his suspension was so embarrassing to him that he is afraid to come back. I expect him or someone like him to have the balls to lead a revolution
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:50 PM   #25
jproudj
Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 44
Why do you think it is important for us to know exactly what punctured the C-ring?

What do you think punctured the C-ring?
jproudj is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:52 PM   #26
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by jproudj View Post
Why do you think it is important for us to know exactly what punctured the C-ring?

What do you think punctured the C-ring?
A really large hole puncher?
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 08:58 PM   #27
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
I'll tell you what didn't make that hole: an A-3 Skywarrior.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:03 PM   #28
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,865
Also rule out a DU penetrator.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:04 PM   #29
Magenta
Graduate Poster
 
Magenta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,311
Originally Posted by jproudj View Post
Why do you think it is important for us to know exactly what punctured the C-ring?

What do you think punctured the C-ring?

Unless you can identify precisely which part of AA77 made the hole (which of course must be documented with photos, YouTube videos, a timeline correct to 1/100 of a second, serial numbers and precise location of all components, fingerprints and detailed employment history of everyone who handled or came within 100 metres of said components, and detailed chain of custody for every last rivet) then it can be assumed that AA77 did not crash into the Pentagon. [/truther]
Magenta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:07 PM   #30
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by jproudj View Post
Why do you think it is important for us to know exactly what punctured the C-ring?

What do you think punctured the C-ring?
It wasn't my Mercury Cougar that made the hole...I categorically deny EVER being at teh pentagon
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:10 PM   #31
JEROME DA GNOME
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,931
This thread is particularly educational.
JEROME DA GNOME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:13 PM   #32
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME View Post
This thread is particularly educational.
That's because 6 1/2 years after the event means the question in the OP was moronic as is the entire truth movement.
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:14 PM   #33
GStan
Graduate Poster
 
GStan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,339
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
So please nominate your best explanation for what caused the hole in the C-Ring.
We seem to be missing an option.

I) On Planet X, the building that houses all military administration is called The Dodecahedron, which has no C-Ring.
GStan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:26 PM   #34
tanabear
Critical Thinker
 
tanabear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 286
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Also rule out a DU penetrator.
Okay. I can also rule out one of Jupiter's moons. We can always come up with explanations of what didn't happen. This thread is about what did happen to cause the hole in the C-Ring of the Pentagon. 9/11 debunkers always accuse the 9/11 Truth Movement of "Just Asking Questions and Ignoring Answers." However, most of the time it is "Just Asking Questions and Not Getting Answers." This is your chance to answer a question.

Originally Posted by Magenta View Post
Unless you can identify precisely which part of AA77 made the hole (which of course must be documented with photos, YouTube videos, a timeline correct to 1/100 of a second, serial numbers and precise location of all components, fingerprints and detailed employment history of everyone who handled or came within 100 metres of said components, and detailed chain of custody for every last rivet) then it can be assumed that AA77 did not crash into the Pentagon. [/truther]
I never said a plane did not impact the Pentagon. I stated previously that what impacted the E-ring and what caused the hole in the C-Ring could have been two separate events.
tanabear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:28 PM   #35
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,163
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
Lee Evey, project manager for the Pentagon Renovation Project made the same claim as Rumsfeld
Do you really think there is a distinct difference between nose and landing gear by the time it reached the C ring?

Quote:
The source was right under the quote. Military District of Washington News Service. http://web.archive.org/web/200206011...ored_dead.html
The article is a memorial for the dead. It is not a study.

Quote:
It was from a National Geographic special. I'm not sure if it is on youtube or not. I don't have the documentary with me. I think it originally aired sometime back in 2004.
When come back. Bring quote in context.

Quote:
The ASCE's Pentagon Building Performance Report mentions the hole, but they do not posit a cause. They simply state, "There was a hole in the east wall of Ring C, emerging into AE Drive, between column lines 5 and 7 in Wedge 2 (figure 5.16). The wall failure was approximately 310 ft from where the fuselage of the aircraft entered the west wall of the building." Popular Mechanics was incorrect when they said that this also was the conclusion of the PBPR.

Yes, it is specifically referring to the hole in the C-Ring. If you go to youtube it is under, History Channel - 9/11 Myths Part 5. There is no mention of the landing gear explanation that was promoted by Popular Mechanics. Why was the explanation dropped, even though they interviewed many people from Popular Mechanics?
While the ASCE report does not directly connect the hole with the landing gear, it does note that the gear was found well past the other wreckage. Its not hard to put 1 and 1 together. ASCE didn't concern itself with impact details, but rather the building's performance under the damage and fire.

Doesn't seem like a big smoking gun to me.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:29 PM   #36
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,163
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
I never said a plane did not impact the Pentagon. I stated previously that what impacted the E-ring and what caused the hole in the C-Ring could have been two separate events.
Except for the landing gear being found past that last hole, and the total lack of evidence whatsoever for a second event.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:32 PM   #37
njslim
Graduate Poster
 
njslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,056
One thing to be aware of that the bottom 2 floors of the Pentagon from E (outer ring)
to the C ring are continous office space. The rings are not separated by individual
walls - an aircraft penetrating would only have to breach the outermost wall ( E ring)
and would smash in large office expanse. The next concrete/brick wall would be the
C ring wall. Thus the debris swarm would not encounter significant resistance .
njslim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:48 PM   #38
Magenta
Graduate Poster
 
Magenta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,311
Originally Posted by tanabear View Post
I never said a plane did not impact the Pentagon.
My post was a tongue-in-cheek response to jproudj's question.

Quote:
I stated previously that what impacted the E-ring and what caused the hole in the C-Ring could have been two separate events.
Please explain what you mean by "two separate events". You agree that one "event" was AA77? What was the other?
Magenta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:50 PM   #39
nicepants
Graduate Poster
 
nicepants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,722
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
The fact that you, nor anyone else, can point to a conclusive explanation for the hole is cause for concern and further investigation. At best, you have an unsubstantiated hypothesis. That should ring your curiosity bell, sadly, it obviously does not.
I don't recall you, or anyone else, for that matter, showing conclusively that this hole could not have been caused by the impact of flight 77.
__________________
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen -Einstein
nicepants is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2008, 09:50 PM   #40
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by njslim View Post
One thing to be aware of that the bottom 2 floors of the Pentagon from E (outer ring)
to the C ring are continous office space. The rings are not separated by individual
walls - an aircraft penetrating would only have to breach the outermost wall ( E ring)
and would smash in large office expanse. The next concrete/brick wall would be the
C ring wall. Thus the debris swarm would not encounter significant resistance .
No fair screwing up their fantasy with facts. You ought to be ashamed
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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 -7. The time now is 11:33 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.