Pentagon 9-11

[Big_John]

i didn't watch that video, but i briefly scanned that second link.. it's funny, that 5th picture set (question #5 or whatever) seems to show very clearly that it was a plane about the size of the superimposed silhouette that made the impact. considering the weight-distribution of the plane, and the physics of the impact, the damage represented seems about what i'd expect from the 757 (or whatever it was). that's just eye-balling it, of course.

i have anecdotal evidence that i trust even more.. i lived just north of DC at the time of the attack. my (at-the-time) girlfriend's mother worked in a building near the pentagon that had a clear view of it. she didn't see it, but several of her co-workers told her they saw a passenger jet impact the pentagon. there are a crap-load of eye witnesses that claim the same. considering there is video of passenger jets hitting the wtc, why would anyone assume otherwise for the pentagon? if anything, the imagery only reinforces that it was a 757.

i would subit the imagery on that site itself as counter-evidence for conspiracy theories.

[discovery1]

Anyone have pics of the engines?

[Adrian II]

Anyone have pics of the engines?

What Really Happened

Photos Of Flt 77 Wreckage Inside The Pentagon

[PanzerJaeger]

This theory doubts the existence of an entire flight?

Presumably there were people on the flight.. are they now gone? Are their records of their lifes before they died? Parents, spouses, friends - entire lives - would all have to be created for these people..

[Divinus Arma]

I think I can shed a little light on this from my unique position as a collision investigator and reconstructionist.

When I first saw this video a few years back, I thought: "where are the wings?"

Well, after years or training and experience in collision dynamics, I now have the answer.

Here is basically what happened from a simple dynamics analysis based on the evidence (the images of the plane and the pentagon are both taken from 2500 ft aerial view:

Here is the Pentagon.


Here comes the plane:


The plane is about to strike the pentagon:


All of the energy from the plane is goin into the direction of the arrows:


Here is the part that matters. This is the first event in the collision system. As the front of the plane strikes and enters the building, the force of the collision begins the explosion. Simulataneuosly, the heat of the explosion and vehicle momentum disrupt the integrity of the structure, forcing it to buckle inwards.


Once the cabin of the plane where the wings meet collide with the building, a new event in the collision system occurs. The wings begin to fold in while simulataneously erupting in explosion. Because the momentum of the craft is so great, this event occurs almost concurrently. If the craft were slower, the wings would simply explode. (imagine non-motion: just plain boom. Now imagine all motion with no explosion: folding only.)The faster the craft travels, the greater the probablity that the wings will break and fold before the fuel disintegrates them.


In the end, the entire vehicle is essentially forced into the point of impact. It is the exact opposite of a vaccum. Instead of the building sucking in the plane, the plane is forcing itself into a hole that it created through heat and momentum.


So where are the wings? They were forced into this superheated hole! Good bye wings, hello urban legend!

I will be happy to elaborate or explain my credentials if anyone cares.

[Divinus Arma]

And since I can't edit, sorry about the spelling errors.

[Devastatin Dave]

Excellent post Divinus.

I have a hard time believing that anyone would doubt that what happened on 9-11 was faked. In fact, the very fact that people doubt the authenticity of that day shows either a unbelievable hatred for anything American or a disturbing lack of compassion for the victoms of that day.

[Devastatin Dave]

Excellent post Divinus.

I have a hard time believing that anyone would doubt that what happened on 9-11 was faked. In fact, the very fact that people doubt the authenticity of that day shows either a unbelievable hatred for anything American or a disturbing lack of compassion for the victoms of that day.

Since I can't edit, let me rephrase my first sentence in my last post.

"I can't believe that anyone would think that what happened on 9-11 was faked."

[Redleg]

In essence it seems you are saying Divinus Arma because of the speed of the plane - it was more like the speeding bullet - little hole going in because of speed - more damage inside because the building began to absorb the impact.

If one understands how the sabot anti-tank rounds work - it would also seem to explain why little aircraft residue was found outside of the building.

Planes are designed to be aerodymanic (cant spell worth a damn myself) if I remember correctly.

[Azi Tohak]

Sweet! Thanks Divinus. That was very good.

Azi

[Proletariat]

Judging by what I have seen and heard in various countries, yes, I think it is very plausible.

Do you find the following plausible? I don't, although there's room for truth in it.

One of the very best books I read this summer, The American Enemy: The History of French Anti-Americanism by Philippe Roger, makes the point that the French have never been very interested in the United States. When they talk about America, they are always talking about themselves--and it is precisely when they are most uneasy about themselves that they are most inclined to lash out at the United States.

And right now, the French are uneasy indeed. Adam Gopnik had a piece in The New Yorker about three weeks ago about the all-pervasiveness of the sense of crisis in France. Any doubts I had as to the accuracy of his perceptions have been dispelled today. I have been on French soil now for less than 12 hours, stumbling along in my miserable high-school French--and in that short space of time, three different French people--one a defense intellectual, one a teacher and translator, and one a café owner who brought me a glass of wine and plate of cheese on my way to look at the town museum--initiated conversations about the utter hopelessness of France’s condition.

