Thread: Three Brazilian Soldiers

> Sure, I know there won't be an outline, but the wings would AT LEAST cause damage WELL BEYOND the hole

A plane with aluminum (correct me if I'm wrong on the metal) wings going at 400+ mph hits a reinforced concrete wall, they're going to basically just disintegrate. They're really just thin skins of metal. Besides, as with a lot of things in that movie, they assume they know exactly what will happen in a scenario that we've never seen before, when the experts are saying the opposite.

> Why would you hide video footage (and confinscate it from near-by convenient stores) and "recorded" phone calls?

They're in a no-win situation with that. If they don't release it, people like you continue to cry out "why? why?". If they do and it's obviously a plane, people like you are going to accuse them of doctoring it. There are plenty of independent witnesses that saw a plane hit the Pentagon. I don't know why that's a point of contention at all. Besides, what do you think happened. Was it

They loaded all the people on this plane, it took off, landed at a secure location and they shot a missle into the pentagon. While that was happening, the plane was chopped up into bits, and scattered across the lawn along with the body parts of the people onboard.

? Again, please tell us what you believe happened, or at least start answering the counterpoints we've been bringing up.

> the 8gon

the what

> as it falls you see an incredibly siquencial poofs coming out. (which are the explosives going off)

You're sure it's explosions and not the pressure from the floors above falling on it? Please point out where these "poofs" are. Also, please explain how the WTC, a very large, very busy building, was extensively wired with explosives without anyone noticing. Wiring a building for demolition isn't a matter of tossing a stick of dynamite in and running out the door. It's a very intricate process.

> And there are eye wittness reports saying "That was not an American Airliner! That was not an American Airliner!".

Sources please. Besides, how the hell would they know?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/1227842.html

Here, that site pretty munch refuted every single point I've ever heard a 911 conspiracy theorist ever use.

> the 8gon

Seriously... it appears during your extensive research of the incident, you never actually caught a look at the PENTAgon. ...or perhaps you were just too busy analyzing the crash to count the number of sides. I'd say it's also fair to assume you're so intelligent that you skipped through second grade where they teach you these shapes.

Queatrix......

Yeah, there's no excuse for thinking the Pentagon is an 8-sided shape. That's just stupid. The Pentagon is meant to look like a pentagon, a 5-sided shape..... which just might be why they named the building such.

So somehow you're going to figure out that it was a fake attack by studying the evidence, and yet you can't even tell how many sides the building has when it was named after a shape? LOL! You have no excuse, especially when @nthony wrote a very humorous post making fun of someone that would get the shape of the building wrong! And he only did a hexagon (6-sided shape), as opposed to the octagon (8-sided shape) that you chose, ignoring the point that you know it's called the Pentagon, as opposed to the joke where the "newbie" did not know the building's name.

Can't you think of a real reason the government would confiscate video surveillance? They want to know everything they can find out about the attack. They don't want to lose the footage for any reason. They want to be in a position to stop another attack this way, but they have to be able to study every minute detail of everything.

That's great if people like you can view the tapes, but all you want to do is point the finger at the government for causing 9/11 when you can't even tell me why they would do it.

All you keep doing is asking questions that you think are really proving a case, but you never never answer any questions. Why do we see flashes as if they building is blowing up with explosives? Someone suggested that the steel supports are giving out as the building is collapsing. Why doesn't the building topple instead of fall almost straight down? Perhaps because it had such strong support near the base. Why did people think it was not an airplane? Dude, you seriously need to learn that witnesses do not necessarily get all their details down right. There can be differences in everyone's story, yet they can all see the same thing. Remember, everything happened really quickly. Would you agree that there are accounts where people have seen weather baloons and thought they saw something that resembled a flying saucer?

You fail to provide any better answer than the accepted theory, and let me tell you something else. The terrorists that really did attack us on 9/11... if you think this was just one attack that they've done, you're way off. Terrorism is nothing new. These types of terrorists (islamofascists) have been attacking people since at least the 1970's. There were plane hijackings all the time during that decade. Have you ever heard of The Raid on Entebbe? Group of terrorists took over an Air France flight that usually held a lot of Jews (common flight for Israelis to get back to Israel, I believe). They flew it to what they considered a "safe" location, and demanded Israel free a bunch of terrorist murderers that were in Israeli prisons. The Israelis managed a very good response. I recommend you see the movie, while it has some things that are possibly factually incorrect, it is a very good generalization of what occurred.

This has been going on for years, and the problem is that so many people have been ignoring terrorism. On September 11th, 2001, people all of a sudden realized that something was wrong, after ignoring it for so long. For those that think Bush is making more enemies in the middle east by fighting back, those people most likely have no understanding of the history of the region and of terrorism in general, namely of the attacks that have been occuring long before Bush was even considered for the candidacy of the Presidency.

But going back to conspiracies...... I love this flash video:

http://www.alzmedia.com/flash/view/anthrax

>8gon

Allow me to repeat what others have already said:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! u r teh foolz doooood.

I think I may have to take you off of my ignore list strictly for the entertainment value.

> Remember, everything happened really quickly.

One thing that really got me was that I recorded the footage when they rebroadcast it last fall for the 5th anniversary. After the second plane hits, the news anchors weren't even sure it was the other building, much less whether or not it was an American plane.

The news media would broadcast that an American city had been destroyed by a missile IF they heard it was true. They probably would not even recant and simply say that no one is perfect in their defense. In short, the news media sucks when it comes to facts. The rush to be the first to report brings in really bad practices and nothing is ever verified.

When the space shuttle Challenger blew up CNN had an 'expert' on that when asked what happened said "...Obviously there has been a catastrophic failure aboard the Challenger." Really? Thanks Einstein.

I remember when the OK bombing happened they said there were multiple bombs in the first news reports. There weren't.

Just recently when a building collapsed while workers were pouring concrete they said that 20 workers were trapped. In reality only 1 was and they pulled him out quickly.

Even some of the news expose's programs cannot be trusted. I had just gotten back from a cruise on the Carnival ship Tropicale when I heard reports of a fire happening on the next cruise. The news picked one of the worst passengers to interview - one of those types that is a victim of everything and they blew everything way out of proportion just because the ship had to say out an extra two days. They failed to mention that the very first thing you do on a cruise is assemble in your emergency areas and they tell you exactly which life boat (more like a small cruise ship in itself) is yours should the ship become stranded or start taking on water.
They also feed you non-stop on the cruises and their is food available around the clock. The stupid report said that the lady wasn't sure there was enough food aboard. Haha. Then they said the cruise ship only had a taped audio broadcast telling everyone to stay calm and they would be under way in no time. Well no kidding. Like it would be smart to say 'We are currently stopped because there has been a fire in the number 2 engine room.' That would cause something short of mass hysteria. Personally if I had to call into work and tell them my vacation was going to be 2 days longer b/c of unforeseen circumstances aboard the boat.....I'd love every day of it.

News cannot be trusted, eye-witness reports cannot be trusted, etc, etc. The only thing that can be trusted are later reports based on research and factual evidence because that is after all the hype has died down. Even then I would only believe about half of it.

As far as all these conspiracy theories go....usually the most obvious and simple answer....is the correct one.

Simple raycasting and the Pentagon
I would like to expand on one thing here that a lot of people have missed. Those of us that are into 3D graphics know the formula for projection and for raycasting. Now let's say we have a stationary security camera looking out over the Pentagon lawn. Let's say it probably has a 90 degree field of view for more than that would look quite distorted at the edges thus also making it impossible to tell what is going on. Here are the formulas for that:

Leftside.x=CameraPosition.x-(cos((CameraFacing-45)*PI/180)*MaxViewDistance)
Leftside.y=CameraPosition.y-(sin((CameraFacing-45)*PI/180)*MaxViewDistance)

Rightside.x=CameraPosition.x+(cos((CameraFacing+45 )*PI/180)*MaxViewDistance)
Rightside.y=CameraPosition.y+(sin((CamerFacing+45) *PI/180)*MaxViewDistance)

This will give you the left and right sides of the frustum in 2D. If you subtract the two sides this gives the total width of the frustum. You can then do rt=d to determine how long it would take a plane moving at 500 mph to move from one side of the frustum to the other. You can then guess on the FPS of the security camera and compute how many frames would fit into this time period. You will find that the number of frames is quite minimal espcially if the camera is not a real-time camera which most security cameras are not real-time.

I compute this on an Excel spreadsheet where I work and it came out to about 8 to 10 frames at 30 FPS which is quite fast for a security camera. Movies in theatres run at a whopping 12 to 15 and your TV runs at 30. So in short I would say that given the amount of footage that has been released we are only missing about 2 to 3 frames. Given that the object is rather close to the camera and given that projection is all about Z distance from the viewer - you probably are not missing much. As Z distance increases the object is in the frustum longer. At short distances you could even miss the object completely. Besides the object in question is moving quite fast and even if the camera did catch it, it would look like a big white object with a huge gaussian blur filter applied to it. If you look closely at the first frame that was released you can clearly see the outline of a jetliner at the far right side of the frustum. The tail, nose, and wings all fit perfectly with a large jet. If this were a missile you would not see such a large tail protruding above the nose. Only aircraft need tails this large to keep the plane stable. A jet most certainly hit the Pentagon. And for those that say where are all the pieces....well you need to go to physics class and/or fly your own jet at 450 to 500 mph into an object and see what happens.

Now while my frustum method is quite primitive there are ways to compute size and distance to objects from still pictures. NASA did this for the Columbia disaster to determine exactly what fell off and when. They took into account the inclination of the camera, location of the camera, location of the camera relative to Challenger, time elapsed during shot, time elapsed prior to shot (for prior damage to shuttle), distance traveled by Columbia during shot, etc, etc. This is all well documented in a huge report available from NASA's website.

The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they argue with every reasonable logical explanation that does not agree with their point of view. I could fly to Hawaii, snap some photos, and post them on the net and some idiot would say I photoshopped them.

I met an american last semester. We started talking about movies and "Team America: World Police". He didn't like that movie because it was so extremely "pro-Bush". He went on by telling me that South Park sucked because it was financed by the evil government that killed so many people at 9/11. I quickly realized that he wasn't joking.

When I told him that his ideas were among the stupidest things I've ever heard in my life, he started talking about "ignoran Swedes" and how we "didn't know what was happening in the world because we are a neutral country".

The weird thing is that he must've been at least 25 years old and he had allegedly been studying at Harvard. Oh well.

Well South Park does kind of suck, so he was at least partially right.

> I can't belive you guys. It was A JOKE! For crying out loud, now you even think I don't know the shapes...

What a funny joke, I laughed so hard... jokes really do go great in the middle of a heated intellectual debate. Especially ones with no real irony or comical value what so ever... the only possible way we could have laughed at that is to think of how dumb you were for saying it... which, as I stated before, I did, and quite a lot. But I think this one is just about as good as your "8gon joke" cause I don't think there is a single person on this forum that didn't know you would try to defend it by saying exactly what you did.

> I wasn't talking to you. And besides, are you some "How People Act At Different Ages" pro or somthing?

Oh good point... cause you know, if he hadn't stepped in, I probably never would have known to mention you had your age in your profile (which by the way, *oopps*, isn't there anymore). Also, you don't have to be a "How People Act At Different Ages" pro to know you're just a stupid kid. It's called experience (you'll have it in a few years)... you see, everyone one here (except you, of course) knows what it's like to be 15, ignorant, and egotistical. You think you know a lot more than you do and you're just not quite smart enough to take a hint and know just how much you're fumbling here. We all were this kid, at some point. Maybe not to the same extent as you, but we all were there at some level.

Now, you haven't made a single good point in this topic... almost everything you said pertaining to the incident is just regurgitation from earlier conspiracy theories that I've heard debunked a long time ago. You haven't come to a single conclusion that someone hasn't told you and yet you still try to speak to us as if you have doctorates in both physics and engineering and with every word you spit out onto this forum, you lose more and more credibility and at this point, I have to tell you, your credibility is significantly lower than even that "evil monarch" that you're trying to put all this blame on.

Do you self a favor and stop beating a dead horse here. You're not going to convince anyone.

And besides, are you some "How People Act At Different Ages" pro or somthing?

Oh, snap!

Originally Posted by Queatrix

I can't belive you guys. It was A JOKE! For crying out loud, now you even think I don't know the shapes...

Mmmm, yup, I still think you don't know your shapes.

Originally Posted by Queatrix

Anyone with a brain will be more convinced by Possibly Fake Evidence over No Evidence.

Hasn't worked for you thus far. You ignore basic logic, yet a simple video tape would settle this for you?

Again, there is no motive for the government to do this. Of all the things you've said, there is no reason to believe that the government had any reason to do it. There's a definite motive for islamofascists to perpetrate this, however.

Originally Posted by Queatrix

I know it is. But they could do it little by little, and you have to remember, this is the gov, they can tell anyone to do what ever they want (so long as is isn't in broad public), so they could just tell them to get out. (In a less obvious way of course) And there are always many times when each part is clear of people, so they could do it then. Like in a slow proccess. And they knew what they where doing to (and pretty good at) so making the system invisible wouldn't be a problem.

So the government was wiring the WTC towers with explosives for years?

What was the purpose of the missile-that-looked-like-a-plane? Why would they be so bent on making sure the towers came down?

Originally Posted by Queatrix

You say: what do I think? I only know that the gov was behind or at had a hand in this. And I don't know why. (I have therios, but I couldn't say for sure.)

You only think it because you want to believe it. I'm beginning to think that the other poster was correct, and you just believe this because it sounds SUPER KOOL TO THE MAX. You have to grow up and realize that sometimes things actually make sense as they are presented by the government.

Originally Posted by Queatrix

you're words are practicly stubleing and falling out of your mouth onto the keyboard.

How ironic.