Missile??

We kinda did that with the "missile", exploring many sources for the image... but I'd settle for a JPEG artifact, the actual thingy not being observed in -every- copy of the video, or the event itself.
 
little grey rabbit said:
Only if she was in the cockpit. You have to remember that due to the coriolanus effect the pilot nearly missed the WTC.
Click to expand...

LOL!

Wrong plane by the way, Sweeney was on board American 11. Why would she have to be in the cockpit to realize something was seriously wrong, that the hijackers were not going to land the plane? You are spewing nonsense about the very moment someone probably realized they were about to die... How nice of you :mad:
 
jaydeehess said:
Let's see the possibilities have been
-sun reflection between the rounded aluminum nose of the a/c and the windows of the structure
-impact destruction of the weather radar or other electronic equipment in the nose of the aircraft
-static electrical discharge between the fast moving aluminum aircraft and the aluminum cladding of the tower

All of which include only known materials and phenomena.

You on the other hand want to know if it could have been a missile for which the the evidence is simply the flash itself. You want to know therefore, if it could be something that cannot be shown to have been in place as oppsosed to the Sun, the electronics, and the phenomena of static discharge. You cannot even come up with a plausible reason for this missile to be in place.

"Ensuring penetration' is ridiculous for something that is supposedly fired from an aircraft moving at several hundred MPH only a few feet from the target. The blast effect of any explosive missile warhead would barely have touched structural components of the tower before the plane impacted AND the blast wave would serve more to keep plane parts from entering the building than it would to allow them to enter.
An incindiary certainly would have no time at all to affect steel structural members before impact. A 'shot gun' type scattering of incindiary within the structure is the most inefficient way I can think of to weaken key structural steel members. If the idea is to ignite large area office fires with this shot gun spread of incindiary it is less efficient than simply using tens of thousands of gallons of liquid fuel already on board the aircraft.

So , no, there is no reason or evidence that a missile was present, which is , correct me if I am wrong, exactly what you were asking about.

Close the thread now?.


,,, and after all you believe in the slight of hand disappearance of a large fast and low flying aircraft that no one ever saw after it reached the Pentagon.

.



Full quote?
Perhaps he meant the politics of the middle east in general.



Perhaps if you spent more time posting YOUR OWN thoughts rather than posting links and instructing us to watch videos or read webpages of the thoughts of others we would not assume that references made in those links were also your opinions.
Click to expand...

Ok let's see.
-sun reflection between the rounded aluminum nose of the a/c and the windows of the structure.
Impossible this flash is seen from different angles. Also a similar flash is seen on the impact of the north tower. I'm going to make a wild assumption that the sun did not move that far in 15 minutes.
-impact destruction of the weather radar or other electronic equipment in the nose of the aircraft.
Impossible. The flash is clearly before impact.
See here at the 16 second mark. This video also has footage of the north tower. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJGrda2Jeqc
-static electrical discharge between the fast moving aluminum aircraft and the aluminum cladding of the tower
Close to impossible, because it would be arched from the planes fuselage to the building itself. It would not be a round bright orange flash and would most likely not be seen in daylight.

So then we're still left with not knowing what it is. Not even having a likely scenario.

If you watch the videos on the original post, you will see there is more evidence than just one flash. You have in the first video, what appears to be a flame coming from the back of the plane. In the second video, when they do the close of zoom of impact. You have something that appears to be traveling along side the A/C, and than impact the building right before the plane.

I think we can agree that if it was a conspiracy, they would want as little plane parts as possible to fall to the ground. The only way to do that is to ensure maximum penetration. I've said previously that it would seem a regular missile does not appear to have enough time to do any damage. But I don't pretend to know every weapon there is, perhaps there is something that would.

I've never said I believe in the slight of hand disappearance at the pentagon. Only that a flyover is a theory that is out there.

As far as Lloyde goes, here is a quote. Lloyde: "We came across the highway together." Interviewer: "You and their event, so it must have been planned then?" Lloyde: "It was planned" But I'm sure he meant OBL and KSM were riding in his cab right? That's really the extent some of you guys go.


