Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
9/11 conspiracy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jurgen36" data-source="post: 32988" data-attributes="member: 805"><p><strong>Re: 9/11 conspiracy</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sorry I have to disagree. </p><p>1: The fuselage is much bigger as the impact hole.</p><p>2: The shredded aluminum of the wings should be outside the hole. But no bits of aluminum were seen in any of the photographs before the rest of the facade collapsed. </p><p>3: The engines can not be shredded by the impact, they are pretty solid and mainly made out of titanium. From past experiences and crashes I have attended the engines usually pretty well stay in one piece, sure they might be deformed like in one case I attended were the impact was at mach 2. But even then the engine could be recognized and even the serial number of the parts could be recovered. </p><p>4: Yes there is a slight possibility that the tail assembly folded back and slipped through the very small hole. But its highly unlikely.</p><p> </p><p>Overall, sorry all the explanations do not work. It simply was not a wide bodied airliner which hit the Pentagon. Also it is now very quit about the one engine they recovered and it could be proven by the manufacturers that this turbine was never used in the airliner in question. So it was a cover up.</p><p>Regards</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jurgen36, post: 32988, member: 805"] [b]Re: 9/11 conspiracy[/b] Sorry I have to disagree. 1: The fuselage is much bigger as the impact hole. 2: The shredded aluminum of the wings should be outside the hole. But no bits of aluminum were seen in any of the photographs before the rest of the facade collapsed. 3: The engines can not be shredded by the impact, they are pretty solid and mainly made out of titanium. From past experiences and crashes I have attended the engines usually pretty well stay in one piece, sure they might be deformed like in one case I attended were the impact was at mach 2. But even then the engine could be recognized and even the serial number of the parts could be recovered. 4: Yes there is a slight possibility that the tail assembly folded back and slipped through the very small hole. But its highly unlikely. Overall, sorry all the explanations do not work. It simply was not a wide bodied airliner which hit the Pentagon. Also it is now very quit about the one engine they recovered and it could be proven by the manufacturers that this turbine was never used in the airliner in question. So it was a cover up. Regards [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
9/11 conspiracy
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top