Re: Could 9/11 Be A Conspiracy?

[Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:46:23 MST, Dude VanWinkle said:

> Semi-Serioulsy though, the only real compelling evidence I ever heard
> of a consipracy (on the governments part) was the fact that no wings
> were found on the Penagon's lawn, and the fact that it would be really
> hard for a trained pilot to fly a 747 that low to the ground.

Take a stick, maybe 4-5 foot long, and a half-inch or so thick.

Hold it horizontally across your chest, and proceed at a fairly good speed through
a 3 foot wide door.

Do the pieces end up inside the door, or outside?

Now repeat, but douse the stick with gasoline and ignite it.

Let me know how many pieces you find outside at that point.

And incidentally, every trained pilot has absolutely no problem flying that
low to the ground.  It's called "landing".

Also, if you *think* about it for a moment, the single biggest problem with
*landing* a plane is that since you're coming in at a 10 degree angle or so,
even a 10 foot vertical difference ends up being several hundred feet down the
runway.  This can suck, especially if you then lose some more runway riding the
ground effect.  That's how you end up going off the far end of the runway.

On the other hand, if you're *trying* to hit a vertical target, a 10 foot
difference just means you hit the top of that window on the 3rd floor instead
of the top of the window on the second floor.  And in this case, ground effect
is your friend...

Attachment: _bin
Description:

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.