Missile??

You may have covered this already but some people think that the flashes were 'matches' to make sure that the photogenic fireball would actually ignite and not turn into a damp squib. That would leave the watching live world audience much less impressed than they might have been. Not enough 'shock and awe'.
Click to expand...

It's nice that you can make light of the fiery deaths of hundreds people by calling it "Photogenic". No wait, it's not nice. It's sick. Go visit your local burn ward, you'll never make a comment like that again.
 
Sam.I.Am said:
It's nice that you can make light of the fiery deaths of hundreds people by calling it "Photogenic". No wait, it's not nice. It's sick. Go visit your local burn ward, you'll never make a comment like that again.
Click to expand...

Read the thread I just bumped for full context.
 
NoahFence said:
Unfortunately for me, the mightiest tree in my forest is lying on my house. Stupid hurricane.
Click to expand...

Are you sure that wind gusts up to 71mph can topple a tree?? Surely the evil government added a trained butterfly, just to make sure!
 
:jaw-dropp
Oystein said:
Are you sure that wind gusts up to 71mph can topple a tree?? Surely the evil government added a trained butterfly, just to make sure!
Click to expand...

Now that you mention it, I didn't actually NOT see a butterfly, so it could have had something to do with it.

Oh man. The lid is BLOWN OFF this thing! The NWO hates Front-To-Back Splits!
 
waypastvne said:
Please pick out one that you think matches this piece of debris better than N612UA





This is the biggest and most unique number on the whole plane. All visible curves and points of the characters corners match perfectly with N612UA.
Even the paint sheen line matches perfectly. The corner of the flag is also visible and exactly where it should be. This piece of debris came from N612UA.

[qimg]http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af74/waypastvne/dsc00478k.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I really don't see more than an N. Do you know the source of this photo? I am curious to look more into it.
 
Oystein said:
Now where on the impact floors of the south tower do you find steel that's les than the 12.7mm of the armoured personel vehicle? Do you know?


No, I did not:




No, I did not:



But there are several things that you forgot to reply to. For example, you never addressed the main point that no matter how you look at Starstreaks, Bofors guns etc, any such device is a peanut compared to an elephant. That the kinetic energy of any missile would be orders of magnitude smaller than even the margin of error with which we can estimate the kinetic energy of the plane per one column.



I did not deceive you. I didn't know how thick the plates were around the impact location, I knew that, in general, perimeter column plates were up to 76mm (3 inches) thick, which is true.

I think the reason why you use this cheap excuse to not respond to me is that you feel embarrassed I demolish your silly ideas so thoroughly every time. I think you are starting to get a hunch just how bizarrely wrong your missile theory is.
Click to expand...

You most certainly use deceptive tactics. Watch this video it penetrates over an inch http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c53_1223582333

So that should be the end of that discussion. It most certainly can penetrate the columns at the impact zone.

I've said time and time again. That huge kinetic force is not even close to being applied to one column. Damaging the column before the nose hits, ensures greater penetration. So it's not really a matter of adding kinetic energy it is when it is delivered. Much as if a hole is already in the wall, smaller than the size of your fist. It would make it much easier for you to punch your ENTIRE fist through the wall. The force to make that small hole could have been much less then the force you applied with your fist, but it still made the job much easier.
 
Can we just ask tmd to produce his evidence or end the discussion? Why the hell should he be allowed to speculate freely if he doesn't have the slightest bit of evidence to support his ridiculous "theory" to begin with?
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Can we just ask tmd to produce his evidence or end the discussion? Why the hell should he be allowed to speculate freely if he doesn't have the slightest bit of evidence to support his ridiculous "theory" to begin with?
Click to expand...

Evidence is all in the OP. Try watching the videos. Here they are again, here is what could be a firing sequence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc4wsjKbYTQ&feature=related

Here at about 24 seconds and out you see something that appears to be traveling along side the A/C and than impacting the building. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x8fs2sZmas&feature=related

I'll add one more. Here is a good quality video that the second flash was before impact. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3dzA0sDTQ&feature=related Explain any of these to me? It hasn't been done yet. I know you will deny what is on these videos in some way shape or form, but maybe you will surprise me.
 
Evidence is all in the OP. Try watching the videos. Here they are again, here is what could be a firing sequence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc4ws...eature=related
Click to expand...

A blip in one frame of a highly compressed video does not evidence make. There is nothing after it in the following frames to make it anything more than that. There's also something noticeably missing in that video. Care to hazard a guess as to what it is?

Here at about 24 seconds and out you see something that appears to be traveling along side the A/C and than impacting the building. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x8fs...eature=related
Click to expand...

And there's nothing in between that "Blip" and your flash. Again that's a highly compressed video. You can't even discern between the windows and the columns on the building. A gap of about 2 feet. What does that tell you about the resolution?

I'll add one more. Here is a good quality video that the second flash was before impact. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3dz...eature=related Explain any of these to me? It hasn't been done yet. I know you will deny what is on these videos in some way shape or form, but maybe you will surprise me.
Click to expand...

You call that a good quality video? Well that's one of your problems right there...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc4wsjKbYTQ&feature=related
 
tmd2_1 said:
Hey Bill thanks for backing me up, I didn't think it was too crazy of a hypothesis!!
Click to expand...


Even as a truther, bill smith is not someone you want backing you up. That he supports your nonsense is just more proof of it being nonsense.
 
bill smith said:
As far as I am concerned nothing is off the table in the 9/11 story.

You may have covered this already but some people think that the flashes were 'matches' to make sure that the photogenic fireball would actually ignite and not turn into a damp squib. That would leave the watching live world audience much less impressed than they might have been. Not enough 'shock and awe'.

If so it means that the planes hit with pinpoint accuracy which in turn could mean that the perimeter columns in the impact area had been replaced with something that looked like steel but was not.
Click to expand...

Maybe that stuff is true but I think it hurts 9-11 truth to use it.
I dont think there would be a need (or surreptitious manner) in which to replace the perimeter columns! The fuel in the wings and the engines were the most substantial parts of the planes and at that speed tore right through those hollow perimeter columns/wall assemblies, leaving their rough outline on the buildings facade.

If I were you I would just stick to the facts that prove the use of explosives:
There is NOTHING theoretical about these facts:

-The speed and symmetry in the destruction of wtc 1,2&7
-WTC7's implosion
-The Squibs and the Explosiveness of wtc 1&2 which literally erupted creating massive debris fields, pulverizing most of the 160 tons of concrete and blasting it, the superstructures and perimeter wall assemblies and building contents all over the surrounding streets! The streets were strewn with thousands of body parts. And despite a two years search for human remains (at Freshkills Landfill, SI) there remained no discernible genetic trace of 1100 human beings. They remain: 'unaccounted for.'
-The witness and first responder testimony.
-The 99 day fires. With excessive heat *up to 2800f days after 9/11 (see Bechtel and NASA readings even weeks late).
-The elemental iron microspheres
-the Molten metal: See: fema bpat http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm
-NIST's refusal to even test for explosives despite the procedural mandate to do so. And what their spokesperson said when asked. 'why not?' 'Its a waste of time to look for something that isn't present" they replied.
-Danish hero Dr Niels Harrit et al's study is undeniable proof of the presence of advance-engineered thermitic explosives in the WTC dust. Like the Anthrax attacks of the same time period, it leads right back to US military labs and contractors.
And the highly revealing clip used in The NORTH TOWER EXPLODING VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

There's more.. but this should be enough for most reasonable people to realize that, at the very least, a proper investigation (you know, one that actually considers the evidence and does not begin with it's conclusions) is needed.
 
tmd, did you miss this post?

fess said:
tmd2_1, just a simple question. Just where, how, and when was this missile mounted on the B757/767 aircraft?
Click to expand...

Before you can speculate on the damage a missile can do, you must first prove that a missile was present.

A few other questions would be; who mounted the missile, how was it missed during the pre-flight walk around.

You do know that some missiles take up to a second to arm themselves once they a launched… right? Considering that this missile was already flying at over 700 fps when it was launched from where you say it was, then figuring in acceleration factor of the missile, the missile wouldn’t be armed until it was half way through the tower.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Did i know how thick it was? I had a general idea yes, and I knew how they got less thick on the way up. You forgot the part about the Bofors 40mm gun. You forgot to low quality of steel in the WTC. As I said I'm not sure there is much of a reason to respond to you. Your deceptive tactics have been exposed, it's not my fault you decided to write what you wrote. Maybe from time to time I can respond to something you write after this, but I see no reason to do it anymore than that.
Click to expand...

Ouch, played with fire and got burned.
 
fess said:
tmd, did you miss this post?



Before you can speculate on the damage a missile can do, you must first prove that a missile was present.

A few other questions would be; who mounted the missile, how was it missed during the pre-flight walk around.

You do know that some missiles take up to a second to arm themselves once they a launched… right? Considering that this missile was already flying at over 700 fps when it was launched from where you say it was, then figuring in acceleration factor of the missile, the missile wouldn’t be armed until it was half way through the tower.
Click to expand...

Well there's several scenarios I can think of, but Airport security at the highest levels would have had to have been involved. Security at all 3 airports just happened to be run by the same company at the time. Coincidence I'm sure. If airport security was involved it is possible. For me to give scenario's would only be speculation on my part. This thread was started as a question, I was looking for an explanation for the flash(es) so far I have only seen one that seems to be possible at all. But seems extremely unlikely, and that's static discharge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom