9/11 - Pentagon hit - Where are the plane parts?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Stink Fish Pot

I’ve been watching some 9/11 programs lately on the pentagon hit specifically… and there doesn’t seem to be any pictures, films, videos, or even many eyewitness accounts of a plane hitting the pentagon. Most of the announcements and “eyewitness” accounts report hearing a plane hit the pentagon based on radio or television reports. I have not seen anyone actually say “I saw the plane fly right into the building.” I really don’t doubt that it did, but for a city as large as DC, and a complex as big as the Pentagon, it just seems strange to me. Especially when stray surveillance cameras never showed up after the fact showing a plane flying close to the ground and/or into the Pentagon.

I know about the conspiracy theories out there and don’t want to get into that here if we can avoid it. (if we can’t, I figured GD was where this would end up).

A plane leaves a LOT of debris. Where did it all end up? They found plane parts all over the general vicinity of the twin towers (I remember one lady being taken out by a landing gear assembly). I don’t remember hearing or seeing anything regarding the plane’s parts.

I’m watching one right now, and it’s strange to me that the plane, coming in at a relatively parallel to the building, wouldn’t leave a bigger hole in the side. Maybe it’s the scale, but it looks like it should be bigger.

The Pentagon is right alongside the 395 freeway going into DC. I know 3 people who saw the plane crash into the Pentagon.

[Sablicious]

gif image

Let the ignornace of the etymology of ‘skeptic’ and the debunking being!

[Absolute]

@Sablicious

gif image

Let the ignornace of the etymology of ‘skeptic’ and the debunking being!

Okay, it’s a GIF of WTC 7 collapsing.

Is there a point you would like to make?

[Patty_O_Furniture]

@kunilou

Not to mention, outside wall of Pentagon: 921 feet.

It could’ve been hit by a supertanker and the hole would look small.

I went looking for a size comparison and came up with this:

I don’t know if one of those vessels is a supertanker, but since I don’t have a good mental picture of how big a supertanker is that likely wouldn’t do me any good anyway.

I guess the pink one is a blimp and the gray one is the Empire State Building. That kind of brings it home.

[Malacandra]

The supertanker’s the bottom image - the world’s largest ever was 1500 feet long and could carry half a million tons of cargo so yes, if it smacked into the Pentagon there would be definite signs.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Sablicious

gif image

Let the ignornace of the etymology of ‘skeptic’ and the debunking being!

I figure you might be making one or two intelligent arguments, or any of several dozen stupid ones. Evidence is currently lacking.

[XT]

@Sablicious

Let the ignornace of the etymology of ‘skeptic’ and the debunking being!

Be more than happy too old boy if you wish to actually make an argument. Just so you know, none of us here thought that a plane hit WTC 7. That doesn’t mean that nothing hit it though…just not an air plane.

-XT

[psikeyhackr]

The truthers also typically mislead many by showing only images of the holes in the second floor of the pentagon or the one inside the final ring of the pentagon that was reached.

ROFL

When planes hit WTC 1 and 2 the impacts were detected on a seismograph miles away even though the impacts were above 900 feet on the buildings.

Try finding the seimographic detection for the Pentagon impact even though the plane supposedly hit near ground level.

psik

[GIGObuster]

@psikeyhackr

ROFL

When planes hit WTC 1 and 2 the impacts were detected on a seismograph miles away even though the impacts were above 900 feet on the buildings.

Try finding the seimographic detection for the Pentagon impact even though the plane supposedly hit near ground level.

psik

What that has to do with he fact that truthers are misleading many by showing the image of the second floor and not the whole picture?

[tomndebb]

@psikeyhackr

When planes hit WTC 1 and 2 the impacts were detected on a seismograph miles away even though the impacts were above 900 feet on the buildings.

Try finding the seimographic detection for the Pentagon impact even though the plane supposedly hit near ground level.

“Miles away,” of course, is just a couple of miles up the river at a New York lab. Manhattan stands on a base of solid granite, making it a good place to erect skyscrapers, but also a good base in which to transmit earth shocks. The lab at Palisades, New York is located on the same granite base.
The Pentagon is located on a bed of much softer ground that fails to transmit shocks nearly as well. In addition, the WTC towers, struck high on their sides steel sides, acted as levers on the earth while the brick sides of the Pentagon crumbled more easily at ground level with no similar lever effect.

Beyond that, let us see your evidence that no similar tremor was recorded for the Pentagon strike. Where are the seismographs that allegedly failed to record the event?

[samclem]

@psikeyhackr

ROFL

When planes hit WTC 1 and 2 the impacts were detected on a seismograph miles away even though the impacts were above 900 feet on the buildings.

Try finding the seimographic detection for the Pentagon impact even though the plane supposedly hit near ground level.

psik

Which means little out of context.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:uomm9h4aMSQJ:www.911review.com/attack/pentagon/index.html+pentagon+seismograph&cd=12&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Some researchers have seized on Kim’s report as evidence that no 757 crashed at the Pentagon. However this is not the conclusion of the scientists who wrote the report, and such an inference is not justified for a number of reasons.

The interpretation of seismic data is a complex subject, depending on details of geology between the event and the station, among other things. The fact that obvious signals were generated by 767s ramming into steel towers in Manhattan anchored to granite bedrock should not lead us to expect that a 757 crashing into a heavy masonry wall of a sprawling building on an alluvial plain of the Potomac River.
The seismic stations whose data was analyzed in the report were all at least 35 miles from the Pentagon, much further than the stations that recorded events at the World Trade Center were from Lower Manhattan.
Of the various types of seismic disturbances that are recorded by seismic recording stations, plane crashes apparently generate only strong S-waves – vibrations in which the displacement is perpendicular to the ground. The strength of an S-wave produced by a plane crash would presumably be highly dependent on the inclination of the plane’s trajectory from the horizontal plane of the ground. Since by all accounts, the Pentagon attack plane approached at a very shallow inclination, perhaps at an angle of less than 10 degrees, we would expect any S-waves generated by the impact to be very weak.

[psikeyhackr]

@tomndebb

“Miles away,” of course, is just a couple of miles up the river at a New York lab.

Beyond that, let us see your evidence that no similar tremor was recorded for the Pentagon strike. Where are the seismographs that allegedly failed to record the event?

So you are saying that 2 miles isn’t miles?

How do you provide evidence for something that didn’t happen?

The people running seismographs in the area would have to supply the graphs if the impact was detected. So you prefer to exclude that possibility that nothing as big as an airliner hit the Pentagon because that would also explain the lack of seismographic evidence.

There is also the matter of elongated holes for the wings in WTC 1 and 2. Where are the photographs of holes for the wings in the Pentagon?

psik

[Czarcasm]

@psikeyhackr

There is also the matter of elongated holes for the wings in WTC 1 and 2. Where are the photographs of holes for the wings in the Pentagon?

Just for the record: How many times do you require this question to be answered before you quit asking it?
Five?
Fifty?
Five hundred?

[GIGObuster]

Thanks samclem I also was aware of the explanations why the pentagon seismic waves were faint, but I had trouble finding the site with that explanation. Not to mention that it still remains a bad form to avoid dealing with the clear misinformation of truther sites regarding the plane damage by talking about a different issue.

I have to laugh at seeing that once again some still believe that items that perplex them have **never **been investigated or explained regarding this issue.

[GIGObuster]

@psikeyhackr

So you are saying that 2 miles isn’t miles?

How do you provide evidence for something that didn’t happen?

The people running seismographs in the area would have to supply the graphs if the impact was detected. So you prefer to exclude that possibility that nothing as big as an airliner hit the Pentagon because that would also explain the lack of seismographic evidence.

Actually they supplied the evidence, the experts explained properly then why the seismic signal was weak coming from the Pentagon, and **samclem **and **tomndeb ** already paraphrased what they did say.

@psikeyhackr

There is also the matter of elongated holes for the wings in WTC 1 and 2. Where are the photographs of holes for the wings in the Pentagon?

psik

Already posted, and by a **really **skeptical truther.

[Ludovic]

The fact that obvious signals were generated by 767s ramming into steel towers in Manhattan anchored to granite bedrock should not lead us to expect that a 757 crashing into a heavy masonry wall of a sprawling building on an alluvial plain of the Potomac River.

That’s what my first thought was. How come conspiracy theorists insist on only using common sense when it suits their theory?

[tomndebb]

@psikeyhackr

So you are saying that 2 miles isn’t miles?

How do you provide evidence for something that didn’t happen?

I am noting that a close recorder will pick up more than a distant recorder and that you have failed to establish actual distances. It would be easy to show evidence of absence in this case, because all you would need to do would be to find a seismic lab that was as close to the Pentagon as the Columbia lab was to the WTC and then show that they had no such instances recorded.
(A point that Samclem has already provided with refutation, but which you are unable–or too fearful of being being exposed–to do.)

@psikeyhackr

There is also the matter of elongated holes for the wings in WTC 1 and 2. Where are the photographs of holes for the wings in the Pentagon?

This point has been addressed in multiple posts in multiple threads on this topic. If you continue to bring up stuff that has long been refuted as though it had never been addressed, you are going to begin attracting Warnings for trolling.

[Absolute]

@psikeyhackr

ROFL

When planes hit WTC 1 and 2 the impacts were detected on a seismograph miles away even though the impacts were above 900 feet on the buildings.

Try finding the seimographic detection for the Pentagon impact even though the plane supposedly hit near ground level.

psik

What exactly is your theory, here?

That the government managed to make two airliners fly into the World Trade Center, but couldn’t scrounge one up to fly into the Pentagon, so they used something else?

That doesn’t even make any fucking sense. Wouldn’t they have worried that some tourist could’ve taken a video of their missile/F-16/whatever the fuck and blown the whole operation? It was just bad luck that there were no cameras pointing in that direction. What could they possibly gain by not using an airliner?

And for that matter, for those wingnuts who claim WTC 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition - what the fuck would the point of that have been? The government knew about / orchestrated / whatever two airliners crashing into the buildings, but wanted to be absolutely sure they collapsed? Why? The buildings were trash anyway after the impact, and the attack itself was justification enough to respond militarily, regardless of whether they actually fell or not. Why take the risk of secretly loading the things up with explosives and possibly being exposed?

And what point is the other wingnut in this thread trying to make about WTC 7? They secretly loaded it up with explosives, but only set them off eight hours later? Why? Why not set them off in the cloud of dust when the other towers collapsed so that no one could see what the fuck was going on, instead of blowing it when there’s a swarm of emergency workers standing right next to it? Who even gives a shit about WTC 7? It was a drab little office building. Why would they bother worrying about whether it collapsed or not, enough to secretly load it up with explosives too?

You people have come up with all these crazy theories about how the official story is wrong, but I don’t understand why you think anyone would want do all this shit you’re claiming was done.

If you want to believe the government knew about the attacks and did nothing to stop them, fine. That’s bad enough. That’s a nice little conspiracy theory you can cling to. If you want to believe that the hijackers were actually government agents (and we somehow got Al Quaeda to play along with this little stunt), hey, whatever.

But why put a missile in to the Pentagon instead of a plane? Why load up the WTC with explosives?

And what exactly do you think happened to flight 77 anyway, if it didn’t crash into the Pentagon? You think the government managed to hijack the plane, dispose of it somewhere else without anyone noticing, and then send a missile into the Pentagon instead? What the fuck. Why?

I saw some website the other day that had a picture of a tire from the landing gear of one of the planes that hit the WTC. It had pictures from a few different angles, with the caption “Was the tire swapped for another one?” All I could do was laugh. What the hell, this guy thinks some team scurried in, removed all the debris, and replaced it with phony debris (without anyone noticing)? Why? Who in their right mind would come up with such a harebrained scheme like that? “We’re going to fly a plane into the WTC, and then replace all the debris so people think it was another plane!”

Like I said, if you want to believe the government is evil and scheming and all that, just assume that Mohammend Atta and the rest were CIA agents. That’s at least plausible, sort of. All this other shit is just crazy.

[jjimm]

Absolute, that post is a thing of beauty.

[tomndebb]

Absolute, if you want to see what psikeyhackr’s position on the attacks might be, simply drop his username into the SDMB search. This thread is not concerned with the overall nuttiness of the Truthers and that material has been done to death in multiple threads, previously.

If anyone wants to get into another general discussion of the WTC/Pentagon attacks, (for whatever masochistic reason), please open a new thread on the topic rather than derailing this one.

[ /Moderating ]