9-11, give me a break.

[abaris]

It's entirely possible, and in my layman's opinion highly likely, that it was caused otherwise -- namely, the failure of steel girders which had had their fire protection stripped by the impact and subsequently exposed to continuous high heat. That same heat likely melted the aluminum from the airplanes. The heat generated by the fires can both have brought down the buildings and, in that process, melted the aluminum.

Three factors, far as I remember. Heat, structural weakness, weight. But I'm not doing the homework for idiots like the above. They can very well move their own asses to look up expert opinions on the buildings collapsing. Which they won't do. So it would be wasted energy anyway.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Oh, and regarding the reporter at the Pentagon stating he'd seen no evidence of an airplane -- here are some photos from the scene:

Engine rotor:



Debris in the foreground with AA markings:


Found at the intersection of West and Rector:


I know, I know, it probably came off a bicycle a couple of years before the attacks.

[Cato]

Here's the full Jamie McIntyre interview for Huggy. Notice how the excerpt Huggy posted left out the very specific question being addressed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuROgQYuA8Q

Huggy, still care to prattle on how Jamie McIntyre didn't think a plane struck the Pentagon?

[Thumpalumpacus]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis...z=view_all

Read that and let me know what you think.

You would be surprised how hard it actually can be to identify parts of a crashed aircraft, even those not involving a building and resultant fire.

I worked a crash in October of 1989 at Carswell AFB in Texas. Two-seat F-16 went in to soft earth at almost 400 kts IA. The biggest recognizable piece was the turbine assembly of the engine, which came through our firehouse roof and set to rest on a roofing girder -- about 800 feet from the crash site. About two cubic feet and mangled to Hell and gone. There was also about five square feet of one of the wings relatively intact, and the landing gear -- dense metal can survive high impacts, as the picture above shows.

The rest of the plane was in pieces almost all smaller than a foot square in area, and scattered downrange of the impact in the direction of flight as far as 3/4 mile (most pieces were much closer). Indeed, the fire truck I was assigned to could not respond to the crash as pieces of the plane had holed our water tanks (truck was parked outside after morning checkout and we couldn't bring water to the site. We were cross-manned as the resupply pumper, so we jumped on that one and hooked up to underground hydrants to aid the other responding trucks).

The largest human remains we found were a foot inside a combat boot and a section of ribcage. Everything else, both plane and occupants, was pulverized beyond recognition.

http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-...file/2395/

[Huggy Bear]

Let me get home to present a more detailed argument, posting on my phone atm.

And it would appear the particular video I posted wasn't in full context, I apologize for that (although it looks like cato's vid was edited to a degree), however I didn't form my conclusion based on that video. There are plenty of other factors.

[LadyForCamus]

I went to college with one of the pot heads that dreamed up "Loose Change". In fact, I was in his apartment with a friend one night when we was drunk/high off his ass putting it together. Not a "reputable source", as one might say, lol.

[LadyForCamus]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis...z=view_all

Read that and let me know what you think.

You would be surprised how hard it actually can be to identify parts of a crashed aircraft, even those not involving a building and resultant fire.

I worked a crash in October of 1989 at Carswell AFB in Texas. Two-seat F-16 went in to soft earth at almost 400 kts IA. The biggest recognizable piece was the turbine assembly of the engine, which came through our firehouse roof and set to rest on a roofing girder -- about 800 feet from the crash site. About two cubic feet and mangled to Hell and gone. There was also about five square feet of one of the wings relatively intact, and the landing gear -- dense metal can survive high impacts, as the picture above shows.

The rest of the plane was in pieces almost all smaller than a foot square in area, and scattered downrange of the impact in the direction of flight as far as 3/4 mile (most pieces were much closer). Indeed, the fire truck I was assigned to could not respond to the crash as pieces of the plane had holed our water tanks (truck was parked outside after morning checkout and we couldn't bring water to the site. We were cross-manned as the resupply pumper, so we jumped on that one and hooked up to underground hydrants to aid the other responding trucks).

The largest human remains we found were a foot inside a combat boot and a section of ribcage. Everything else, both plane and occupants, was pulverized beyond recognition.

http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-...file/2395/

Thump, you're a fire fighter? Sorry if you mentioned it already; I haven't read back very far in the thread.

[LadyForCamus]

Oh, God...of COURSE Huggy is a 9/11 truther...[emoji849]

[Arkilogue]

Look genius, you don't have to be an expert to determine whether or not plane crashed into a freaking building.

Correct Huggy, you just have to look at the model they come up with to support the official story and then look at the actual damage.....NOPE! That crap is dead wrong.

[LadyForCamus]

All of this is one big argument from incredulity just like the stupid God argument:

"I just can't fathom how planes could have caused this type of damage and left this sort of wreckage (because I'm a willfully ignorant layperson who has no expertise in the fields relevant to this discussion, and not interested in learning anything new that might change my position), therefore it COULDN'T have happened the way they say it did, and...government-dun-it!