You say my posts are giving you laughs. I think your posts are giving the viewers laughs.
David picture #2 is one frame before picture #1.
So the dustcloud is simply expanding.[/QUOTE]

They're from different cameras.

This series was released first.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm

This series was released later.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...dodvideos.html

Show me what the dust cloud is. I don't know what you're referring to.

This link,
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm
first picture.
The dust is seen on top right of the yellow box to the right.
It expands to the right. The plane is in front of it but covered by the box.

This link
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...dodvideos.html
First picture.
Starting with picture#2 (top right)
The dust cloud is seen at the right of the picture.
In the following frames you can see the dust disperse above the lawn.

On the other camera, whose frames are shown to the left, you can see it too.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

So you think it's dust. What do you say to the people who posted this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8
According to the video, it's smoke from a damaged engine.

I've actually been getting the oppisite impression; that it is YOU that is wasting OUR time, with endless links that you keep recylcing, and ignoring hard core evidence as being "planted".

On the other hand, you do provide funny material to read.

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

A video again... Did not watch it.

Smoke, dust. Whatever. Sorry, I mix that up sometimes. Not my mother language.
Yes it is smoke from a damaged engine. It sucked in parts of a chopped lamppost.

The engine left a trail of smoke. You can see it in the video as it dispers after the impact.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

...Somehow, I doubt it.

I am a "viewer." Anyone want to guess who I'm laughing at?

Hmmm. Not Buddy Holly, presumably...

__________________
Relight the Firefly!

"It is quite clear that Occam's razor does not sharpen in your pyramid." (Nicolas)

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." (Paul Simon)

[img=http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/metcalf3.jpg]Photo[/img]

DavidC, In the above photo we see the Pentagon post-impact pre-collapse.

The front wall of the ground floor is completely missing for tens of feet in this one photo and others that do not have obscuring smoke or water spray show that the total missing wall was 90-100 feet long.

This damage had to be caused by whatever hit the building. If it was a missile and this wall was blown out by the explosion inside the building then the remanents of that 100 feet of missing concrete wall must have been blown outward. Those spools are 25 - 30 feet in front of the wall and therefore this view shows a lot of the space directly in front of the wall. We now notice that there is no evidence of the concrete chunks that would have been blown out by a missile explosion within the building. The firefighters should have been tripping over the chunks.

Conclusion, there was no internal explosion that caused the wall to shatter and blow outwards. This leaves only the choice that a force was applied to the outside surface of the wall and it was destroyed by moving it inwards.

DavidC , you have been asked serveral times to give evidence that it was a missile that blew up inside the Pentagon, please show any evidence of this.

If you wish to postulate a concrete pulverising missile you must explain how it did this to 100 feet of the wall (while not showing diminishing damage spreading out from the point of impact) not to mention having to show some evidence that such a device actually exists let alone even be a possibility.

__________________
"Man has always found it easier to sacrifice his life than learn the multiplication table." - Somerset Maugham

Oh, isn't it obvious Jaydeehess?
Those firemen are all govt plants!

I still don't understand why David C doesn't think a 757 did the damage.
What was the name of that apartment complex that was hit by a cargo carrying 747? Anyone recall the damage that did?
No reason to think a 757 didn't do the job it did agains the Pentagon.

And what's laughable is that David C's best evidence is a few blurry frames.

Sad, really.

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

In the spirit of this thread, a post full of links. They all show this El al 747 Amsterdam "Bijlmermeer" (Bijlmer) scene.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rampwiers2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rrampwiers.jpg

http://www.nrc.nl/W2/Lab/Profiel/Bij...mp/bijlmer.jpg

http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/Pe.../bijlmer-3.jpg

http://www.nrc.nl/W2/Lab/Enquete/bijlmer-1.jpg

The aircraft hit the building at 90° roll, rather than level wings.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

I agree, though it's gone from funny to simply pathetic with the constant repetition. David C never did listen to anyone and never will.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

I am curious as to David C's thoughts on the El al 747 Amsterdam "Bijlmermeer" (Bijlmer) crash.

Please, enlighten us David C.

Consider it a test of your objectivity.

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

Did YOU watch it? It shoots your theory out the window from what I saw.

__________________
Hanlon's Razor - "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
Asimov's addition - "Or ignorance."

