|
antipode -> RE: 911----All those People! Why Hasnt Anyone Talked? (2/17/2010 11:31:58 PM)
|
quote:
Especially since a cruise missile looks like an airplane... DUH
How do you know it was a 757 instead of a 767?
It goes a little bit like this: in New York City as well as in Washington/Arlington, we see an aircraft land or take off every 45 seconds or so, all day, every day. The majority of those are shuttles, and the majority of those are smaller Airbuses or smaller Boeing aircraft. Many of us fly these aircraft, as well, some of us commute between Washington and New York in them. We know which ones are which because the Airbus lets us disembark front and back, and the Boeing does not, so we check what we board when we board. When you see these things day in day out, every day, 52 weeks a year, every year, right over your head, you learn to tell the difference.
I understand this may come as a surprise to you, but we can actually tell the difference between cruise missiles and airliners because they forgot to put windows in the cruise missiles. I know, this must be an unforgivable mistake in your eyes, but there it is, it is a definite design flaw. I've noticed that cruise missiles seem to have slightly different wings, too - and I have personally never seen a cruise missile with turbofan engines, but maybe you know of one, or make one up, you're going to need that for this conversation.
The other way we can tell, though, is that cruise missiles have a tendency to explode, whereas airplanes do not, they disintegrate and catch fire, which is a different process - it is a bit like the difference between a car that has been in a wreck, and a car bomb - they look a bit different, afterwards. I know from driving past the hole in the Pentagon, most days, and flying over the impact site in lower Manhattan, two or three times a week, that these sites looked very different from sites that were hit by missiles, which you get to see when you spend some time in the military. I know from the damage done to my office, across the street from the WTC, that the damage was impact damage, not explosion damage, as the two have very different patterns, and I would have noticed the fire damage that would have resulted from a cruise missile hitting a building four hundred yards from mine (I have plenty of pictures taken by my colleagues on the recovery teams). Apart from anything else, an explosion has a 180 degree dispersal pattern, whereas an impact has a mostly forward dispersal pattern. This was very visible at the Pentagon, where there was no damage of any kind to the road adjacent to the impact site, at a distance of maybe 300 yards, and I know this because I drove on that road, past the blast site, when going home from my other office, in D.C., to my home in Virginia. I know it is hard to believe, but I would have noticed bits of road missing, burn marks, and I would have noticed if they had closed the road for repairs, which would have been a likely procedure after a massive explosion. But no, the burn was forward, and sideways, from the first impact location right in front of the building, all clearly visible from the road for weeks. Had they closed the road, you see, I, and several thousand fellow commuters, would not have been able to drive there, or go to the Pentagon City Mall to shop, and we would have probably noticed that. Honest, we are that smart.
|
|
|
|
