Complete Proof (NEW, never seen): Pentagon

[Gumby]

what does snopes say about this .... http://www.reopen911.org/Contest.htm

can I atleast get half of it when you do finially convince them Bong?? I mean I did show it to you right? when does that check come in by the way??

Gumby Reviewed by Gumby on 05-03-2006. Complete Proof (NEW, never seen): Pentagon starting fresh b/c i don't want any useless shit that will sway people in the other threads: Picture 1: look at the pieces on the ground Picture 2: i think we can all agree the wingspan of a 757 is longer than this truck (where is the damage of the wings?) COMPLETELY NEW 3 & 4 go together: previous pictures of the "crash" that including myself have shown are indeed of a different part of the pentagon... after careful looking i realized this yesterday and have finally found an Rating: 5

[xblackdogx]

i dont have the time to write 5 pages like the guy at snopes did

IT proves everything..... just think an independent researcher found this out.

you guys say one thing snopes and i say another...... I posted our side you dont like it cause it doest fit YOUR side. its ok

i look at evidence to suppor MY side, so if you show me something that makes sense i would analyze it.

you're source says nothing about how there is no damage in the ring directly
behind the crash site, yet the following ring does have damage.
given that YOU BELIEVE this guy's statements, what do you think about this mysterious placement of damage. THIS DOESNT FIT YOUR STORY (or tell me how it does) and these pictures are showing what ACTUALLY OCCURRED! - that's is what i'm trying to get at.

[Bong30]

so if you show me something that makes sense i would analyze it.
OK read this...

you're source says nothing about how there is no damage in the ring directly
behind the crash site, yet the following ring does have damage.

1) Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?
Despite the appearances of exterior photographs, the Boeing 757-200 did not "only damage the outside of the Pentagon." It caused damage to all five rings (not just the outermost one) after penetrating a reinforced, 24-inch-thick outer wall. As 60 Minutes II reported in their "Miracle of the Pentagon" episode on 28 November 2001, the section of the Pentagon into which the hijacked airliner was flown had just been reinforced during a renovation project:


"We made several modifications to the building as part of that renovation that we think helped save people's lives," says Lee Evey, who runs a billion-dollar project to renovate the Pentagon. Theyâ??ve been working on it since 1993. The first section was five days from being finished when the terrorists hit it with the plane.
The renovation project built strength into the 60-year-old limestone exterior with a web of steel beams and columns.

"You have these steel tubes and, again, they go from the first floor and go all the way to the fifth floor," says Evey. "We have everything bolted together in a strong steel matrix. It supports and encases the windows and provides tremendous additional strength to the wall."

When the plane hit at 350 miles an hour, the limestone layer shattered. But inside, those shards of stone were caught by a shield of cloth that lines the entire section of the building.

It is a special cloth that helps prevent masonry from fragmenting and turning into shrapnel. The cloth is also used to make bullet-resistant vests.
All of this, especially the steel, held up the third, fourth and fifth floors. They stayed up for 35 minutes. You can see them through the smoke, suspended over the hole gouged by the jet. Only after the evacuation did the heat melt the new steel away. Evey says that without the reconstruction, the floors might have collapsed immediately.

Exterior photographs are misleading because they show only the intact roof structures of the outer rings and don't reveal that the plane penetrated all the way to the ground floor of the third ring. As a U.S. Army press release noted back on 26 September 2001, one engine of the aircraft punched a 12-foot hole through the wall of the second ring:


On the inside wall of the second ring of the Pentagon, a nearly circular hole, about 12-feet wide, allows light to pour into the building from an internal service alley. An aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane. The result became a huge vent for the subsequent explosion and fire. Signs of fire and black smoke now ring the outside of the jagged-edged hole.
Recall that when the first airliner was flown into a World Trade Center tower on September 11 â?? before it was known that the "accident" was really part of a deliberate terrorist attack â?? newscasters were speculating that a small plane had accidentally flown into the side of the tower, because the visible exterior damage didn't seem as extensive as what people thought a large airliner would cause. Even though the two airplanes flown into the World Trade Center towers were travelling faster at the time of impact than the Pentagon plane was (400 MPH vs. 350 MPH), hit aluminum-and-glass buildings rather than reinforced concrete walls, and didn't dissipate much of their energy striking the ground first (as the Pentagon plane did), they still barely penetrated all the way through the WTC towers.


pretty much sums it up........:thumbsup:

[xblackdogx]

Only after the evacuation did the heat melt the new steel away. Evey says that without the reconstruction, the floors might have collapsed immediately.

among other things, this was the most amusing.

the PICTURES i have posted show me where the damage is to "all 5 rings"- as you source says-, so there is no need to try to prove to me in words where the damage was, due to the contradictory PHOTOS

how come the fires on the floors of the 3rd ring (look at the fire damage, black spots) didn't "melt" the steel aswell?

[eg420ne]

WoW explain this one for me- it said "the aircraft engine punched the hole out on its last flight after being broken loose from its moorings on the plane".....Wheres the hole that the engine made, and also snope said the engines drag, wheres the drag markings?, and if that plane had hit the ground at 400mph damn wing n engines would of broken off.....please explain where the engine punched a hole in the pentagon

[Bong30]

here is some info on snopes, i just found them

Urban Legends Reference Pages
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Snopes.com)
Jump to: navigation, search

The title page of snopes.com shows the numerous categories which urban legends fall into. They updated their layout in 2005The Urban Legends Reference Pages, also known as snopes.com, is a website dedicated to determining the truth about many urban legends, modern-day myths, internet rumors and other such stories of uncertain or questionable origin. Snopes is run by Barbara and David Mikkelson, a couple from California who met on the newsgroup alt.folklore.urban and married. The site is organized according to topic and includes a messageboard where questionable stories and pictures may be posted.

Contents [hide]
1 Main Site
2 Forums
3 See also
4 External links



[edit]
Main Site
The Mikkelsons' work has been effective in debunking or confirming widely spread urban legends. The site is referenced by numerous other sites, directing people to more information about various hoaxes, especially in regard to chain e-mails. Although they research their topics heavily and provide references when possible, not all of their sources (especially those which are personal interviews, phone calls, or e-mails) are fully verifiable. Where appropriate, pages are generally marked "undetermined" or "unverifiable" if the Mikkelsons feel there is not enough evidence to either support or disprove a given claim.

The site should not be confused with The AFU and Urban Legends Archive [1], a similar site run by the denizens of alt.folklore.urban, which houses that newsgroup's FAQ. (In fact, there is considerable animosity between some longtime AFU "old hats" and the Mikkelsons.)

The Mikkelsons have stressed the reference portion of the name Urban Legends Reference Pages, indicating that their intention is not merely to dismiss or confirm myths but to provide evidence for such debunkings and confirmations as well. In an attempt to demonstrate the perils of over-reliance on authority, the Mikkelsons created a series of made-up urban folklore tales which they termed The Repository Of Lost Legends. Its acronym signalled that they were trolling. One fictional legend averred that the children's nursery rhyme Sing a Song of Sixpence was really a coded reference used by pirates to recruit members. (This parodied a real false legend surrounding Ring Around the Rosie's link to the bubonic plague.) Although the creators were sure that no one could believe a tale so ridiculous â?? and had added a link at the bottom of the page to another page explaining the hoax â?? eventually the legend was featured as true on an urban legends board-game and TV show. Whether this meant their plan backfired or succeeded is in the eye of the beholder.

Critics have accused the Mikkelsons of political bias. However, they have various articles that are both critical and supportive of various political beliefs.

The name snopes comes from the name of a family in the works of writer William Faulkner

[eg420ne]

But explain what happen with the MTE that was said by snoppyy the it went inside the building, I looked at all the pictures and cannot find where the MTE left there mark, i cant find no holes where the MTE entered....and its hard to believe that a plane going 400mph hit the ground leaving no trace of wings or engines or anything.......I trust snopes as much as pyscho4bud trust prisonplanet

[Bong30]

well eg that migh be snope is an independent they claim that... Alex has agenda.

maybe somewhere between snoops and alex huh?