| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 85088 | 2007-11-29 09:40:00 | Controversial poll.. | russell108 (7499) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 616517 | 2007-12-10 23:24:00 | While you are about it, apply the razor to this statement: "If the Pentagon was not hit by a plane, where is that plane and its passengers now?" It's gotta be somewhere you see, otherwise it is still missing and it was last seen going in that direction. Is nobody going to offer up an opinion or an answer? I'd hate to think I killed a rampant conspiracy thread stone-dead by asking a rational question. The suspense is killing me! Cheers Billy 8-{( :confused: |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 616518 | 2007-12-10 23:33:00 | Now we just have to direct the 55% of all US Citizens or whatever who believe its a conspiracy to this thread and we'll all live happily ever after :) | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 616519 | 2007-12-10 23:34:00 | Sorry Billy. I believe the most logical explanation is they were ditched in the sea somewhere. I think it impossible the Pentagon was hit by a passenger liner, more likely a small plane or similar was flown into it, and the passenger liner never came close to the Pentagon. As Joe said before, the airspace above the Pentagon is one of the most protected in the world. Assuming everythings legit, which it's not, anything that went anywhere near there, especially on 9/11 after the twin towers had been hit, would have been obliterated immediatley. How did anything get near there at all? Well if it was an inside job.... |
wratterus (105) | ||
| 616520 | 2007-12-10 23:50:00 | conspiracy theorists are so closed minded. they never bother checking the 'facts' for themselves Its so easy. A web site devoted to debunking the myths www.popularmechanics.com Obviously the US Govt spent $millions ,killed 2000+ people in 9/11, yet couldnt kill the 2 guys who made this film & risked exposing the cover up. Maybee thats the real conspiracy I did see the film, lots of interesting points. Also lots of false information & theories passes off as fact. |
steveroby (9470) | ||
| 616521 | 2007-12-11 04:36:00 | I believe the most logical explanation is they were ditched in the sea somewhere . As Joe said before, the airspace above the Pentagon is one of the most protected in the world . Well, I guess you can ignore commonsense, and maybe you haven't read the explanations linked by steveroby (which contain a lot of the fact-based logic that I have already posted, and I had never seen that site before), but now you are making up theories of your own . Ditched in the sea somewhere? Then the razor would have produced floating bodies . Instead it produce a clearly identifiable part of the plane . How damnably inconvenient is that!! Protected airspace above the Pentagon? They came in low and flat! They had to, because inexperienced pilots couldn't dive bomb a passenger jet with any accuracy . Of course flying flat, fast, and low has also been a recognised defence against pursuing aircraft ever since WW1 and works just as well against air-to-air missiles, ground-to air missiles and pursuing aircraft today . However, I doubt that the hijackers had such tactical skills, they just got down low and followed their nose . Damn that razor, it cuts through umpteen layers of seemingly impenetrable conspiracy theories like they were not even there, and comes back to the plain simple truth every time . If you have to make up factually unsupported scenarios to support your theory, you have either moved into the world of fiction, or have sunk into that sad grey miasma inhabited by lunatic conspiracy theorists for whom the plain truth is so unpalatable they'd prefer to live in a state of permanent delusion rather than yield to commonsense . Take the time to follow the link . Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 616522 | 2007-12-11 04:43:00 | Wasting your time Billy. They need to head off and read some Carl Sagan (www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk) ... | Biggles (121) | ||
| 616523 | 2007-12-11 05:01:00 | Wasting your time Billy. They need to head off and read some Carl Sagan (www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk) ... Yeah, I know Bruce, but it's so much fun shooting ducks on the water (or pigeons in the park if you are a Wellingtonian) that sometimes I just can't help myself. :D Cheers Billy 8-{) :lol: |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 616524 | 2007-12-11 06:16:00 | Well, I guess you can ignore commonsense, and maybe you haven't read the explanations linked by steveroby (which contain a lot of the fact-based logic that I have already posted, and I had never seen that site before), but now you are making up theories of your own . Ditched in the sea somewhere? Then the razor would have produced floating bodies . Instead it produce a clearly identifiable part of the plane . How damnably inconvenient is that!! Protected airspace above the Pentagon? They came in low and flat! They had to, because inexperienced pilots couldn't dive bomb a passenger jet with any accuracy . Of course flying flat, fast, and low has also been a recognised defence against pursuing aircraft ever since WW1 and works just as well against air-to-air missiles, ground-to air missiles and pursuing aircraft today . However, I doubt that the hijackers had such tactical skills, they just got down low and followed their nose . Damn that razor, it cuts through umpteen layers of seemingly impenetrable conspiracy theories like they were not even there, and comes back to the plain simple truth every time . If you have to make up factually unsupported scenarios to support your theory, you have either moved into the world of fiction, or have sunk into that sad grey miasma inhabited by lunatic conspiracy theorists for whom the plain truth is so unpalatable they'd prefer to live in a state of permanent delusion rather than yield to commonsense . Take the time to follow the link . Cheers Billy 8-{) I also think there might of been sarcasm in wratterus post:dogeye: |
plod (107) | ||
| 616525 | 2007-12-11 06:35:00 | Damn this post modern sarcasm the kids use nowadays. In my day when you were being sarcastic everyone knew it. | Biggles (121) | ||
| 616526 | 2007-12-11 06:38:00 | Damn this post modern sarcasm the kids use nowadays. In my day when you were being sarcastic everyone knew it. It was only a thought:( , but I do hope so |
plod (107) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 | |||||