• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Clear evidence that 9/11 was an inside job

FatFreddy88 said:
I'm having a busy work week so I won't be able to do any serious posting for a few days but here's some more stuff.
...
Click to expand...

O shucks.
Instead of wasting your time on moving goal posts and resurrecting old nonsense from the wastebin of time, you should have had the courtesy to acknowledge my posts 72 and 74 which directly addressed the question you posed in the opening post:
"Does anyone want to check my measurements and math?"​

I checked your measurements and math.
I also pointed out that one of the sources you linked to contain good measurements and math.
The result is clear:

Both your measurements and your math were faulty, and so was your conclusion; the parking lot cam image is consistent with showing a 757 on the "official" flight path.

Why do you truthers always run away from your claims the moment someone analyses them?
 
Oystein said:
On my screen, the far side of the protruding part is about 9.5mm high, and what I speculate is the plane (I see its nose to the left of the box) is about 11.5mm. If I assume it's not the nose I see and measure like you do, I have 10mm.

Here is a very rough draft of the line of sight and the flight path:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/368864dca5656ca008.png[/qimg]
The angle between the lines is about 140°. The apparant length of the plane would not get shortened by 20%, as you assume without argument or prove, but by 1-sin(140°) = 36%

The distance from camera to far edge of protruding part is about 65mm, to the line of sight (where the blue and red line cross) 75mm. That would further reduce the apparent length of the plane by 1-65/75 = 13%.

Now, if building height of 9.5mm corresponds to 77 feet in real world, then the length of a 757-223, which is 155 feet, would correspond to 9.5mm * 155/77 = 19mm
These 19mm get shortened due to angle by 36% -> 12.24mm, and further shortened due to distance by 13% -> 10.6mm.

This nicely corresponds to what I measured.

My approach has a number of sources of error: imprecise measuring, flight path and line of sight only approximately, etc.Still, I am satisfied that you result "maximum of two thirds the length of a 757" is imprecise. Your sources of error are more substantial than mine: You underestimate the effect of angle, and disregard the difference in distance.
Click to expand...

:bigclap

You quite nicely addressed the points I brought up earlier.

Instead of simply pulling a number out of a hat for the foreshortening due to angle and distance from end to end of the object as FF has it, you actually applied reason, logic and math to the problem. Kudos to you, Oystein!


Even if the margin of error of your result is as small as 10% (a rather exacting margin of error considering the approximations used) then the image of the aircraft is rather well situated within this margin at either 11.5 or 10 mm.


This '911 conspiracy' raw speculative conjecture is done.

NEXT!!
 
Oystein said:
I checked your measurements and math.
I also pointed out that one of the sources you linked to contain good measurements and math.
The result is clear:

Both your measurements and your math were faulty, and so was your conclusion; the parking lot cam image is consistent with showing a 757 on the "official" flight path.

Why do you truthers always run away from your claims the moment someone analyses them?
Click to expand...

I brought this up in another thread. It seems that when challenged directly many 911 conspiracy adherents will manufacture a myriad of reasons(excuses) not to address the queries or statements made by those challenging them.
 
I Am The Scum said:
Why go through all this trouble to make it look like a plane hit the Pentagon, when it would be much easier to actually crash a plane into the Pentagon?
Click to expand...

Especially at a location that is a popular tourist destination, where you are sure to have witnesses.
 
the title of the OP should be changed to "Clear speculation that 9/11 was an inside job".
 
Last edited:
I'm having a busy work week and I've been posting on other threads. I'll be back this weekend. I haven't chickened out.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
I'm having a busy work week and I've been posting on other threads. I'll be back this weekend. I haven't chickened out.
Click to expand...
You have no evidence, there is no need for you to post on the weekend, the NWO lets us have the weekend off.

You have nothing new on 911, all your claims are from idiots who were debunked long ago and have been wrong for over 9 years.

You left out the clear evidence.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
I'm having a busy work week and I've been posting on other threads. I'll be back this weekend. I haven't chickened out.
Click to expand...

You moved goal posts instead of acknowledging replies to your opening post.
I expect that your next post here will address those replies that showed you how your measurements were incorrect and that you failed to do math.
 
jaydeehess said:
What exactly do you find so hilarious?

What I personally find 'funny' are the inane comments added by the author of the video clip.
Click to expand...

The news anchor said that the plane folded back its wings at impact and became like a piercing dart, and that's why the hole in the Pentagon was so small. LMAO. :D
 
Anders Lindman said:
The news anchor said that the plane folded back its wings at impact and became like a piercing dart, and that's why the hole in the Pentagon was so small. LMAO. :D
Click to expand...

Almost as funny as those idiots who think there never was a plane at the Pentagon or it suddenly veered up and flew over it with nobody noticing, huh? ;)
 
twinstead said:
Almost as funny as those idiots who think there never was a plane at the Pentagon or it suddenly veered up and flew over it with nobody noticing, huh? ;)
Click to expand...

Remember there ARE live eyewitnesses seeing a big fat airliner with the American Airlines logo on the tail, making a steep dive, and then folding back its wings in the shape of a dart, thereby penetrating the stern Pentagon structure!!! :rolleyes::boxedin::duck::jaw-dropp:faint:
 
Anders Lindman said:
Remember there ARE live eyewitnesses seeing a big fat airliner with the American Airlines logo on the tail, making a steep dive, and then folding back its wings in the shape of a dart, thereby penetrating the stern Pentagon structure!!! :rolleyes::boxedin::duck::jaw-dropp:faint:
Click to expand...

It's roughly 300 meters from the point where the plane crossed Washington Blvd. to point of impact.
A 757-223 is 47 meters long.
Flight 77 flew at a ground speed of about 853 km/h or 237m/s.

That means it was 1.3 seconds from road to impact, and 0.2 seconds from nose touching wall to tail disappearing inside.

In that short frame of time, no human brain processes visual short term memory reliably. Thar USA Today man saw the plane crash and disappear into the Pentagon. This much is clear. Any details such as wings folding is almost certainly added subconsciously in post-processing of short-term memory.

He describes what he remembers, but that memory is unreliable. You need to differentiate between the more reliable basic facts, and the less reliable details that ones brain is prone to fill in as time passes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom