BBC 10 years of 9/11 conspiracy theories
09-15-2011, 12:47 AM (This post was last modified: 09-15-2011 04:14 AM by p4r4.)
RE: BBC 10 years of 9/11 conspiracy theories
Quote:Of course it's foam. I just wanted to give you the opportunity to AVOID answering:
How considerate. I translate that as a "diversion". so it's foam, good to know ... i was thinking it might be some kind of magic powder ...
Quote:This is the main impact hole. If a brisant explosive charge went off INSIDE the Pentagon, then WHY is there a heap of burning rubble INSIDE, and no burning rubble outside?
The main "brisant" explosion happened at the impact not inside. you can setup your missiles to explode as you wish. Then there would be planted internal explosive and burning fuel to be ignited for more realism and damage.
Quote:Why is there any damage at all HERE?
what damage? A broken window and the wall looks blackened by the smoke.
Quote:This is obviously an external impact. The I-section beam has been buckled downward and inward.
As i mentioned in my previous post. it's bent outwards! Most likely from preplanted explosives in the pentagon.
Quote:Diversion. What the FBI or CIA tells anyone will rarely be the truth. Just because they do it doesn't mean YOU have to.
You seem to accept all of the "truth" by FBI, CIA. Who claimed al qaeda did it...
Quote:THAT is what is seen in the low-res camera.
Size of 757-200 relative to post can be estimated using geometry.
The Pentaon's facade is 72 feet high.
A 757-200 is 155 feet long.
The size of the Boeing 757 in this picture was determined directly from that of a similar picture on David Bosankoe's web-site (without verifying its accuracy, as the picture seems to be roughly what one would expect). As David has since recalculated the size of the pictured 757 and released an updated (and significantly different) version of this picture, I decided to check his work by calculating the size of the Boeing 757 using a different approach (an approach already put to use in the above mentioned article). This alternate approach is particularly suited to the task here, as it automatically accounts for the distortion due to the security camera's wide angle lens.
Since the heliport control tower is strangely invisible in the "plane" photo, the lines bounding it had to be superimposed from the "impact 2" photo. These are the 2 lines on the left. The line bounding the planes tail has also been marked. It is the rightmost line. What we need to calculate is the position of the line that bounds the nose of the 757. The angle between the lines bounding the heliport control tower is 6.4 degrees. The other (rightmost) angle is 16.5 degrees.
We now transfer these lines to the overhead photo of the area, presented below.
We mark on the 2 lines bounding the heliport control tower.
We measure the angle between these lines, and find it to be 4.8 degrees.
Since the angles must maintain the same ratio in both pictures (imagine that the lines have been painted on the ground) the 16.5 degree angle in the "plane" photo must correspond to a 12.2 angle in the overhead photo. That is, the 6.4 : 4.8 ratio must be the same as the 16.5 : 12.2 ratio, which is the same as saying that 6.4 / 4.8 = 16.5 / 12.2 (this value is about 1.34).
We measure 12.2 degrees toward the top of the photo and mark the line that bounds the tail of the 757.
We draw in a line, emanating from the point of impact, at an angle of 50 degrees to the Pentagon wall. This is the path of the aircraft.
We measure the length of the side of the Pentagon visible in the photo, and find it to be 622 pixels.
Now each side of the Pentagon is known to be 920 feet long, so each pixel corresponds to 920 / 622 = 1.48 feet. We know that a Boeing 757 is 155 feet long. So in the overhead picture, the Boeing must be 155 / 1.48 = 105 pixels long.
We measure 105 pixels from the point where the line that bounds the tail of the 757 and the line that shows the planes path, intersect.
We scale a picture of a Boeing 757 to 105 pixels and superimpose it on our picture.
We draw a line from the nose of the aircraft to the security camera.
We measure the angle between the middle 2 lines emanating from the security camera booth. It is 1.9 degrees.
At this point we have obtained the following picture.
Now the 1.9 degree angle in the overhead photo corresponds to an angle of 1.9 x 1.34 = 2.6 degrees in the "plane" photo. Making a line 2.6 degrees to the right of the line that bounds the right of the heliport control tower, we obtain the desired line which bounds the nose of the 757. Thus we obtain the following picture that shows roughly what one would expect to see if the security camera had indeed snapped a picture of a Boeing 757 (with its tail in the same position as the purported tail section that we are meant to be able to see above the larger of the two parking control structures).
Quote:You could try acknowledging the points you previously avoided - now.
|Messages In This Thread|
RE: BBC 10 years of 9/11 conspiracy theories - p4r4 - 09-15-2011 12:47 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)