Here is the whole video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHM5f9lVho



Whatever you want to say about my posts, they seem to have gotten your attention now haven't they?
 
Björn Toulouse said:
Since I did not read the entire thread, I guess I missed that video.




The 2nd video in the first post seemed to show a flash at the moment of impact. In that video I did not see the "flash" that was circled in the 1st video.

The flash is clearly before impact, and you can see the flash or flame from the first video at about the 13 second mark.


And they recovered no missile parts either from the crash scenes, but I suppose if they had, they would have had to lie about it, right?

I don't know, it may not have a classic missile. I'm sure if it was a conspiracy they would have taken this into consideration, and made sure it wouldn't happen. How they would have done it I don't know.



The extent that some of you guys will go to interpret something to your own design is unbelievable. Of course, the planning of the attacks were done by people with money in comparison to Lloyde, but to call his ramblings a "virtual confession" to his involvement of the planning of the attacks is as ridiculous as spotting the Madonna.

"We came across the highway together." Interviewer: "You and their event, so it must have been planned then?" Lloyde: "It was planned" But I'm sure he meant OBL and KSM were riding in his cab right? That's really the extent some of you guys go.


Here is the whole video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHM5f9lVho


Nope. Just another benchmark like Lloyde's "confession". When I see that in a post, I tend to dismiss the whole thing as idiocy.


I never mentioned Jennings in a post (until you brought it up) That whole post (you are referring to) was relating to firemen and what they said. Someone said a "truther" will never quote a fireman about WTC 7, so I said here is a bunch of them, and than called one out specifically to talk about.

This is what I am talking about. Jennings did NOT "see" bodies, therefore he was NOT an "eyewitness" to bodies in WTC 7. This ignorance just shows what you read and where you get your erroneous information. I have no patience with this garbage. It is the twisting of words.


Really all I said was Jennings did say THAT. I was referring to what was in the video. Clearly those are his words (whatever they are) as that is him in the video. I don't know what to make of them.


Nope. Just a benchmark that tells me you are gullible and willing to believe anything that supports your conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

You are willing to believe anything that supports the official story, or not believe anything that goes against the official story.

I'm sorry I messed up what I wanted to in the post, here is the post with your words and my responses.

Since I did not read the entire thread, I guess I missed that video.




The 2nd video in the first post seemed to show a flash at the moment of impact. In that video I did not see the "flash" that was circled in the 1st video.

The flash is clearly before impact, and you can see the flash or flame from the first video at about the 13 second mark.


And they recovered no missile parts either from the crash scenes, but I suppose if they had, they would have had to lie about it, right?

I don't know, it may not have a classic missile. I'm sure if it was a conspiracy they would have taken this into consideration, and made sure it wouldn't happen. How they would have done it I don't know.



The extent that some of you guys will go to interpret something to your own design is unbelievable. Of course, the planning of the attacks were done by people with money in comparison to Lloyde, but to call his ramblings a "virtual confession" to his involvement of the planning of the attacks is as ridiculous as spotting the Madonna.

"We came across the highway together." Interviewer: "You and their event, so it must have been planned then?" Lloyde: "It was planned" But I'm sure he meant OBL and KSM were riding in his cab right? That's really the extent some of you guys go.


Here is the whole video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHM5f9lVho


Nope. Just another benchmark like Lloyde's "confession". When I see that in a post, I tend to dismiss the whole thing as idiocy.


I never mentioned Jennings in a post (until you brought it up) That whole post (you are referring to) was relating to firemen and what they said. Someone said a "truther" will never quote a fireman about WTC 7, so I said here is a bunch of them, and than called one out specifically to talk about.

This is what I am talking about. Jennings did NOT "see" bodies, therefore he was NOT an "eyewitness" to bodies in WTC 7. This ignorance just shows what you read and where you get your erroneous information. I have no patience with this garbage. It is the twisting of words.


