IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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 flight 77 , pentagon

Reply
Old 5th April 2007, 09:31 PM   #1
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Physical evidence that a plane did NOT hit the Pentagon

I've been wanting to make this thread but am doing so now because of a direct request from Mercutio. I appreciate his rational, civil, logical, and fair approach to debate. Others here would do well to follow his lead.


In response to The PentaCon....a common thing for skeptics to say is:

"But physical evidence trumps eyewitness testimony."

Well the anomalous physical evidence is what started all the questions to begin with. That's what inspired us to go to Arlington and find out what people saw in the first place.

So as in most investigations....this one was inspired by suspicions that arose from examining physical evidence.

The eyewitness testimony simply confirmed our suspicions beyond our wildest imaginations.

Realize that if the citgo witnesses are even somewhat correct in their placement of the plane that this PROVES the physical damage was staged which means the physical evidence IS the crime. Therefore the approach of this investigation has to adjust accordingly. We must look for anomalies.

Here is a nice breakdown in regards to the anomalous physical evidence:


Where is the tail section damage to the third floor? Why is column 14AA still intact?





Why are columns 15-20 blown *up and out*, or not damaged at all from the right wing?




Why is there no continuity to the "wing damage" when it tilted up it's right wing?. It looks as if the facade simply fell off in part of this section. Clearly no wing passed through it.




Why is the floor undamaged, if a 757 just tilted it's left wing, dropped down on the ground, and skidded under the first floor?




If the left wing/engine allegedly tilted and went through/under the first floor. Why is the foundation, the shoring is resting upon, still intact????




Here is the RB211 for scale reference...





This animation from Purdue University didn't even bother including the engines since clearly there was no physical explanation for their existence:



And this image from the ASCE report shows how the plane was allegedly tilted and even depicts the left engine digging into the foundation!


So how could the foundation possibly remain undamaged???







Now everyone is well aware that there is zero evidence that any large pieces of aircraft were found at all and that the only physical evidence of an aircraft that was released is limited to these few parts:




Other than a few more much smaller scattered remnants this is the extent of it. Nothing else even somewhat substantial was reported.

Although the area that allegedly got hit had just undergone a renovation and had blast proof windows etc.............it wasn't built to be 757 proof.

Here is the thickness and material that made up the Pentagon wall:



There is no reason an entire 100 ton 757 would completely disintegrate while leaving areas within the alleged impact of these walls virtually untouched.

So there you go.

Physical evidence that a 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon.

The eyewitness testimony simply corroborates the obvious anomalies in the physical evidence.

The plane did not hit the Pentagon.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 09:34 PM   #2
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Lyte Trip you have previously demonstrated you lack the ability to correctly interpret photographic evidence.

Don't worry you're not alone in this.

-Gumboot
__________________

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 5th April 2007, 09:39 PM   #3
Arus808
Philosopher
 
Arus808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,204
lyte, its best that you dont start new already debunked theories when you have alread four threads you've abandoned here because you can't back up your claims.
__________________
Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato.

“Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.”
“Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”
Arus808 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 5th April 2007, 09:42 PM   #4
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
Hey Lyte:

Since you've ignored my question in your other thread, maybe you'll answer it here:

You claim to have sent your "rock solid evidence" to the media and the authorities. How about some links to where the media have published anything resulting from your "rock solid evidence". How about posting some responses you received from the authorities whom you've sent your "rock solid evidence". Surely if you have "rock solid evidence", the authorities would have responded.

What did they say?
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
DavidJames 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 5th April 2007, 09:43 PM   #5
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Arus808 View Post
lyte, its best that you dont start new already debunked theories when you have alread four threads you've abandoned here because you can't back up your claims.
What new theory?

All the threads I have made back the same theory and none have been abandoned.

The discussion has simply progressed.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 09:45 PM   #6
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
Hey Lyte:

Since you've ignored my question in your other thread, maybe you'll answer it here:

You claim to have sent your "rock solid evidence" to the media and the authorities. How about some links to where the media have published anything resulting from your "rock solid evidence". How about posting some responses you received from the authorities whom you've sent your "rock solid evidence". Surely if you have "rock solid evidence", the authorities would have responded.

What did they say?
That is waaaaaay off topic.

And I have already said I am not inclined to share that information with you.

