Re: Final Evidence: No 757 Hit The Pentagon

From: 1aircraftQAguy (glennab1_at_aol.com)
Date: 09/07/04 

Date: 6 Sep 2004 17:41:31 -0700

"C-Fresh" <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message news:<Xns955C82C89FE47spamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17>...
> lensman1955@hotmail.com (lensman1955) wrote in
> news:633b063b.0409060210.18b93634@posting.google.com:
>
> > "AbsolutelyCertain" <easily@entertained.net> wrote in message
> > news:<chgb48$b62$0@pita.alt.net>...
> >> "lensman1955" <lensman1955@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:633b063b.0409051618.29abbdfb@posting.google.com...
> >> > "AbsolutelyCertain" <easily@entertained.net> wrote in message
> news:<chcr3s$5fr$0@pita.alt.net>...
> >> > > "C-Fresh" <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message
> >> > > news:Xns955A73D172AE7spamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17...
> >> > > > lensman1955@hotmail.com (lensman1955) wrote in
> >> > > > news:633b063b.0409040655.1a6f4b10@posting.google.com:
> >> > > > > What do you think it is and what do you base that on?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I think it is smoke/exhaust, based on it's characteristics in the
> still
> >> > > > frames.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In fact, it's patently obvious it is smoke.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Someone said it was dust, but dust doesn't form tight little
> >> > > > contrails
> like
> >> > > > that. It's a more generalized cloud.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Ralph said it was water vapor, which is even less believable.
> >> > >
> >> > > Can you name a single piece of information external to the photo
> >> > > which
> can
> >> > > be used to substantiate any particular explanation of the cloudlet?
> >> > >
> >> > > Answer yes or no: Do you know what it is?
> >> > >
> >> > > If you don't, then why are you presuming to tell other people what
> >> > > you
> think
> >> > > it is?
> >> >
> >> > Because this is usenet and we're allowed to tell anybody what we
> >> > think.
> >>
> >> Indeed. And then people will ask for a little something more than rank
> >> opinion. Ask him if he has any evidence that it's smoke .... or
> >> anything else, for that matter.
> >
> >
> > Well, it IS something, that's obvious. The question is not; does the
> > thing exist. The question is what is it and what's causing it. I don't
> > believe it's a missile being fired by a killer jet. I think it's too
> > well formed to be dust kicked up from the construction site. It might
> > be smoke from an engine burning after knocking down a few lamp posts.
> >
>
> Why would dust form a tight contrail behind the object?

For the short time frame we're talking about....... yes.

> And the lawn was not a construction site, furthermore.

Actually, the lawn had the construction storage area on it and there
was a dirt road/trail visible in some photos.
 
> No engine struck a post, either.

There was a witness report that the 757 hit a light post.
 
> http://BiDooper.con - BeOS and a hell of a lot more bull***

Loading