Re: The Ultimate Pentagon 9/11 Question Andy Carol couldn't answer. was Re: Flight 175 WAS a FUEL TANKER, for REAL. This is not a "theory".

From: AbsolutelyCertain (easily_at_entertained.net)
Date: 06/29/04 

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:07:23 -0700

"Geoff Cashman" <theobviousgcashman@theobviousindiana.edu> wrote in message
news:cbsefe$80a$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <briEc.1511$876.194@fed1read07>,
> Harvey <researchermd@netscape.net> wrote:
> >
> >Oh, don't you think a high speed crash site is a pretty chaotic
environment?
> >Know anything about how surprising those are? Or indeed even know what
I'm
> >referring to? Or have you done so many tests crashing 757s into low rise
> >buildings that you *know* to a high degree of statistical power the
> >probability all the possible outcomes?
> >
>
> Responding to Jason is like screaming at a wall. Actually, it's worse
> than that. This idiot talks back. He's incapable of answering basic
> questions about his pet conspiracy theory, yet insists that everyone
> and their pet dog's second cousin's twin parakeet come up with an
> explanation about the second engine.
>
> Now let's remember; plane crashes are not chaotic events! Planes
> leave their debris in nice neat little piles for the NTSB to sift
> through, so as to not cost taxpayers any more money than necessary.

Yes, I think it is mandated that the debris piles arrange the scraps in
alphabetical order, and that each shard be photographed and catalogued for
perpetual public retrieval.