Conspiracy Theories

[Chris Preston]

Don´t start dodging stuff now. First of all prove to me an airplane hit the Pentagon.
Then explain the hole (which apparently) was caused by the airplane.

Seeing as you took the gravity number from the internet perhaps you can find on google what Newton´s third law is.

Dude, I'm going into Engineering in University and took physics for two years in high school, I know what the acceleration due to gravity is and I know all of Newton's laws and I have a decent knowledge of physics probably more than you do since you called it "the gravity number" lol. Newton's third law is "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" and to be honest it doesn't even take a physics student to know that one.

Anyways back to the point: What do you think caused the hole in the building? From what I've cared to read people believe a missile hit the building or a bomb was planted there... How would either of those two things created the hole?

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Dude, I'm going into Engineering in University and took physics for two years in high school, I know what the acceleration due to gravity is and I know all of Newton's laws and I have a decent knowledge of physics probably more than you do since you called it "the gravity number" lol. Newton's third law is "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" and to be honest it doesn't even take a physics student to know that one.

Anyways back to the point: What do you think caused the hole in the building? From what I've cared to read people believe a missile hit the building or a bomb was planted there... How would either of those two things created the hole?

"Dude" i believe you must have slept your way through quite a lot of classes.

But ok let´s leave the physics thing above for a second i´ll get back to that in just a minute, your last paragraph caught my attention.

First of all you said this,

There's plenty of facts that prove my side while there's plenty of theories that support yours.

"your side" says that a plane hit the Pentagon.

And you claim to have facts that indeed prove that a plane hit the Pentagon.
Could you please show us these facts and proofs?

I swear i will answer your question on what i think hit pentagon that day.
but i need you to answer me first as i was the one asking the question first.
let´s work together here.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

You have to be quick as well as the time here is 11pm and i´m going up at 5.30am

If i don´t respond i will do it at around 14.00 GMT, i should get off work then and be home by then. However i might stay up for another half an hour tops.

but just post everything you want and ill answer what i can today and the rest tomorrow.

 

[Chris Preston]

I ended with over 85% both those years in physics so while I maybe have slept through some classes because it was at 8:30 AM I know what I needed to know for that class.

Reasons why a plane hit the pentagon:

- How would you create an explosion like that? A bomb being planted where would have been detected by people working there or a camera and a missile would have been seen by spectators. The flames would also come from the amount of jet fuel being exploded. If you watch the explosion it looks similar to when a plane hit the twin towers.
- In the video I showed you can see on the very right hand side at around 1:23 about half way up a white object... That's a plane.
- There are pictures of plane pieces, people dead in their chairs, and a missing plane.
- There are clear recordings of people calling their love ones while on that plane.
- What happened to the people that were boarding that plane? They didn't just vanish.

 

[Miguel Gonzalez]

- In the video I showed you can see on the very right hand side at around 1:23 about half way up a white object... That's a plane.
- There are pictures of plane pieces, people dead in their chairs, and a missing plane.
- There are clear recordings of people calling their love ones while on that plane.
- What happened to the people that were boarding that plane? They didn't just vanish.

Where are these pictures? There was no wreckage bigger than half a phone keypad.

Nothing was found after because they literally had the entire area resurfaced, LITERALLY covering up any evidence.

If a plane hit that building the hole would have been MUCH bigger, there's declassified gov documents discussing a false flag attack on the pentagon from the 80s. That white blur was no 757, IF anything it was a small missle painted.

The whole thing is too shady to give them any credibility. The fact that they go to such lengths to cover up and hush up afterwards doesn't help. If they had nothing to hide they would've given the investigation the time of day it deserved.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

I´ll answer happily when i get home but please put forth your explanation of what caused the hole, we can´t simply ignore it.
What on an airplane would have the energy and be streamlined enough to penetrate that many walls and floors.

 

[Dave Stephenson]

Some interesting points on both sides. Tbh I don't think any of us will ever know or be able to prove either way.

On a side note don't let it get too personal gents.

 

[Chris Preston]

I´ll answer happily when i get home but please put forth your explanation of what caused the hole, we can´t simply ignore it.
What on an airplane would have the energy and be streamlined enough to penetrate that many walls and floors.

I said I don't know what caused the hole so how do you expect me to answer? I'm not going to lie pretending I know the answer. If I had to guess I'd say the engine because it would be the heaviest projectile, but as I said it's just a guess.

If this indeed were a missile, where was it launched from and how would that go undetected by everyone? I've been to the pentagon and there's no open space for it to be hid and there's many major freeways right next to it as well.

P.S. the projectile from the plane would have to have a lot of momentum not energy ^.^ It would need kinetic energy obviously, but momentum would allow it to travel through walls. Learned that in physics class

 

[Hampus Andersson]

So it can be the engine you say, but doesn't a plane carry at least one on each wing?

What stopped one engine on the lawn and the other just projectiled through several walls like it was butter? They had identical momentum.

Missile could be launched from a military ship in the atlantic.
Nobody would intercept it because the military was ordered to stay on ground and the planes which flew straight to the Atlantic was "officially" doing exercises so they did not know who was the enemy and who was practice target.

 

[Hiroshi Awazu]

No way a 757 hit the Pentagon, no way. There were also people that survived the blast that had evacuated out of the blast area and they claimed they saw no evidence of a plane, no viable wreakage,bodies/ body parts or blood, luggage, nothing. Watch clips of other plane crashes, there is debris everywhere, parts of the plane body parts/bodies, clothing, everything.

http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm

http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/hypothesis.html

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Not only that but at least one witness says they saw a "missile with wings"

This was in live footage at the scene. So you have two different witnesses.
Why would anyone mistake a 757 for a mssile which travels at probably 5-6 times the speed of an airliner.

There you have your momentum, mach 1 or 2 i would guess.
And you have an object that is harder then the material it hits unlike an airplane which is made out of aliminium, carbon fiber and glass fiber.

That leads me to WTC but ill save that candy for later.

Edit: you also have the neccessary shape to cut through walls very efficently.

 

[Mapu]

Candy? Oh yes Sir, please... I want some candy!

Seriously, you sound worse then the people who come up with these ideas and put it out as the truth because there are inconsistencies in the (main) media reports. Usually they just use these inconsistencies to fill them with their "what could be" ideas and back these up with pseudo-evidence which sometimes works and sometimes do not. They have you where they want you to be.

Just a little idea, food for thought. How about one engine got stuck because it hit the ground and the other got launched through the air. One should not underestimate brute force.

Anyway, let me fuel your theories even more, "live broadcasts" are never live, they're always few seconds behind. I wonder why.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

You just sit tight and don't go anywhere, like i said, we will save that for later.

Ok so one engine hit the ground, but where are the marks from it?
The pictures with the engine laying around shows no scrape marks at all.

And you say the other engine "flew through the air"

I thought the plane hit the building then the momentum sent it further into the building?

Also, do you not think that if an engine flew through the building, it would say so in the official report.

Could you find out what NIST say about the hole?

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Regarding the live thing, we say live because it is pretty much live.
15-20 seconds or so i would guess is the deficit. Completely irrelevant to the witness report.

 

[Mapu]

Ok teacher.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Ok teacher.

Talk to me like im an idiot and ill talk to you like one.

Both me and Chris already did that and we quickly found out it wasn't the most prroductive way hence the much better tone between us in the latter posts.
Then you smashed the door in...

Let's all try and stick to questions theories answers physics and chemistry.
That includes me as well.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

And if you want to contribute ANYTHING to the thread, provide some official information regarding the hole.
If you can't find any then we work from there.

 

[Mapu]

No, sorry I won't contribute anything more to this topic; I did a few pages before. This kind of "investigation" doesn't suit my style. It's guesswork, reading the crystal ball, shady and not objective, and therefore doesn't contribute anything towards clarification.

To each their own, but that's my real opinion and I am sorry for being sarcastic two post above.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Actually it's not guess work, some things like when Chris asked where the missile came from and i answered, that is pure speculation obviously.

But things like if an airplane crashed or not i have yet to see any form of proof that it was an airplane.

It just doesn't add up. You or NIST can't explain the hole.
It's not rocket science, if there was an engine it would have been found close to the hole but nothing has officially said about the hole.

Why?

 

[Mapu]

No, sorry I won't contribute anything more to this topic; I did a few pages before. This kind of "investigation" doesn't suit my style. It's guesswork, reading the crystal ball, shady and not objective, and therefore doesn't contribute anything towards clarification.

To each their own, but that's my real opinion and I am sorry for being sarcastic two post above.

[...] But things like if an airplane crashed or not i have yet to see any form of proof that it was an airplane.

It just doesn't add up. You or NIST can't explain the hole.
It's not rocket science, if there was an engine it would have been found close to the hole but nothing has officially said about the hole.

Why?

My guess is you shot yourself in the foot.