Really all I said was Jennings did say THAT. I was referring to what was in the video. Clearly those are his words (whatever they are) as that is him in the video. I don't know what to make of them.


Nope. Just a benchmark that tells me you are gullible and willing to believe anything that supports your conspiracy theory.
You are willing to believe anything that supports the official story, or not believe anything that goes against the official story.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
You are willing to believe anything that supports the official story, or not believe anything that goes against the official story.
Click to expand...

Don't project, tmd. It makes you look like a fool.
 
Whatever you want to say about my posts, they seem to have gotten your attention now haven't they?
Click to expand...

Well, we shake our heads alot and mock you. If that's what you're going for then you hit the nail on the head....
 
tmd2_1 said:
You are willing to believe anything that supports the official story, or not believe anything that goes against the official story.

I'm sorry I messed up what I wanted to in the post, here is the post with your words and my responses.

Since I did not read the entire thread, I guess I missed that video.




The 2nd video in the first post seemed to show a flash at the moment of impact. In that video I did not see the "flash" that was circled in the 1st video.

The flash is clearly before impact, and you can see the flash or flame from the first video at about the 13 second mark.


And they recovered no missile parts either from the crash scenes, but I suppose if they had, they would have had to lie about it, right?

I don't know, it may not have a classic missile. I'm sure if it was a conspiracy they would have taken this into consideration, and made sure it wouldn't happen. How they would have done it I don't know.



The extent that some of you guys will go to interpret something to your own design is unbelievable. Of course, the planning of the attacks were done by people with money in comparison to Lloyde, but to call his ramblings a "virtual confession" to his involvement of the planning of the attacks is as ridiculous as spotting the Madonna.

"We came across the highway together." Interviewer: "You and their event, so it must have been planned then?" Lloyde: "It was planned" But I'm sure he meant OBL and KSM were riding in his cab right? That's really the extent some of you guys go.


Here is the whole video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHM5f9lVho


Nope. Just another benchmark like Lloyde's "confession". When I see that in a post, I tend to dismiss the whole thing as idiocy.


I never mentioned Jennings in a post (until you brought it up) That whole post (you are referring to) was relating to firemen and what they said. Someone said a "truther" will never quote a fireman about WTC 7, so I said here is a bunch of them, and than called one out specifically to talk about.

This is what I am talking about. Jennings did NOT "see" bodies, therefore he was NOT an "eyewitness" to bodies in WTC 7. This ignorance just shows what you read and where you get your erroneous information. I have no patience with this garbage. It is the twisting of words.


Really all I said was Jennings did say THAT. I was referring to what was in the video. Clearly those are his words (whatever they are) as that is him in the video. I don't know what to make of them.


Nope. Just a benchmark that tells me you are gullible and willing to believe anything that supports your conspiracy theory.
You are willing to believe anything that supports the official story, or not believe anything that goes against the official story.
Click to expand...

... and no missile was fired into the WTC.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Ok let's see.
-sun reflection between the rounded aluminum nose of the a/c and the windows of the structure.
Impossible this flash is seen from different angles. Also a similar flash is seen on the impact of the north tower. I'm going to make a wild assumption that the sun did not move that far in 15 minutes.
-impact destruction of the weather radar or other electronic equipment in the nose of the aircraft.
Impossible. The flash is clearly before impact.
See here at the 16 second mark. This video also has footage of the north tower. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJGrda2Jeqc
-static electrical discharge between the fast moving aluminum aircraft and the aluminum cladding of the tower
Close to impossible, because it would be arched from the planes fuselage to the building itself. It would not be a round bright orange flash and would most likely not be seen in daylight.

So then we're still left with not knowing what it is. Not even having a likely scenario.
Click to expand...

How convenient for you to have not listed 2 other possibilities that have been brought up in this very thread:

- microwave arcing / feedback between the tower cladding and the weather radar
- compression-wave from the nose of the aircraft flash-heating the surface of the building.

The pre-impact nose flash is seen in both impacts, so there is a common cause. In both impacts the flash is a bright circle about 1 airframe in diameter when the nose is about 1 airframe-diameter away.