The only available consolation seems to be the hope that maybe things are even worse somewhere else--and it is on that hope that French television pundits make their careers. It’s irritating at first. But on second thought, it’s rather sad.

http://frum.nationalreview.com/

[Adrian II]

Do you find the following plausible? I don't, although there's room for truth in it.

There is certainly room for truth in it. According to the French middle classes their country has been going to the dogs since Clovis. Crying imbécile is a way of life for the French for as long as I frequent them (which is at least once a year since 1969, and sometimes for months). And they are inward-looking just like all great nations, the Americans, Chinese, Brits, Russians, Brazilians. Much of their criticism or adoration of other countries is a reflection of their own national preoccupations.

[kiwitt]

Divinus: An excellent presentation.

This does not only make it plausible, it disproves any of those Urban legends in laymens terms.

Conspiracy Theories, be damned. This goes to proves that conspiracy theories are based on conjecture and half-truths. I think instead of becoming a "Conspiracy Theorist", that I felt was developing into,( until I joined in discussions here), I should look for real reasons for events; (i.e. become a "debunker" of these theories.)

[Kaiser of Arabia]

If I said the britsh government staged the IRA attacks I'd most likely be banned...weird.

[Divinus Arma]

Just so everyone knows, in the Marine Corps, I am a Collision Reconstructionist, which is a step more complex than traffic accident investigation. I have hundreds and hundreds of hours of formal training from the Department of Defense and from State Certified local Law Enforcement Agencies.

I'll be attending one of the countries top reconstruction courses in Florida in October, and after that I will be pursueing my ACTAR accreditation.

The point of this is to further bust the myth by explaining that I am not just "guessing".

[Devastatin Dave]

If I said the britsh government staged the IRA attacks I'd most likely be banned...weird.

So true...

[Strike For The South]

So true...

Thats right were white christian americans we shouldn't have to put up with this bull

[Xiahou]

Anything that has to use so much music and imagery to make it's point is pretty much always devoid of anything resembling fact. The ominous music and fancy animations just try to cover for how base the peice really is...
It was like that schlock "The Power of Nightmares" that people were saying we "needed" to see in the Backroom not too long ago. The saddest thing about it is that you realize you'll never get back those minutes that you wasted watching it.

It's also sad to see that people dislike the US enough to believe we're capable of anything- just so long as it's bad.

This should be all the refutation anyone needs:

CREW

Charles Burlingame, captain; David Charlebois, first officer; Michele Heidenberger; Jennifer Lewis; Kenneth Lewis; Renee May;


PASSENGERS

Paul Ambrose; Yeneneh Betru; M.J. Booth; Bernard Brown; Suzanne Calley; William Caswell; Sarah Clark; Asia Cottom; James Debeuneure; Rodney Dickens; Eddie Dillard; Charles Droz; Barbara Edwards; Charles S. Falkenberg; Zoe Falkenberg; Dana Falkenberg; Joe Ferguson; Wilson "Bud" Flagg; Dee Flagg; Richard Gabriel; Ian Gray; Stanley Hall; Bryan Jack; Steven D. "Jake" Jacoby; Ann Judge; Yvonne Kennedy; Norma Khan; Karen A. Kincaid; Norma Langsteuerle; Dong Lee; Dora Menchaca; Christopher Newton; Barbara Olson; Ruben Ornedo; Robert Penniger; Lisa Raines; Todd Reuben; John Sammartino; Diane Simmons; George Simmons; Mari-Rae Sopper; Bob Speisman; Hilda Taylor; Leonard Taylor; Leslie A. Whittington; John Yamnicky; Vicki Yancey; Shuyin Yang; Yuguag Zheng;

[lars573]

The only people who could believe that a plane never hit the pentagon have 0 understanding of physics. While in high school they obviously though it was for losers. That despit the size of a passenger air craft it's basically made out of aluminium and plastic. That once you compromise it structure it goes to pieces, fast. Planes are not durable at all when you consider the speeds they move at. They wouldn't be able to fly if they were.

[Papewaio]

True for its size a aeroplane is less strong then a coke can... and see what happends when you stomp on one of those.

[Divinus Arma]

The only people who could believe that a plane never hit the pentagon have 0 understanding of physics. While in high school they obviously though it was for losers. That despit the size of a passenger air craft it's basically made out of aluminium and plastic. That once you compromise it structure it goes to pieces, fast. Planes are not durable at all when you consider the speeds they move at. They wouldn't be able to fly if they were.

You are exactly correct. It's just simple physics. As for the wings, they were just reacting to the forces placed upon them.


And thanks for the kudos folks.

[Papewaio]

So DA do you have a physics background?

[ICantSpellDawg]

So DA do you have a physics background?

Pape, what is your background?

[Papewaio]

I have a fairly convulted career path but the short version:

BSs in Multidisciplinary Science, Majors in Applied Physic & Exploration Geophysics... minor in Astrophysics. Worked in gold exploration in Indonesia and Aus, then working in IT and moved to Telephony Servers... so tech based.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I have a fairly convulted career path but the short version:

BSs in Multidisciplinary Science, Majors in Applied Physic & Exploration Geophysics... minor in Astrophysics. Worked in gold exploration in Indonesia and Aus, then working in IT and moved to Telephony Servers... so tech based.

and what is your opinion of this conspiracy theory?

[Papewaio]

Bogus with a capital B.

Barocca is doing the right thing in getting as much ammo as possible to shoot this theory full of holes... he is doing some Mythbusting.

With the likes of DA here it seems we have some really good data.

I don't think consipracy theories hold much water... it would only take a single tiny leak to spring them apart... then view how little cohesion government agencies have when dealing with problems... if the government cannot act as a team in an emergency over a hurricane, I very much doubt it could do the scale of coverup required for a consipracy theory of this magnitude.

In short the incompetence of governments of the worlds is proof enought that consipiracy theories are not worth the paper they are printed on.

[Divinus Arma]

So DA do you have a physics background?

Collision reconstruction is pretty physics intensive. I don't have a degree in physics, I have ceertifications in collision investigation.

The principles of angular and collinear momentum in collision recomstruction, for example, involve breaking the entire collision system down into energy from momentum. Momentum, as I'm sure you know, is a vector quanitity, being assigned a scalar value as well as direction. The energy entering a collision always equals the energy expended in a collision.

We apply newton's laws of physics, especially the second law (on inertia), to account for all of the lost energy in a collision. By accounting for the expended energy, we can account for the initial energy. The whole point in a reconstruction is to analyze the evidence and determine what transpired, second by second, all the way back to the point of possible perception and first harmful event. In this way, I can assign fault in an accident.

For example, Vehicle #1 is traveling North towards an intersection and observes Vehicle #2 entering the intersection from the East. Driver of Vehicle #1 executes maximum braking, but is unable to avoid Vehicle #2. As a result, the front end of Vehicle #1 strikes the left front door of Vehicle #2.

If both drivers were killed, and there are no witnesses, how do we determine who is at fault? Was Vehicle #1 driving too fast? Did Vehicle #2 unsafely enter the intersection?

We use math (algebra, some right angle trig, and calculus) to figure it out.

An example of how we do this would be as follows:

This is a basic speed (in mph) from locked wheel skid formula, where:

S = the square root of 30df [sorry no square root synbol and I don't fee like uploading a picture]

Speed = S [this is the total minimum speed
Friction (the coefficient of friction, or how "sticky" the road is in relation to that specific vehicle in those specific conditions) = f
the number 30 is a constant, which was developed from a relationship between variables that I don't have the ability to derivate right at this moment.

So, if I vehicle leaves 100 feet of locked wheel skid and has a coefficient of friction of .7 in that length, we know that S=square root of 30(100)(.7), or about 14.5 mph or so. I am doing this without a calculator, so someone can feel free to correct me.

So, if some guy is driving through a neighborhood and sees a little kid run into the street and slams on his brakes, but hit the kid anyway, with this formula I can now determine:

a. Whether he was speeding
b. Where the kid was when he saw the kid
c. How far away he was when he saw the kid.

Because Velocity in Feet per second is S1.467, I can say he was going 21.27feet per second when he first hit the brakes. Since we it takes 1.5 seconds just to react (According to studies) and hit the brakes, he traveled 21.27(1.5) = 31.9 feet in his reaction, which means he was 131.9 feet away when he actually the kid.

You get my point. Yes I know I am taking about Papewaio.

And there is no way I am going to break down angular momentum in formula and procedure here since it takes no less than 240 hours of classroom time to learn. I am not going into the quadratic equation, crush analysis, et al. If you want to see a reconstruction, look into the recent works on Princess Dianna's traffic accident. I am sure you can find out what I'm talking about by looking at the fancy videos they'll show you.

My Degree is actually in Business Management.

I hope this helped.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Bogus with a capital B.

Barocca is doing the right thing in getting as much ammo as possible to shoot this theory full of holes... he is doing some Mythbusting.

With the likes of DA here it seems we have some really good data.

I don't think consipracy theories hold much water... it would only take a single tiny leak to spring them apart... then view how little cohesion government agencies have when dealing with problems... if the government cannot act as a team in an emergency over a hurricane, I very much doubt it could do the scale of coverup required for a consipracy theory of this magnitude.

In short the incompetence of governments of the worlds is proof enought that consipiracy theories are not worth the paper they are printed on.

Without a physics degree or a proficiency in impact assessment, I concur with every single word.

[Divinus Arma]

And damn I wish I had my edit button back to fix all those errors. I also had to break out the calculator for that last part.

[Papewaio]

I figured you knew what you were talking about... I was wondering if you got into that area through Physics, Medical, Enginnering, Forensics or other science... Business Management was not my first guess.

BTW I have seen ^ used as power. So square root would be ^0.5

So (30df)^0.5