- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:06 pm to kingbob
quote:
Airliner or missile?
Doesn't look like a parked airliner, but I haven't seen an airliner flying by point blank hundreds of miles an hour and I'd imagine that looks a little bit different from pictures of airliners parked on a runway.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:14 pm to ProbyOne
quote:
Did the terrorists shrink the plane during flight?
Yes.
Plane shrinkage technology was reverse engineered from the advanced technology obtained from the Roswell crash. So how did a bunch of Arabs get this closely guarded technology?? They didn't. This proves that it was our own military that carried out the operation.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:15 pm to lsu480
How old are you?
I’m not trying to be insulting. I’m dead serious.
In case you aren’t aware, back in 2001, this was a typical cell phone:
No camera. No video. Texting was new and hardly anyone did it.
People weren’t carrying around video cameras. Or any camera at all.
Buildings, even government ones, didn’t have a proliferation of surveillance cameras. There were probably only cameras at the gates and on the doors, and they were low quality and expensive.
Having high quality, cheap cameras everywhere is a thing from the last 5 years. Don’t project current technology, practices, and quality back on 2001. It was a simpler, lower fidelity time.
I’m not trying to be insulting. I’m dead serious.
In case you aren’t aware, back in 2001, this was a typical cell phone:
No camera. No video. Texting was new and hardly anyone did it.
People weren’t carrying around video cameras. Or any camera at all.
Buildings, even government ones, didn’t have a proliferation of surveillance cameras. There were probably only cameras at the gates and on the doors, and they were low quality and expensive.
Having high quality, cheap cameras everywhere is a thing from the last 5 years. Don’t project current technology, practices, and quality back on 2001. It was a simpler, lower fidelity time.
This post was edited on 4/27/18 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:21 pm to kingbob
Tomahawk
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:26 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:
Having said that, what do aviation experts have to say about the possibility of a plane being able to fly so low to the ground?
Is this motherfricker serious?
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:29 pm to lsu480
quote:
I agree but my question is why is that the only video we have ever seen from the Pentagon crash?
Because this happened in 2001
Cellphones didn't have cameras, very few external security systems were full motion capture and the side of the pentagon hit was under construction.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:31 pm to kingbob
This was released to network and cable news soon after 9/11, as I recall, so it is not previously unseen.
It looks like a passenger jet screaming in at max speed at near 600 mph captured on a camera designed to monitor moving vehicular traffic that's traveling at maybe 3 miles per hour or completely stopped.
Why do people believe that the "Illuminati" or whomever, need to resort to this sort of thing to run the world? Isn't the Internationalist Left advancing the Globalist Socialist Agenda well enough?
Look what these folks are doing to the first POTUS to outspokenly oppose this agenda! Does anybody suppose that some dude AFTER Trump will ever again try to look out exclusively for the USA's best interests and the best interests of its legal citizens? No way!
It looks like a passenger jet screaming in at max speed at near 600 mph captured on a camera designed to monitor moving vehicular traffic that's traveling at maybe 3 miles per hour or completely stopped.
Why do people believe that the "Illuminati" or whomever, need to resort to this sort of thing to run the world? Isn't the Internationalist Left advancing the Globalist Socialist Agenda well enough?
Look what these folks are doing to the first POTUS to outspokenly oppose this agenda! Does anybody suppose that some dude AFTER Trump will ever again try to look out exclusively for the USA's best interests and the best interests of its legal citizens? No way!
This post was edited on 4/27/18 at 12:34 pm
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:34 pm to Cooter Davenport
quote:
Buildings, even government ones, didn’t have a proliferation of surveillance cameras
Ahhh what? It was the Pentagon; a squirrel couldn't fart without audio picking up the sound and video seeing the little fricker hiking his leg
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:39 pm to tigerpawl
quote:
In this scenario, it would be fair to say that the ill-fated aircraft exhibited the same characteristics as a missile in terms of attitude relative to the ground and speed
In the video, if it looks like anything, it looks like an object flying at a building-level altitude parallel to the ground struck the Pentagon.
I’m not saying this video proves anything, because it’s hard to see, but if someone told me an object flying parallel to the ground at such a low altitude had hit a building, I wouldn’t guess it was a large passenger jet. I definitely wouldn’t guess it was one that had previously been flying at a high altitude.
I just can’t picture that maneuver. Can it be done? I don’t mean, “is the airplane capable of it in laboratory conditions”.
It is possible that what little “flying object” we see in the video is actually not the plane itself, but just the dust kicked up as the plane angled down to the Pentagon at speed.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:43 pm to Vastmind
quote:
Tomahawk
That heap big racist.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:44 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
A cruise missile is about the size of a 20 ft long telephone pole. It would barely be picked up on that grainy video if at all.
Being reasonable and logical is not allowed.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:45 pm to DownSouthJukin
quote:
There's a gas station across the street from the Pentagon that the FBI seized security camera tape from almost immediately after.
quote:
Rumor has it that it was owned by Saudi Arabians...
The gas station or the Pentagon?
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:46 pm to Roger Klarvin
I’m not questioning it. I don’t have any doubts about it being a plane. I’m simply taking the arguments of the conspiracists as mentioned in the article, as specious as they are, and countering them.
I’d like an aviation expert to tell these fools that the low flight path is certainly possible for a commercial passenger jet. They might take it better from them than from me, because what the hell do I know?
I’d like an aviation expert to tell these fools that the low flight path is certainly possible for a commercial passenger jet. They might take it better from them than from me, because what the hell do I know?
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:47 pm to Wtodd
quote:
Ahhh what? It was the Pentagon; a squirrel couldn't fart without audio picking up the sound and video seeing the little fricker hiking his leg
They're not typically pointed skyward.
I mean, in Metropolis they might be...
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:47 pm to idlewatcher
quote:
The gas station or the Pentagon?
Both.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:47 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
A cruise missile is about the size of a 20 ft long telephone pole. It would barely be picked up on that grainy video if at all.
Well nothing is clearly picked up on the grainy video. I see a disturbance moreso than an object.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:49 pm to Brosef Stalin
quote:A missile that large?
What if the missile was launched from a truck or some other vehicle?
Would have needed several big rigs just to transport it in pieces. Then they would have to assemble.
That would be a pretty major undertaking with likely thousands of witnesses.
Come on
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:50 pm to skrayper
quote:
They're not typically pointed skyward.
It seems you are implying that the pentagon didn’t have its entire perimeter covered by cameras. Good cameras.
Obviously you are wrong if this is the case.
Posted on 4/27/18 at 12:51 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Looks can be and always are deceiving, but that does not look like a commercial plane...
What should a passenger plane moving at 600 miles per hour look like on a grainy security cam 100 feet away?
Page 8 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News