I used to think it was microwaves, but on review I am beginning to lean toward air compression. Google " fire piston " to see the affects simple compression can have on heat. ( pv=nrt ? Remember that one? )

Similarly, space debris has always been described as "burning up" in atmosphere due to "friction" but studies on debris that reaches the ground intact show that compression is a much greater force at play -- so space craft designers now take compression loading into account for boosters and such that they want to be destroyed on reentry, and avoid creating shapes with low compression profiles.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1, what would be the point of an incendiary missile fired 1/1000 second before inpact?
 
ApolloGnomon said:
How convenient for you to have not listed 2 other possibilities that have been brought up in this very thread:

- microwave arcing / feedback between the tower cladding and the weather radar
- compression-wave from the nose of the aircraft flash-heating the surface of the building.

The pre-impact nose flash is seen in both impacts, so there is a common cause. In both impacts the flash is a bright circle about 1 airframe in diameter when the nose is about 1 airframe-diameter away.

I used to think it was microwaves, but on review I am beginning to lean toward air compression. Google " fire piston " to see the affects simple compression can have on heat. ( pv=nrt ? Remember that one? )

Similarly, space debris has always been described as "burning up" in atmosphere due to "friction" but studies on debris that reaches the ground intact show that compression is a much greater force at play -- so space craft designers now take compression loading into account for boosters and such that they want to be destroyed on reentry, and avoid creating shapes with low compression profiles.
Click to expand...

I was just addressing that guy's points, that's all. In terms of air compression-fire piston, can you explain that a little more? Below is an exert from wikipedia about fire pistons, you can see it needs to be air tight. Some thing that clearly was not in place. (Mods I don't believe this violates the rules as it is a one paragraph excert)

A fire piston consists of a hollow cylinder ranging in length from about 7.5 cm to 15 cm (3 to 6 inches), having a bore 6-7 mm (about 0.25 inch) in diameter, sealed at one end and open at the other. A piston with an airtight circular seal is fitted into the cylinder. The piston has a handle on the end to allow a firm grip to be applied to it, or a large enough surface area to strike it sharply without causing pain while the cylinder is braced against a hard surface, and it can be completely withdrawn from the cylinder. The piston generally has a notch or recess on or in its face, into which a piece of tinder is placed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_piston

But I would like to hear more, despite what some may think I do like to look at all possibilities.
 
WildCat said:
tmd2_1, what would be the point of an incendiary missile fired 1/1000 second before inpact?
Click to expand...

Believe it or not I do agree with you, and said so in a previous post. It doesn't seem like it would make any sense. But a lot of possibilities (reflection etc) are ruled out, we're not left with much. Also I do not know every weapon, perhaps there is something that would have had some affect, I really don't know. Maybe it was something being used for tracking/guiding, and not a weapon at all? Seems unlikely but when so many possibilities are not possible or extremely unlikely, your not left with much. Again at no point did I ever say this is what it was, this thread was and is a question.
 
I'm not saying the nose of the airplane is a fire piston, I'm trying to give you an example or two of the amount of heat that can be generated by air compression.

You ignored the other example, falling space debris, which is also not in an air-tight tube but still creates enough heat to fully destroy structures made of aluminum, titanium, fiberglass and the like.

The 767 was moving alarmingly close to the speed of sound, at nearly sea level. There's a compression wave traveling ahead of the nose. At the "speed of sound" (air pressure is a variable in the equation, the speed is not a constant) the nose pushes into/past the compression wave, creating a shock wave that can be heard hundreds of miles away in some cases. In this case the compression wave is a conical zone of compression at the nose of the craft. It hit the building and, gee, guess what, suddenly compression goes up because it's not being dissipated by ambient air. The surface of the building creates the containment area for the compression.

A fire piston won't work unless airtight because at the speed it is used air can get around it through leaks. If you were able to slam the piston faster than the air can leak out (true in any case, a bamboo fire piston would leak out if you moved it really slow) even the leakiest piston could start a fire.
 
