contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths [16 Myths Debunked]
- Thread starter contra
- Start date
taul
Siasat.pk - Blogger
contra said:
--i wonder what's your obsession with the time frame :lol: you happen to get me all the time.. :lol: :lol:
--World believes it was an Inside job :ugeek: and they have all the Valid as well as logical reasons one could ask for :ugeek: ,you should come to terms as well :)
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths - Part8 [Seismic Spikes]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seismic Spikes
Fine Lines: Revisionists say sharp spikes (graph 1, above) mean bombs toppled the WTC. Scientists disprove the claim with the more detailed graph 2 (below). (Seismograph readings by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University: Won-Young Kim, senior research scientist; Arthur Lerner-Lam, associate director; Mary Tobin, senior science writer)
FACT:
1. "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context." :geek:
2. The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span. :evil:
3. On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear misleadingly as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seismic Spikes
Fine Lines: Revisionists say sharp spikes (graph 1, above) mean bombs toppled the WTC. Scientists disprove the claim with the more detailed graph 2 (below). (Seismograph readings by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University: Won-Young Kim, senior research scientist; Arthur Lerner-Lam, associate director; Mary Tobin, senior science writer)
FACT:
1. "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context." :geek:
2. The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span. :evil:
3. On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear misleadingly as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.
defending themselves against what?
dare I say 'accusations of negligence and dereliction of duty'?
and if you agree, won't you also agree that we have gone back to my original question: why on earth was NOBODY held accountable inside the US agencies for negligence?
is there any other word besides 'cover-up' to describe a COLLECTIVE effort to ignore supposed 'systemic' failures?
and...if you happened to be one of those directly affected by the tragedy (like the Jersey Girls) - wouldn't you be justifying in asking a simple question:
why the cover up??
despite his accusations, NORAD WAS LET OFF THE HOOK, despite their open attempts at misleading the inquiry commission.
Goes back to my earlier post: WHY?
WHY was 9/11 commission so TOLERANT of the lying by people in responsible positions?
taul
Siasat.pk - Blogger
--I believe you do NOT hear and believe the President Confessing himself :lol:
---Planes do NOT bring buildings down..Watch some controlled demolitons to get slight picture in your head :ugeek: how they look like :)
--Enjoy :D
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAwtmun_aj8[/video]
---Planes do NOT bring buildings down..Watch some controlled demolitons to get slight picture in your head :ugeek: how they look like :)
--Enjoy :D
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAwtmun_aj8[/video]
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
bhitai bhai,
1. To conclude that 9/11 is an inside job, because, no one was fired is comical. I am not aware if anybody was removed, but, the procedure were strengthened along with inter agency coordination. Also, Department of Homeland Security was established.
2. In India, after the Mumbai attacks, the following people resigned:
a) Union Home Minister.
b) Chief Minister of Maharashtra
c) Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra (was also the Home minister of the state)
d) Police Commisioner of Mumbai (fired)
So, according to you, this proves that Mumbai was not an inside job? I will be very grateful if you could inform Mr. Zaid Hamid of this conclusion, he believes that Mumbai was a joint RAW-Mossad operation.
3. Lahore attack -
As far as i know, nobody resigned or was fired.
Therefore, according to you, this is an inside job?
1. To conclude that 9/11 is an inside job, because, no one was fired is comical. I am not aware if anybody was removed, but, the procedure were strengthened along with inter agency coordination. Also, Department of Homeland Security was established.
2. In India, after the Mumbai attacks, the following people resigned:
a) Union Home Minister.
b) Chief Minister of Maharashtra
c) Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra (was also the Home minister of the state)
d) Police Commisioner of Mumbai (fired)
So, according to you, this proves that Mumbai was not an inside job? I will be very grateful if you could inform Mr. Zaid Hamid of this conclusion, he believes that Mumbai was a joint RAW-Mossad operation.
3. Lahore attack -
As far as i know, nobody resigned or was fired.
Therefore, according to you, this is an inside job?
taul
Siasat.pk - Blogger
contra said:
---Hope you are enjoying the show of some very solid Rationale put forth by the american themselves along side rest of the world :ugeek:
--All has to have a reason and explanation,None was provided and Proofs were sealed :ugeek:
---Symmetric fall of towers as in a Controlled manner in Ny as well as no plane wreckage found at the Pentagon site raised eyebrows of the whole World and to this day they are keen to know the Truth :ugeek:
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVWWnK7n3H0&feature=related[/video]
if 3000 people died because of someone's NEGLIGENCE, won't that person be at-least fired?
Of course the EASIEST thing is to set up yet another government agency and gobble up more TAXPAYER money!
don't you think the US Embassy officials who issued VISAS to 9/11 terrorists on PHONY documents should ever be reprimanded at-least?
Here's how some of 911 Commissions own members feel about it:
Thanks for bringing up MUMBAI. Here's why your analogy is WRONG:
a- In mumbai many officers were KILLED in the line of duty, fighting with the terrorists. Contrast that with 9/11 where agencies kept sitting on their behinds, blaming FAA for instance for not letting them know of the hijackings in time..
b- NOBODY resigned or was fired
c- NOBODY took responsibility of dereliction of duty
d- No formal investigation was launched (the commission had a very LIMITED mandate - just to make recommendations and that's IT)
f- No 9-11 terrorist survived to tell their story in front of a court
g- many potential witnesses (Bin Laden family) were allowed to SLIP AWAY for no apparent reason - nothing like this happened in mumbai
h- The victims of mumbai are generally SATISFIED with the investigation, while 9-11 is a totally different story
And I don't have anything to do with Zaid Hamid, so nice try with your straw-man.
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
bhitai bhai,
Whether anybody was fired or suspended or what action was taken against the bureaucrats is something which should be addressed to the US government.
But, for you to arrive at the conclusion that this somehow implicates the US government is something I strongly disagree with.
Whether anybody was fired or suspended or what action was taken against the bureaucrats is something which should be addressed to the US government.
But, for you to arrive at the conclusion that this somehow implicates the US government is something I strongly disagree with.
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part9[WTC 7 Collapse]
WTC 7 Collapse
Fire Storm: WTC 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. Damaged by falling debris, the building then endures a fire that rages for hours. Experts say this combination, not a demolition-style implosion, led to the roofline "kink" that signals WTC 7's progressive collapse. (Photograph by New York Office of Emergency Management)
FACT:
1. Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom approximately 10 stories about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.
2. NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.
3. According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."
4. There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation:
a) First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.
b) Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."
5. WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors along with the building's unusual construction were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
WTC 7 Collapse
Fire Storm: WTC 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. Damaged by falling debris, the building then endures a fire that rages for hours. Experts say this combination, not a demolition-style implosion, led to the roofline "kink" that signals WTC 7's progressive collapse. (Photograph by New York Office of Emergency Management)
FACT:
1. Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom approximately 10 stories about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.
2. NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.
3. According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."
4. There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation:
a) First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.
b) Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."
5. WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors along with the building's unusual construction were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part10[Big Planes, Small Holes]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pentagon
At 9:37 am on 9/11, 51 minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, the Pentagon was similarly attacked. Though dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.
HQ Attack: Taken three days after 9/11, this photo shows the extent of the damage to the Pentagon, consistent with a fiery plane crash. (Photograph by Department of Defense)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Plane, Small Holes
Hole Truth: Flight 77's landing gear punched a 12-ft. hole into the Pentagon's Ring C. (Photograph by Department of Defense)
FACT:
1. When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
2. Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
3. 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.
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pentagon
At 9:37 am on 9/11, 51 minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, the Pentagon was similarly attacked. Though dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.
HQ Attack: Taken three days after 9/11, this photo shows the extent of the damage to the Pentagon, consistent with a fiery plane crash. (Photograph by Department of Defense)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Plane, Small Holes
Hole Truth: Flight 77's landing gear punched a 12-ft. hole into the Pentagon's Ring C. (Photograph by Department of Defense)
FACT:
1. When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
2. Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
3. 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.
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part11[Intact Windows]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intact Windows
FACT:
1. Some windows near the impact area did indeed survive the crash. But that's what the windows were supposed to do they're blast-resistant. :geek:
2. a) "A blast-resistant window must be designed to resist a force significantly higher than a hurricane that's hitting instantaneously," says Ken Hays, executive vice president of Masonry Arts, the Bessemer, Ala., company that designed, manufactured and installed the Pentagon windows.
b) Some were knocked out of the walls by the crash and the outer ring's later collapse. "They were not designed to receive wracking seismic force," Hays notes. "They were designed to take in inward pressure from a blast event, which apparently they did: [Before the collapse] the blinds were still stacked neatly behind the window glass."
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intact Windows
FACT:
1. Some windows near the impact area did indeed survive the crash. But that's what the windows were supposed to do they're blast-resistant. :geek:
2. a) "A blast-resistant window must be designed to resist a force significantly higher than a hurricane that's hitting instantaneously," says Ken Hays, executive vice president of Masonry Arts, the Bessemer, Ala., company that designed, manufactured and installed the Pentagon windows.
b) Some were knocked out of the walls by the crash and the outer ring's later collapse. "They were not designed to receive wracking seismic force," Hays notes. "They were designed to take in inward pressure from a blast event, which apparently they did: [Before the collapse] the blinds were still stacked neatly behind the window glass."
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part12[Flight 77 Debris]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flight 77 Debris
Aftermath: Wreckage from Flight 77 on the Pentagon's lawn proof that a passenger plane, not a missile, hit the building. (Photograph by AP/Wide World Photos)
FACT:
1. Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box."
2. Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts :cry: . Okay?"
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flight 77 Debris
Aftermath: Wreckage from Flight 77 on the Pentagon's lawn proof that a passenger plane, not a missile, hit the building. (Photograph by AP/Wide World Photos)
FACT:
1. Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box."
2. Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts :cry: . Okay?"
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part13[The White Jet]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... 7#whitejet
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flight 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. :(
But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane :o .
Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them. :lol:
The White Jet
FACT:
1. There was such a jet in the vicinity a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C., an apparel company that markets Wrangler jeans and other brands. The VF plane was flying into Johnstown-Cambria airport, 20 miles north of Shanksville.
2. According to David Newell, VF's director of aviation and travel, the FAA's Cleveland Center contacted copilot Yates Gladwell when the Falcon was at an altitude "in the neighborhood of 3000 to 4000 ft." not 34,000 ft. "They were in a descent already going into Johnstown," Newell adds. "The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on." Reached by PM, Gladwell confirmed this account but, concerned about ongoing harassment by conspiracy theorists, asked not to be quoted directly.
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... 7#whitejet
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flight 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. :(
But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane :o .
Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them. :lol:
The White Jet
FACT:
1. There was such a jet in the vicinity a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C., an apparel company that markets Wrangler jeans and other brands. The VF plane was flying into Johnstown-Cambria airport, 20 miles north of Shanksville.
2. According to David Newell, VF's director of aviation and travel, the FAA's Cleveland Center contacted copilot Yates Gladwell when the Falcon was at an altitude "in the neighborhood of 3000 to 4000 ft." not 34,000 ft. "They were in a descent already going into Johnstown," Newell adds. "The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on." Reached by PM, Gladwell confirmed this account but, concerned about ongoing harassment by conspiracy theorists, asked not to be quoted directly.
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part14[Roving Engine]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roving Engine
FACT:
1. Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site.
2. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling.
3. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "[/i]you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second[/i]. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roving Engine
FACT:
1. Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site.
2. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling.
3. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "[/i]you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second[/i]. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part15 [Indian Lake]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indian Lake
FACT:
1. Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, tells PM no body parts were found in Indian Lake.
2. Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site.
Paper and tiny scraps of sheetmetal, however, did land in the lake. "Very light debris will fly into the air, because of the concussion," says former National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick.
3. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater not 6 miles easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. And the wind that day was northwesterly, at 9 to 12 mph, which means it was blowing from the northwest toward Indian Lake. :geek:
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indian Lake
FACT:
1. Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, tells PM no body parts were found in Indian Lake.
2. Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site.
Paper and tiny scraps of sheetmetal, however, did land in the lake. "Very light debris will fly into the air, because of the concussion," says former National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick.
3. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater not 6 miles easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. And the wind that day was northwesterly, at 9 to 12 mph, which means it was blowing from the northwest toward Indian Lake. :geek:
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Re: contra: Debunking 9/11 Myths-Part16[F-16 Pilot]
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F-16 Pilot
FACT:
1. Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment.
2. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11.
3. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."
Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... tml?page=8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F-16 Pilot
FACT:
1. Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment.
2. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11.
3. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."
G
Guest
Guest
i completely agree with u contra!! even Musharraf admitted that according to pak intelligence it was carried out by al-qaeda...if US had to carry out an attack against itself why would it choose such a valuable target which would cost it billions?? :mrgreen: :mrgreen: why wldnt it just say " v attacked al-qaeda bcoz it was going to carry out attacks on US soil or it harbors terrorists??
lol but some people will just bleive in controversial theories and blame US itself even though they dont know a thing about US or the west hehehhe :mrgreen:
but i applaud u for bringing these facts that speak loud enough against the so called controversial theories hehe
great job :D
lol but some people will just bleive in controversial theories and blame US itself even though they dont know a thing about US or the west hehehhe :mrgreen:
but i applaud u for bringing these facts that speak loud enough against the so called controversial theories hehe
great job :D
contra
Senator (1k+ posts)
Satire
This is video by The Onion.
The Onion is an American News Satire organisation.
www.theonion.com
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0[/video]
This is video by The Onion.
The Onion is an American News Satire organisation.
www.theonion.com
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0[/video]