I am here to discuss the evidence not report on my day to day activities.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 09:53 PM   #7
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
I love how you point to the damaged floor and structure and say right on there "look, the floor and structure is not damaged".

I mean- it doesn't get any easier than that. You and Merc have a amazing ability to debunk yourselves- and it appears as if you're honing in on that gift...

Kudos.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 09:55 PM   #8
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,465
OK Lyte, I'll take the bait.

1) If all that death and destruction wasn't caused by Flt 77, what did cause it?

2) Is there any physical evidence for this alternative?

3) What happened to the real Flt 77 and its passengers and crew?

there are lots of other questions that can be asked about your absurd premise, but these three will do for a start.
Brainache 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 5th April 2007, 09:55 PM   #9
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,592
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
...There is no reason an entire 100 ton 757 would completely disintegrate while leaving areas within the alleged impact of these walls virtually untouched.

So there you go.
Not too many years ago I witnessed a crash of a modest-sized military helicopter. I watched it go almost vertical into the tarmac less than two city blocks from where I was standing. Made quite a sound, not to mention an impressive, black smoke cloud. All that was left on the smudged ground were a few charred bits, the total of which would probably have fit in a carry-on suitcase.

Quote:
The plane did not hit the Pentagon.
In searching for my earlier use of the recollection above, I see that I offered them twice before: once on March 23rd of this year, and prior to that exactly one year earlier.

A year of dealing with people who don't, won't, or can't cease from their flights of fancy. And if the JFK assassination is anything to go by, it'll continue for decades to come. And right in the face of any and all evidence to the contrary. It's a remarkable phenomenon.

And a waste that I'm done enabling.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 5th April 2007 at 10:09 PM.
Regnad Kcin 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 5th April 2007, 09:57 PM   #10
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
That is waaaaaay off topic.

And I have already said I am not inclined to share that information with you.

I am here to discuss the evidence not report on my day to day activities.
I can only assume then you are a liar. You have not forwarded your "rock solid evidence" to the media nor have you forwarded it to the authorities. You are a coward, a fraud and a liar. This is a game to you. A game you are playing to satisfy your ego and possibly your wallet.

Your game has nothing to do with the truth and everything to do with your ego. Why else would someone who believes the government killed 3000 people not want justice, and only post on Internet forums?
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
DavidJames 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 5th April 2007, 09:58 PM   #11
Arus808
Philosopher
 
Arus808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,204
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
What new theory?

All the threads I have made back the same theory and none have been abandoned.

The discussion has simply progressed.
1) no your theories haven't been supported
2) the discussion can't progress until you answer the many questions you've left unasnwered in the other threads

please dont make new threads until you address the questiosn that have been asked of you and ignored.
__________________
Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato.

“Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.”
“Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”
Arus808 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 5th April 2007, 09:59 PM   #12
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
I love how you point to the damaged floor and structure and say right on there "look, the floor and structure is not damaged".

I mean- it doesn't get any easier than that. You and Merc have a amazing ability to debunk yourselves- and it appears as if you're honing in on that gift...

Kudos.
What?

The foundation is completely intact.

Circle this damage from the engine that you see.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:03 PM   #13
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
What?

The foundation is completely intact.

Circle this damage from the engine that you see.
You see those blocks- the supports.

Read the ASCE BIPS and you'll see why those supports are there, it goes into detail for every single column damaged by the impact. How can you say those columns remain intact as you're pointing to the building being supported by a NEW support structure is exactly why you're a conspiracist.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:05 PM   #14
Obviousman
Muse
 
Obviousman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 652
Could you change the images to URLs instead? I have limited bandwidth and multiple large images really slows me down.

Thanks.
__________________
Any time it can be proved that one of my studies is wrong, I am more eager than anyone to acknowledge AND CORRECT IT.
Jack White

Little White Lies.......
Obviousman 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 5th April 2007, 10:06 PM   #15
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Brainache View Post
OK Lyte, I'll take the bait.

1) If all that death and destruction wasn't caused by Flt 77, what did cause it?

2) Is there any physical evidence for this alternative?

3) What happened to the real Flt 77 and its passengers and crew?

there are lots of other questions that can be asked about your absurd premise, but these three will do for a start.
1. Pre-planted explosives etc.

2. All physical evidence has been permanently sequestered but yes in photos you can see columns blown up and out where the right wing was supposed to have entered. Victims that were in the building have said they smelled cordite, thought there were bombs, and didn't see anything that remotely resembled aircraft debris.

3. That's for you to ask the perpetrators.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:08 PM   #16
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
You see those blocks- the supports.

Read the ASCE BIPS and you'll see why those supports are there, it goes into detail for every single column damaged by the impact. How can you say those columns remain intact as you're pointing to the building being supported by a NEW support structure is exactly why you're a conspiracist.
Column?

We are talking about the FOUNDATION. Read slower.

Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:09 PM   #17
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,871
Lyte,

why in your opinion did so many witnesses (including your own) report a passenger jet hitting the Pentagon?
CHF 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 5th April 2007, 10:10 PM   #18
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Arus808 View Post
1) no your theories haven't been supported
2) the discussion can't progress until you answer the many questions you've left unasnwered in the other threads

please dont make new threads until you address the questiosn that have been asked of you and ignored.
What question in what thread?

Bump it.

If it is relevant to the topic I will answer it.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:11 PM   #19
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Column?

We are talking about the FOUNDATION. Read slower.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...oundation2.jpg
And what do you think a foundation is?

If you want to restrict your theory to the concrete floor, and the floor alone- please explain- using strict calculations- what damage you would expect, and why it is not there.

I see damaged foundation, weakened supports- and a hole where there used to be a building...

Then there was that plane, the witnesses, the flight path damage, the victims, the DNA, FDR, plane parts- etc... but I guess you will continue to ignore that.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:13 PM   #20
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by CHF View Post
Lyte,

why in your opinion did so many witnesses (including your own) report a passenger jet hitting the Pentagon?
Why did they report the plane on the north of the citgo?

Only one of the claims can be correct.

Read the OP in the Lagasse/Brooks thread for a list of reasons why it's more likely that the north side claim is correct.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:15 PM   #21
NobbyNobbs
Gazerbeam's Protege
 
NobbyNobbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,617
I find it highly amusing that Lyte Trip says...

Quote:
Now everyone is well aware that there is zero evidence that any large pieces of aircraft were found at all
...as an introduction to the 9 photographs of such evidence.
__________________
I wish someone would find something I wrote on this board to be sig-worthy, thereby effectively granting me immortality.--Antiquehunter
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted years on earth the time spent eating butterscotch pudding.
AMERICA! NUMBER 1 IN PARTICLE PHYSICS SINCE JULY 4TH, 1776!!! --SusanConstant
NobbyNobbs 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 5th April 2007, 10:15 PM   #22
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Why did they report the plane on the north of the citgo?

Only one of the claims can be correct.

Read the OP in the Lagasse/Brooks thread for a list of reasons why it's more likely that the north side claim is correct.
FINALLY...

You admit that the majority of witness contradict your "north of the Citgo" story.

Jeez- took ya long enough.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!

Last edited by Totovader; 5th April 2007 at 10:16 PM. Reason: wrong building
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:17 PM   #23
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
And what do you think a foundation is?



Too funny.

Ummmmmm........not columns?



I can't believe I have to do this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundat...rchitecture%29


Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:17 PM   #24
The Doc
Curing Stupidity
 
The Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,158
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Only one of the claims can be correct.
Well why are you claiming that both are?
The Doc 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 5th April 2007, 10:19 PM   #25
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
FINALLY...

You admit that the majority of witness contradict your "north of the Citgo" story.

Jeez- took ya long enough.
Whaaaaaaaat?

Where did I say anything remotely resembling such a thing?

First you think a foundation is a column and now you are pretending I am saying things I didn't even say.

Are you off your meds dude?
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:21 PM   #26
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post


Too funny.

Ummmmmm........not columns?



I can't believe I have to do this:
So, you're ignoring the columns- in addition to the requirement that you actually support your statements?

Why would you expect the floor to be damaged any more than it was?

(And, by the way- look at your own photographs. You are pointing to the columns when you state "foundation"- which is why I was assuming your definition was not quite so literal. Consider your own statements before you go pretending to "have to do" anything.)
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:22 PM   #27
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by NobbyNobbs View Post
I find it highly amusing that Lyte Trip says...

"Now everyone is well aware that there is zero evidence that any large pieces of aircraft were found at all"

...as an introduction to the 9 photographs of such evidence.
You call those "large" pieces??

Haven't seen too many jets in your day?

You must be a homebody.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:24 PM   #28
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,154
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Column?

We are talking about the FOUNDATION. Read slower.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...oundation2.jpg
Dear oh dear, Lyte you're no better at construction than you are at eyewitness testimony.

Just a word to the wise, don't mention the lack of damage to a buildings foundations again, certainly not in this context, because it really does not make you look very......bright.

For the record, the foundation of a structure provides a stable base upon which the superstructure is built.

Dmage to a foundation would normally only occur through ground movement such as earthquakes or subsidence.

A plane hitting a building is very unlikely to cause any damage to what is (probably) a mass of concrete buried in the ground.

Also, your killklown impersonation of "where's the damage from the tailplane" further indicates that you are speaking from a position of personal incredulity rather than expertise.

Something to consider with regard to aircraft:

You know that an aircraft derives lift from it's wings, right?
So effectively the wings are supporting the fuselage of the plane.
So, if you wanted to lift an aircraft with, for example, a crane, you could do so by lifting the wings.

I make these points to indicate that the wing structure is not fragile but is sturdy enough to carry the loading of the aircraft.

However, the tail is a relatively flimsy construction, and smashing the tail section into a building at high speed is likely to leave very little recogniseable tail pieces, and the tip of the tail is unlikely to cause a great deal of damage to the wall it hits.

To summarize:

Wings = strong and cause lots of damage as they disintegrate

Tail = weak and cause little damage as it disintegrates
uk_dave 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 5th April 2007, 10:24 PM   #29
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Whaaaaaaaat?

Where did I say anything remotely resembling such a thing?

First you think a foundation is a column and now you are pretending I am saying things I didn't even say.

Are you off your meds dude?
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Why did they report the plane on the north of the citgo?

Only one of the claims can be correct.

Read the OP in the Lagasse/Brooks thread for a list of reasons why it's more likely that the north side claim is correct.
Did you miss it?

And if you want to continue to boast that your equivocation is worth anything- you should at least try and answer the question.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:24 PM   #30
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,465
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
1. Pre-planted explosives etc.
Not really an answer. You might as well have said "Magic". So no one in the Pentagon was aware of their offices being planted with explosives. If they were, they decided to stay in their offices anyway and be killed. Yes Lyte, killed in a horrific way by explosions and fire. Unless you also want me to believe that no one died there at all. Or were all the people in those offices expendable pawns in the evil perps' game?

Quote:
2. All physical evidence has been permanently sequestered but yes in photos you can see columns blown up and out where the right wing was supposed to have entered. Victims that were in the building have said they smelled cordite, thought there were bombs, and didn't see anything that remotely resembled aircraft debris.
There was a fair bit of aircraft debris. Hal Bidlack, a man who posts on this forum was there that day. He saw parts of an airplane. He helped carry the dead and wounded. He doesn't share your beliefs. Lyte, is he a liar?

Quote:
3. That's for you to ask the perpetrators.
It's your theory Lyte. I know where they are. They were destroyed by an impact with the Pentagon.

I was asking how your theory accounts for their deaths. I see you don't feel your theory needs to acount for all the facts, just poke imaginary holes in reality and pretend like you are doing some kind of investigation.
Brainache 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 5th April 2007, 10:25 PM   #31
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
So, you're ignoring the columns- in addition to the requirement that you actually support your statements?

Why would you expect the floor to be damaged any more than it was?
Because the official story says the plane was tilted and entered entirely under the first two floors:



That image is from the ASCE report.

It's their story.....not ours.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:25 PM   #32
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,871
Lyte,

I think the most likely scenario is that your two witnesses are wrong about the flight path and that the rest of the witnesses are right.

As for a plane hitting the Pentagon....ALL are agreed on that point.

So why are you opposing what ALL WITNESSES claim?
CHF 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 5th April 2007, 10:28 PM   #33
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Because the official story says the plane was tilted and entered entirely under the first two floors:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...tagon/138b.jpg

That image is from the ASCE report.

It's their story.....not ours.
This really doesn't answer the question. Do you expect the engines and plane to somehow dig in at over 500mph after hitting the edge of the Pentagon?

I'm wording it that way so you can start to see that your expectation is entirely unreasonable... let's see if it starts to click...
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:33 PM   #34
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Getting more to the point- you have claimed that you have evidence that a plane did not hit the Pentagon.

So far you have only supplied what you see as reasons to doubt that a plane hit the Pentagon- which are all easily debunked.

So far it's all been a large dose of argumentum ad ignorantium- so I'm waiting patiently for you to actually get some evidence.

You claim it was a missile. Where is the evidence of a missile?
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader 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 5th April 2007, 10:39 PM   #35
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by uk_dave View Post
Dear oh dear, Lyte you're no better at construction than you are at eyewitness testimony.

Just a word to the wise, don't mention the lack of damage to a buildings foundations again, certainly not in this context, because it really does not make you look very......bright.

For the record, the foundation of a structure provides a stable base upon which the superstructure is built.

Dmage to a foundation would normally only occur through ground movement such as earthquakes or subsidence.

A plane hitting a building is very unlikely to cause any damage to what is (probably) a mass of concrete buried in the ground.
To suggest a 6 ton titanium engine that slams into a concrete slab is going to leave it perfectly intact is absurd. That's why you went right to the wings and tail. They have the engine digging in the ground.



Quote:

However, the tail is a relatively flimsy construction, and smashing the tail section into a building at high speed is likely to leave very little recogniseable tail pieces, and the tip of the tail is unlikely to cause a great deal of damage to the wall it hits.

To summarize:

Wings = strong and cause lots of damage as they disintegrate

Tail = weak and cause little damage as it disintegrates
The columns are blown UP AND OUTWARDS.

Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:42 PM   #36
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
Getting more to the point- you have claimed that you have evidence that a plane did not hit the Pentagon.

So far you have only supplied what you see as reasons to doubt that a plane hit the Pentagon- which are all easily debunked.

So far it's all been a large dose of argumentum ad ignorantium- so I'm waiting patiently for you to actually get some evidence.

You claim it was a missile. Where is the evidence of a missile?
You are out of your mind tonight.

I do NOT claim it was a missile!



Apparently you haven't even watched The PentaCon.

Please at least go watch it before you try telling me what I believe.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:46 PM   #37
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,871
Lyte,

why do witnesses (including your own) report a plane hitting the Pentagon?

What plane was it if not flight 77?
CHF 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 5th April 2007, 10:47 PM   #38
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Brainache View Post
Not really an answer. You might as well have said "Magic". So no one in the Pentagon was aware of their offices being planted with explosives. If they were, they decided to stay in their offices anyway and be killed. Yes Lyte, killed in a horrific way by explosions and fire. Unless you also want me to believe that no one died there at all. Or were all the people in those offices expendable pawns in the evil perps' game?
They were victims.

The renovation had just completed and the section was not fully occupied.

Quote:
There was a fair bit of aircraft debris. Hal Bidlack, a man who posts on this forum was there that day. He saw parts of an airplane. He helped carry the dead and wounded. He doesn't share your beliefs. Lyte, is he a liar?
He does not contradict anything I have claimed. I posted images of every substantial piece of debris that was reported.

Quote:

It's your theory Lyte. I know where they are. They were destroyed by an impact with the Pentagon.

I was asking how your theory accounts for their deaths. I see you don't feel your theory needs to acount for all the facts, just poke imaginary holes in reality and pretend like you are doing some kind of investigation.
We just uncover evidence.

No matter how much you want to deny it; the on site testimony we have obtained is evidence. Rather strong evidence at that.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:51 PM   #39
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by CHF View Post
Lyte,

why do witnesses (including your own) report a plane hitting the Pentagon?

What plane was it if not flight 77?
You see CHF.....that's the whole point.

I know it's kind of hard for a raccoon to understand but the plane they saw could not possibly have created the physical damage so that means it couldn't have hit the building.

The witnesses were simply fooled into believing it did because of the timing.

It was a sleight of hand illusion.

Don't you JREF'ers get into those types of things?

You know......magic tricks.
Lyte Trip 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 5th April 2007, 10:56 PM   #40
Mr.D
Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert
 
Mr.D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,178
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
To suggest a 6 ton titanium engine that slams into a concrete slab is going to leave it perfectly intact is absurd.
What about an engine that impacts at a very shallow angle?

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
They have the engine digging in the ground.
That image is not physical evidence, no matter the source.
Mr.D 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 06:28 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.