Study: Did a 757 hit the Pentagon?

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Emotional devastation is not justification in cases like this.

[/ QUOTE ]
What? Everyone knows that fiction can't make people cry. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I was in my Death and Afterlife (Religion 110) class when 9-11 happened. It was an early class so I was tired. I heard that a plane hit the towers and I went back to bed.

Then my gf woke me up yelling about what happened and I saw the towers falling and asked "why are they demolishing the buildings already?" [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[andyfox]

It always amazes me how people find what they're looking for in these pictures. Somebody posted one about Dealey Plaza here a while back, saying that a certain photo clearly showed a shooter behind a fence or something. I could make out Mother Goose and Rock Balboa in the picture, but no shooter.

[VarlosZ]

[ QUOTE ]
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...deoframes.html
I found the information about the lack of shadows interesting in this link.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Look at the post directly above yours. The expanding shadow from the smoke is clearly visible just below the horizon. Your link cropped it out and claimed it didn't exist.

[madnak]

Government sure would be boring if it weren't for all the conspiracies!

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...deoframes.html
I found the information about the lack of shadows interesting in this link.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Look at the post directly above yours. The expanding shadow from the smoke is clearly visible just below the horizon. Your link cropped it out and claimed it didn't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure the article is referring to the lack of shadows here.

[VarlosZ]

No, they say the following: ". . . Yet the huge explosion casts no apparent shadow from the sun on the lawn below it."

Next to this statement they show the stills you just posted, in which they've cropped out the plainly visible shadows that you can see in RedBean's post in this thread.

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
No, they say the following: ". . . Yet the huge explosion casts no apparent shadow from the sun on the lawn below it."

Next to this statement they show the stills you just posted, in which they've cropped out the plainly visible shadows that you can see in RedBean's post in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]
True. But this is also in the same paragraph.
[ QUOTE ]
The uppermost swath of white in the enlargement to the right is part of the heliport, which was directly under portions of the explosion. Yet it is illuminated by direct sunlight.

[/ QUOTE ]
The images I posted are to the right of that paragraph.

I'm going to email them and tell them to correct the mistake you caught. All that matters is the truth and they need to get it right.

EDIT: Actually, mulling it over, what's the definition of "below"? You are referring to the shadow cast beside the explosion. I'm still emailing them to point out the confusion that statement can cause for people that don't understand the concept of "below".

[mike28]

Redbean:

I'm with you in how I don't see how an airplane didn't hit the pentagon...

but i've watched that .gif like 50 times just now, and I can't see a plane. Just a small white trail like smoke flying real low to the ground. Like a missle?

wtf is wrong with me

then again a plane moving at 400 MPH might not have a sign saying "WHAT UP MIKE" on the side of it

[illeagle]

That white blob in frame 1 looks like smoke to me also, not some sort of humpbacked plane.

[mike28]

[ QUOTE ]
That white blob in frame 1 looks like smoke to me also, not some sort of humpbacked plane.

[/ QUOTE ]

idk I just guess I expected for a plane to be much larger and take up more of the screen.

Kinda like ok nothing...oh [censored] giant white thing...boom