"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."
-- Charles Babbage

It shoots your theory out the window from what I saw

You could say that David C's theory has been defenestrated.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

I must wonder what DavidC thinks about the Air France flight 8969, bound for Paris from Algiers in June of 1976. It was hijacked on the tarmac in Algiers. The Algierians blocked its path and the hijackers killed three people before the Algierians gave in and allowed it to take off. It had been running the aux. power unit for a full day though and did not have enough fuel to reach Paris so it put down in Marseilles. The French would not allow a re-fueling and eventually stormed the plane successfully. those old enough to recall this will remember the co-pilot jumping out the window of the cockpit.

The hijackers had called for a very specific amount of fuel. They had wanted 27 tonnes but the flight to Paris required no more than 9 tonnes. The significance of 27 tonnes? It is the max that the Airbus 300 could carry. It was already suspected that they intended to blow the plane up over Paris(they did have bombs on board) which was one of the reasons the plane was not allowed to leave Marseilles. The leader of the Algierian Mujahadeen later admitted the plan was to do so, basically to use it to firebomb Paris.

This is a clear example of a suicide hijacking that was thwarted. The main reason it was stopped was that the hijackers did not know enough about the aircraft or flight operations(the lead hijacker had to have it explained how to use the radio). All they had studied about the plane was the amount of fuel they could get maximum. They had boarded the plane as Algeirian police but the Captain was suspicious and the delay alerted the tower that something was up so they blocked the path of the plane. This was a myopic hijacking plan. The planners of 9/11 learned from this apparently.

__________________
"Man has always found it easier to sacrifice his life than learn the multiplication table." - Somerset Maugham

Hi, another constant reader here, just popping in to laugh at Mr C... again! GL will remember the old days at LC (before the Purge) when David C would have us in fits with his tried and true "you'd-be-laughed-out-of-the-debating-hall-look-at-this-video-from-the-2minute-35secs-mark" routine.
How's Madrid David? Seems like you're getting too much sun, son.

I'm not old enough, but I've seen the footage and have flown in A310's. Quite shocking to see somebody jumping/falling from that height, but IIRC he came out relatively well. Quite a thin copilot as well; these windows aren't extremely large.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

This is an excercise on how to run in circles, and spend weeks watching the same to videos and same 2 pictures. What a collosal waste of time. I can't possibly see any value in interacting with David C any further.

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher

You guys act like you're in the majority. You're only in the majority here among the people who bother to post stuff. What do you think of all of the people here who commented on the second video released?

http://www.haloscan.com/comments/tf2...le13076/#34573

(second video released)
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle13076.htm

Get them here so we can talk to them.
So pou assume these people represent the majority?
Get out on the street and ask 1000 people about their opinion.

Anyway. Facts don't care for what people think.
There has been a time when everybody thought earth is flat.
Earth did not care about it and remaind in its shape.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

The earth is an antisocial piece of rock. Facts should be democratic. In that case, we should choose which democratic result to follow though. Shall we take CNN polls, SF911T polls, BBC World polls, Gov polls, or other polls? Let's have a vote on it.

I hope the majority votes for ninja monkeys.

The amount of people on each side of the debate is of no importance. The official story of 9/11 is the mainstream story, if you're proposing something against the mainstream, such as a 9/11 gov conspiracy, you need to prove it. That's how this board works. Saying a white blob is conlcusive evidence is not the same as proving the conspiracy theory. I haven't even seen a conspiracy theory other than a whole list of possibliities as long as it ain't a 757.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Yeah! Polls.
Poll #1.
Should the universe change so that it would be easier for mankind to build a fusion reactor?
YES:
NO:
WHO CARES:

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

Steven Colbert agrees, and even coined a term for it, "Wikiality" ("truth by consensus").

__________________
I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. -- Jimmy Hoffa

We're a majority in the real world too.

Everyone I know hasn't even heard of any conspiracy theories concerning 9/11. Nor do they believe in any, after I mentioned their existence to them (some have heard of the moon hoax idea, dismissing that one too as hogwash).

You and other like you are a small voice, crying out for attention.
The bottom line is, you have no evidence that stands to scrutiny.
You keep referring to a blurred photo, and claim the physical evidence was planted.
It is so important for you to stick to those beliefs, because without them, your arguement means nothing.

I'd still like your thoughts on that 747 crash I mentioned earlier. Look at the photos provided by Nicolas, and then explain why a 757 couldn't cause the damage seen at the Pentagon.
I will take a failure for you to do this as a concession, as you will find yourself backed into a corner with your arguement, and no other explainations left, other than speculations (as this requires you own ideas, and not some that have been posted online by someone else).

Also, tell me this: you seem to doubt terrorists took over the planes involved in 9/11. Why? Do you not think it possible for such a thing to have happened, though it has occurred in the past?
IIRC, terrorists took over a cruise ship once. Why not a plane?


EDIT to add:

At least one person there also thinks the moon landings are fake. And you know how that idea stands up to scrutiny.
Also, these people only look at one aspect. They don't look at the whole picture; the wreckage, the optics involved with the traffic cam, ect.
If they did, then they might change their tune.

As offerred earlier, let them come here.

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

The minority in a forum that posts is surprisingly representative of the majority that do not...

Nonetheless, if there are any viewers that are "laughing" at us, I await with amusement to see them mention such...

Not much, really. But hey, if they want to waste their time...

...Wow. You're right. 84 comments, of which I bet some are merely multiple posts of individuals...

I'm completely overwhelmed by the sheer majority of 84, compared to a population of 300 million in the U.S. alon, and 6 billion throughout the world.

Your fallacy of Argument by Popularity stinks like seven year old cottage cheese.

What does the majority belief have to do with scientific fact?

We present you with facts all the time and yet you continue to 'believe; that it was not a 757 that hit the Pentagon. Instead you substitute your own 'reality' based upon the words , 'it could be', 'maybe', 'possible' and such even when presented with further facts to illustrate that some of your beliefs simply cannot be.

You have never answered many of the questions put to you about your theory including mine about why there is no evidence of chunks of the concrete and limestone of the front wall of the Pentagon lying about in front of the building. That wall was indeed missing long before the collapse, this is well docuemented yet your only response so far was to dismiss this by saying the building collapsed as if that somehow explains what was in evidence prior to collapse.

Yours is a dogma rather than a theory. Wake up pal!

__________________
"Man has always found it easier to sacrifice his life than learn the multiplication table." - Somerset Maugham

That's another good point.

As has been mentioned once before, David C, a majority once believed the Earth was flat. A majority believed in the geocentric system. A majority rejected evolution and the big bang.

Do you get the idea?

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

Backed into a corner? You guys were all backed into a corner with this picture.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/...gon1_plane.jpg
You were so backed into a corner that all you could do was deny the obvious by saying it was smoke from an aircraft that couldn't be picked up by the camera even though you made yourselves look silly doing it. I used to see the same tactics back at the Loose Change moon thread--when cornered, deny the obvious with a patronizing attitude. I can understand why you do it though; you guys can't admit 9/11 was an inside job.
Look closely at this photo.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/...gon2_plane.jpg
This is smoke (probably from a missile being fired). It has waves. This picture of it is a little bigger.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm
Notice the tail of the aircraft in front of it.
Now look at this picture.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/...gon1_plane.jpg
Notice the object is not wavy but smooth. There's a black spot on the tip. It's cylindrical. The top is shiny and the bottom is shadowy. The shadow line is consistent with the position of the sun. The shadow line is straight so it can't be wavy like the smoke in the other picture. This picture of it is a little bigger.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...dodvideos.html
If it were smoke it would be wavy like the smoke in the other picture.
As I've said before--I don't know how you guys can keep a straight face while you say the object on the right is smoke. It's the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and it doesn't have the shape of a 757 nose. If there are twenty people with scornful patronizing attitudes saying it's smoke, it doesn't change it's shape one whit. You might be moving a few slow-witted people with your patronizing attitudes but you're not moving anybody with any brains. Objective people of normal intelligence like the ones at this link believe what they see--not what they'e told they see. http://www.haloscan.com/comments/tf2...le13076/#34573 You guys are pretty good but I doubt many people are falling for your psychological game of intimidation.
Face it. You guys are cornered by that picture so just denying it is the only thing you can do. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain. All you're doing by denying it is making yourselves look silly.
Here's an example.
It's not blurry at all--look at it.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...dodvideos.html
No objective person who can see could say it's blurry with a straight face.


This issue has really been made moot by the picture mentioned above but no one has given a satisfactory answer to this yet.
http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Has the government announced that the serial numbers of the parts found in the crash match the plane that was flight 77? I haven't seen anything released by the government that said so.

That's funny--I was thinking the same thing about you guys.

I consider that picture to be proof that whatever hit the Pentagon was not a 757. Show something that you consider to be proof that is was a 757 and we can discuss whether it constitutes conclusive proof. Everything you've shown so far has one or more alternative explanations. The only alternative explanation the picture has is that it's not the real picture taken by the camera next to the Pentagon. Why would the government release a picture of the nose of a plane that is obviously not a 757? That part is debatable but the smoke argument is ridiculous.