Last edited:
ApolloGnomon said:
I'm not saying the nose of the airplane is a fire piston, I'm trying to give you an example or two of the amount of heat that can be generated by air compression.

You ignored the other example, falling space debris, which is also not in an air-tight tube but still creates enough heat to fully destroy structures made of aluminum, titanium, fiberglass and the like.

The 767 was moving alarmingly close to the speed of sound, at nearly sea level. There's a compression wave traveling ahead of the nose. At the "speed of sound" (air pressure is a variable in the equation, the speed is not a constant) the nose pushes into/past the compression wave, creating a shock wave that can be heard hundreds of miles away in some cases. In this case the compression wave is a conical zone of compression at the nose of the craft. It hit the building and, gee, guess what, suddenly compression goes up because it's not being dissipated by ambient air. The surface of the building creates the containment area for the compression.

A fire piston won't work unless airtight because at the speed it is used air can get around it through leaks. If you were able to slam the piston faster than the air can leak out (true in any case, a bamboo fire piston would leak out if you moved it really slow) even the leakiest piston could start a fire.
Click to expand...

Ok let me make sure I understand you correctly. You are saying that in front of the planes nose is a compression zone, and that when it impacted the building (the zone) it stopped, and therefore gave the nose an opportunity to catch up thus causing the flash on impact. Is that correct?

If I understood you correctly, and if I just accept that what you say is correct, wouldn't the flash have been in all directions equally? I would think so. The flash is only seen in the lower right hand side of both A/C.

As far as space debris, I'm not sure how that relates. The plane was traveling at the same speed for a while encountering the same resistance, so we should have seen flashes all the way through.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Ok let me make sure I understand you correctly. You are saying that in front of the planes nose is a compression zone, and that when it impacted the building (the zone) it stopped, and therefore gave the nose an opportunity to catch up thus causing the flash on impact. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

Kind of, yes, but not exactly. The compression wave stops traveling forward at the building. The nose is still pressing air forward. The distance between the nose and building decreases faster than the air can get out of the way.

If I understood you correctly, and if I just accept that what you say is correct, wouldn't the flash have been in all directions equally?
Click to expand...

No, it would be from the leading edge of the airframe. The zones of compression are at the forward points of the moving object, and are variable with cross section. The wings and rudder will also have compression waves ahead of them but much smaller both in width and distance forward as they are quite narrow. The nose if the airplane is quite blunt and will push quite a large compression wave ahead of it. Supersonic aircraft and missiles have extremely pointed noses (and wing leading edges) so that the compression zone is as small as possible.

I would think so. The flash is only seen in the lower right hand side of both A/C.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? I'm talking about the big circular blink of light on the building itself right in front of the airplane just before impact. I'm NOT talking about any of the various sunlight or jpeg blinks flashes or squares at any other point in the sequence.

As far as space debris, I'm not sure how that relates. The plane was traveling at the same speed for a while encountering the same resistance, so we should have seen flashes all the way through.
Click to expand...

Again, what the hell are you talking about? The "flash" is not on the airframe, it's on the building. Change in velocity is irrelevant.

Space debris is traveling into air and compressing air as it goes. The air in contact with the object is the most compressed and gets hot enough to vaporize metal, or rock in the case of meteorites. The nose of an aircraft is rounded, so the air can't accumulate there and over heat the airframe. The SR71 Blackbird was capable of traveling at mach 3.3 or so (or mach 4.5 , depending on whether you buy the official specs or unofficial reports of radar data from Finland) and actually gets extremely hot.
 
The compression effect is noted only when something gets in the way.
For those airplanes, at those speeds, it's the buildings.
For space debris entering the atmosphere, at their enormous speeds, it's the air, which can't move out of the way, gets compressed, and heated.
Look up how a sonic boom is generated.
 
tmd, did you figure out where the missile was hidden? How could one be fitted on a 757? Why you can not see a missile in ANY still photo?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom