Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at info@12ozprophet.com and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

find the boeing

Discussion in 'Channel Zero' started by casekonly, Oct 21, 2003.

  1. casekonly

    casekonly Veteran Member

    Joined: Aug 6, 2002 Messages: 8,264 Likes Received: 5
    find the boeing 757

    pretty interesting. deals with 757 which smashed into the pentagon. several pictures showing the damage. challenges you to find airplane wreckage in photographs
     
  2. BIGBLUE

    BIGBLUE Senior Member

    Joined: Jul 4, 2003 Messages: 1,667 Likes Received: 0
    THE PICS ON THIS SITE MAY BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THOSE SENSITIVE TO 911
     
  3. i11igul

    i11igul Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 5, 2003 Messages: 1,810 Likes Received: 0
    sounds to me like we've been fooled, i saw no evidence what so ever that a plane of that size hit the building. i love shit like this(not 911), i like when people probe into what the government feeds us, and we find out that maybe we have been fooled:mean:
     
  4. i11igul

    i11igul Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 5, 2003 Messages: 1,810 Likes Received: 0
    :bubble bursts::(
     
  5. Smart

    Smart Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Apr 14, 2000 Messages: 17,017 Likes Received: 174
  6. seeking

    seeking Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: May 25, 2000 Messages: 32,277 Likes Received: 233
    'there's the 'facts' you were looking for'? that site is run by the 'San Fernando Valley Folklore Society', which is one guy and his wife. hardly an unquestionable source of 'fact'.
    also, it was not posted until a year after our discussion, so supplying it with a link to our debate, as if it was the backing for your argument then, is misleading.
    lastly, there is no more 'fact' stated there, than in the original article. and 'infact' one of this guys main claims is that the plane hit the ground first, and then 'bounced'. now, simply looking at all of those pictures, both his and the french sites, i can not find any evidence of a several thousand pound plane hitting the ground at 350 mph. then again, my 'knowledge' of cratering and explosions is centered mostly around childhood experiments with m80's and bottle rockets with the stocks torn off, so what do i know?

    seeks/till it makes glue
     
  7. Smart

    Smart Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Apr 14, 2000 Messages: 17,017 Likes Received: 174
    No, not those facts, I always believed that a plane hit the pentagon... in the thread I linked to, you might notice me asking you (or anyone), to produce a simple outline of the facts concerning the conspiracy... What, where, when, why and how...

    No, in the post above I was refering to the 'facts' concerning the time you told me I wasn't allowed to stop arguing with you... something you recently denied, but, it's all good...

    believe what you want...
     
  8. old*824

    old*824 Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 8, 2003 Messages: 1,362 Likes Received: 0
    eh, they have video footage of the explosion that has been admitted but not of the aircraft impacting?

    besides it would of clipped the wings at one point, the penetgon was not a wtc tower.
     
  9. space base

    space base Senior Member

    Joined: May 4, 2003 Messages: 1,765 Likes Received: 0
  10. Intangible

    Intangible 12oz Legend

    Joined: Jul 9, 2001 Messages: 17,479 Likes Received: 6
    it seems odd that a 757 was angled perfectly into such a low target...the ground seemed fine as if the plane never skidded across it, just straight into the building...but i guess they were professionals or something...
     
  11. Rectum

    Rectum Senior Member

    Joined: Nov 13, 2002 Messages: 1,501 Likes Received: 0
    You'd expect that theyd be able to at least find the plane's engine blocks or something
     
  12. causinpanic

    causinpanic Senior Member

    Joined: Sep 13, 2003 Messages: 1,141 Likes Received: 0
  13. I've always thought the same about Snopes, seeking, how it's run by a mom-and-pop couple and how much I should really trust it. However it's been around for quite a while now, and it's been generally acclaimed almost everywhere (websites, magazines, etc.) as a solid online fallacy-defuser. Besides that, they always make sure to list their sources for each and every article... in this case, they were news articles in responses to the French publications (nobody else think's it's weird that all of these Pentagon conspiracy articles are French?) that made the claims. One of them is even from The Guardian, a newspaper that I would've expected to do somewhat of the opposite. Not only that, but the snopes article is peppered with further links.

    Regardless, the explanations brought forth from Snopes and it's sourced articles seem to me to be fairly solid in terms of dismissing the questions brought forth by the site. I do think that the whole bouncing thing doesn't seem to be as convincing as the rest, but just as I haven't seen pictures of lawn damage, I haven't seen pictures of an undamaged lawn either, one that doesn't have a dozen fire trucks and rescue vehicles covering most of it. One of the quotes mentions it hitting the helipad, which I don't feel sounds right (angle is off), but it would have left little marks beyond concrete scrapes.

    And as for the precision involved, well, if there was as much planning into this as there appears to have been, I don't know why it would be hard to believe that the calculations were made beforehand to make a standard landing procedure place the plane touch-down spot in that general area. They could've hit the roof or smashed harder against the lawn just as much as they could've hit it dead on like they did, and they would've still fucked shit up, maybe to a lesser degree. The wrong people often get lucky.


    *Edit: I'd like to add that even the stuff outlined by the snopes articles isn't my strongest reason for not believing the conspiracy site... the main reason is that I honestly can't imagine the government being so unbelievably sloppy in execution and coverup.

    "Yeah, we'll set up a bomb to explode and then we'll tell everyone it was a plane."

    -"Word... but wouldn't a plane leave debris?"

    "Nah, nobody's gonna care about that."

    -"What about the plane and the people on it? They have to exist and families must lose relatives and a registered plane has to dissappear."

    "Whatever, we'll take a flight and dump it in the middle of the Atlantic."

    -"Dope... but wouldn't radar... ah fuck it dude, let's do it!"
     
  14. seeking

    seeking Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: May 25, 2000 Messages: 32,277 Likes Received: 233
    to be honest, i didnt feel their 'debunking' facts were any more persuasive than the original 'conspiracy' theory, and thats not because i dont want to believe, its just how i see it. i had problems with the conspiracy theory as well. trust me, id much rather be able to accept that it was actually a plane and not possibly something else. but the way it stands, i just cant. and as far as some of the comments you made... if it hit the heli-pad before hitting the building, it would leave a whole hell of alot more than 'scrapes'.
    " And as for the precision involved, well, if there was as much planning into this as there appears to have been, I don't know why it would be hard to believe that the calculations were made beforehand to make a standard landing procedure place the plane touch-down spot in that general area."

    it would be difficult to believe because they were flying without the aid of navigational support, using ground landmarks to find their way. as cracked originally stated in the original thread, for them to be able to spot the building, make a wide turn to andle themselves towards it, then come down in such a manner as to hit it perfect at the base, when they had never performed such an operation before in their lives, is highly, highly suspect. i'm not positive, but i dont believe any of the men had flown planes anywhere near this size before, which makes all the difference in the world.
     
Top