Re: Final Evidence: No 757 Hit The Pentagon

From: C-Fresh (master_at_mason.snuh)
Date: 09/07/04 

Date: 7 Sep 2004 02:11:01 GMT

glennab1@aol.com (1aircraftQAguy) wrote in
news:a83bb3a1.0409061641.43d548c7@posting.google.com:

> "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.

Sure it would.

 
>> 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.

Cite?

Of course not.

>> No engine struck a post, either.
>
> There was a witness report that the 757 hit a light post.

Cite?

Of course not.

No 757 Hit The Pentagon
http://www.bedoper.com/eastman

ASCE Report Proves No 757 Hit The Pentagon
http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce

New Online Video Proves No 757 Hit The Pentagon
http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon121.swf 

-- 
http://BeDoper.com - BeOS and a hell of a lot more
Virgin Message Board
http://bedoper.com/cgi-bin/plugins/BBS/bedoper_ubb/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro
Gortician's Not Dead, Punk
http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=15537

Relevant Pages