Ed Pentagon - TruthMakesPeace

Captain_Swoop said:
Why didn't anyone see all the plastic explosives etc plastered all over the windows?

Why were the crew effected? they have masks to provide oxygen.
Click to expand...
The masks didn't work because the air was let out slowly, which apparently doesn't trigger the masks.

And also so quickly that no-one had time to realize what was going on.

:confused:
 
TruthMakesPeace said:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_200back.html
The 757-200 flight deck, designed for two-crew member operation, pioneered the use of digital electronics and advanced displays. Those offer increased reliability and advanced features compared to older electro-mechanical instruments.

A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing. Linking together digital processors controlling navigation, guidance and engine thrust, the flight management system assures that the aircraft flies the most efficient route and flight profile for reduced fuel consumption, flight time and crew workload.
The precision of global positioning satellite (GPS) system navigation, automated air traffic control functions, and advanced guidance and communications features are now available as part of the new Future Air Navigation System (FANS) flight management computer.
...
Flight decks of the 757 and 767 are nearly identical and both aircraft have a common type-rating. Pilots qualified to fly one of the aircraft also can fly the other with only minimal additional familiarization.​
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/193154dd0c7598379d.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Apparently you are confusing a remote control system with an autopilot.
 
TruthMakesPeace said:
According to the theory, passengers were allowed to make calls, to get the official story out. Then "At about 10000 feet above sea level, remote controlled plastic explosives blew about 20 windows at once, balanced with 10 each side of the fuselage, so the plane would stay level, and equalize drag. This caused rushes of air to be released simultaneously and evenly, so the fuselage was not significantly damaged. This froze, asphyxiated and incapacitated the crew, passengers, and hijackers into unconsciousness."


I agree with your good point. The air release valve idea is too complicated and slow. Blowing the windows with plastic explosives would be much easier, faster, and effective.
Click to expand...

This is quite possibly the DUMBEST theory, EVER!!

:dl:
 
Last edited:
TruthMakesPeace said:
Yes, they were probably gassed to death. I just did not want to dwell on a negative and sad topic. Most intelligent people get the idea. We don't have to spell it out to them, in all caps. Obviously, either way the explanation works, if the occupants were unconscious or passed away by the time the planes hit the buildings.
Click to expand...

Wow, and the other "truthers" tell us we're believing everything on faith....
 
TruthMakesPeace said:
According to the theory, passengers were allowed to make calls, to get the official story out. Then "At about 10000 feet above sea level, remote controlled plastic explosives blew about 20 windows at once, balanced with 10 each side of the fuselage, so the plane would stay level, and equalize drag. This caused rushes of air to be released simultaneously and evenly, so the fuselage was not significantly damaged. This froze, asphyxiated and incapacitated the crew, passengers, and hijackers into unconsciousness."
Click to expand...

Wow. You've just confirmed you have zero knowledge of flying/aircraft in this post. You look like the most gullible sucker on the planet for believing this garbage without doing some research for yourself.

FYI: Planes have experienced explosive decompression at altitudes much higher than 10,000 ft and nobody was rendered unconscious.

Oh, look! Facts to support my statement! What a novelty!

http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/index.htm

Aloha Air Flight 243, on 28 APR 88, experienced explosive decompression at 24,000 ft and lost the entire roof! One stewardess lost her life as she was sucked out of the plane. She was the only fatality on that flight.

Oh, and a BTW, notice this?:
webpage said:
The first officer stated that she observed a rate of descent of 4,100 feet per minute at some point during the emergency descent.
Click to expand...
Yeah...truthers claim this ROD is impossible without catastrophic failure of an aircraft...yet A243 did this with an already damaged plane. Imagine that.
 
Last edited:
TruthMakesPeace said:
"At about 10000 feet above sea level, remote controlled plastic explosives blew about 20 windows at once, balanced with 10 each side of the fuselage, so the plane would stay level, and equalize drag. This caused rushes of air to be released simultaneously and evenly, so the fuselage was not significantly damaged. This froze, asphyxiated and incapacitated the crew, passengers, and hijackers into unconsciousness."
Click to expand...

A quick look at recorded history reveals that, in WW1, British aircraft were routinely flying at altitudes of 10,000 feet and more as early as 1915, and that by 1917 flights up to 20,000 feet were not unusual, yet the Royal Flying Corps didn't start using oxygen until 1918. Maybe people pass out more easily these days.

Dave
 
Sabretooth said:
...
FYI: Planes have experienced explosive decompression at altitudes much higher than 10,000 ft and nobody was rendered unconscious.
...
Click to expand...

As a child of 7 I once spent hours outside at an altitude near 10,000 feet.
I neither froze nor asphyxiated nor was I incapacitated into unconsciousness.
The other day I talked to a young woman who spent several days in last december way above 10,000 feet, a couple of days above 15,000 feet, and even some hours above 20,000 feet. She managed to stay healthy and in excellent condition. Truth to be told, it was cold enough for some snow not to melt. Oxygene was rare enough for some fellow hikers to stay behind.

TruthMakesPeace makes up just-so-stories, untouched by basic knowledge about the things he talks about, such as conditions at 10,000 feet of altitude, and it is very plain to see for all onlookers.

How embarrassing!
 
Maybe Cicorp couldn't find this link.
Here you go. The technical analysis of how crazy and impossible his "theory" is.


TruthersLie said:
Ah yes... here is the technical analysis.

Cicorp... I believe you will need to admit that you are wrong (again), then then you can admit that you slandered the SEC investigators, the FBI and others in your baseless claims.

http://www.911myths.com/images/5/5b/Remote_Takeover.pdf

Can you do even basic research? Start at about page 20... hell read the whole *********** thing. Then try to put it into your tiny head that you are WRONG again.
Click to expand...
 
At about 10000 feet above sea level, remote controlled plastic explosives blew about 20 windows at once, balanced with 10 each side of the fuselage, so the plane would stay level, and equalize drag. This caused rushes of air to be released simultaneously and evenly, so the fuselage was not significantly damaged. This froze, asphyxiated and incapacitated the crew, passengers, and hijackers into unconsciousness."
Click to expand...

Dang...I guess the people of Leadville, Colorado are screwed! :)

Man in business class: "Stewardess...could I get a rum and coke and a pillow please?...oh and by the way...there seems to be an explosive charge attached to my window."
 
Last edited:
TruthMakesPeace said:
The request for proof applies equally well on the OCT. Prove fire can completely collapse a sky scraper. Prove the occupants were alive inside the planes at the time of the crash. Prove there were no assistive explosives on the planes. Prove there were not explosives in the buildings. It cuts both ways. We're critical thinkers because we demand proof - even if a statement comes from the Government. This theory explains the evidence and witness statements equally well, if not better than the OCT, which asks us to accept that 19 guys intentionally killed themselves, without proof. www.911Pentagon.org
Click to expand...

No I don't have to prove there were no explosives on the planes anymore than I have to prove that a militant arm of Up With People staged the attacks framing Bin Laden. You say there were explosive, produce the residue. This is pretty basic.
 
Craig4 said:
No I don't have to prove there were no explosives on the planes anymore than I have to prove that a militant arm of Up With People staged the attacks framing Bin Laden. You say there were explosive, produce the residue. This is pretty basic.
Click to expand...

These truthers live in a topsy turvy world.
 
Craig4 said:
No I don't have to prove there were no explosives on the planes anymore than I have to prove that a militant arm of Up With People staged the attacks framing Bin Laden. You say there were explosive, produce the residue. This is pretty basic.
Click to expand...

ahahahahah Residue? How about a building or two or three pulverized into dust as a result of falling on themselves?
 
TruthMakesPeace said:
According to the theory, passengers were allowed to make calls, to get the official story out. Then "At about 10000 feet above sea level, remote controlled plastic explosives blew about 20 windows at once, balanced with 10 each side of the fuselage, so the plane would stay level, and equalize drag. This caused rushes of air to be released simultaneously and evenly, so the fuselage was not significantly damaged. This froze, asphyxiated and incapacitated the crew, passengers, and hijackers into unconsciousness."


I agree with your good point. The air release valve idea is too complicated and slow. Blowing the windows with plastic explosives would be much easier, faster, and effective.
Click to expand...

I know that others must have commented on this before me but as soon as i read this I had to respond.

why is it that everytime you post a stupid concept and it gets challenged you then alter it to make it even worse?

At 10,000 ft you would indeed cause MOST people to fall asleep. No garauntee that they all do, especially the people with the best health which would include the pilots. The cockpit would also not suffer this supposedly immediate de-pressurization, with its door closed it would remain sufficiently pressurized as to allow the pilots to send out a mayday. Its also unlikely that you'd freeze them at 10,000 ft on a sunny day in early Sept. unless you are travelling in Canada. Cold, maybe, freeze them to death, no not really. In fact it could easily be warmer at 10,000 ft than at ground level.

Possibly someone else already pointed out that a 737 in Hawaii had several feet of the top of the fuselage come off and those who were belted into their seats all survived. IIRC this occured at above 10,000 ft. The crew fought the plane as it violently shook due to the increase in drag caused by this hole.

Blowing the windows would cause this aircraft to become unstable and more difficult to control which, in an RC control condition, all but garuntees that the plane will crash. It is unstable not because of some assymetry in the new holes in the fuselage but because the aerodynamics of the a/c, its drag and turbulence, have been changed significantly.
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
ahahahahah Residue? How about a building or two or three pulverized into dust as a result of falling on themselves?
Click to expand...

I believe,,,, yes,,, looking at his post I can see that Craig was asking you to provide explosive residue, not building residue. Besides multi-ton chunks of steel are not usually characterized as 'dust', nor is it quite right to describe structural collapses of three buildings that destroy/render unusable or severely damage 8 - 10 nearby structures as 'falling on themselves'.:rolleyes:
 
jaydeehess said:
If the pilot was making numerous corrections then his flying by definition imperfect.

You still indicate that you hold the idea that Hani hit the exact spot he wanted to hit yet you have nothing other than what amounts to a classic Sharpshooter Logical Fallacy with which to make this claim.

Once again with feeling; the likely, most logical thing for a suicide pilot who wants to impact the Pentagon to do is to aim for the center of the 300 foot by 77 foot wall. Hani missed that spot 30 some feet low and a few dozen feet wide. Did it matter? Not a bit, not one iota, nope, it just did not matter. As I stated he could have hit the earth 50 feet in front of the Pentagon and cartwheeled the aircraft into the Pentagon, and still caused as much damage and loss of life. He could have crashed on the roof and done as much damage, he could have been too high for that wall and crashed into the inner ring on the far side and done MORE damage (inner walls not being hardened as the outer walls.) He could have been 100 feet left or right and done as much damage (well if he plowed into the helipad tower that might have reduced damage to the Pentagon proper though it would have absolutly destroyed the smaller structure)

He hit where he hit, not necessarily exactly where he was aiming and GIVEN his inexpert handling of the aircraft he most likely did not hit the exact spot he was aiming for.
Click to expand...

Clayton, are you ready yet to concede that hitting the side of the Pentagon is really not that hard to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom