pods

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

pods; pods
Topic Started: Sep 27 2008, 12:02 PM (527 Views)
mjd1982	Sep 27 2008, 12:02 PM Post #1
Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #867 Joined: 09/27/08	Hi there, I have just watched the film "In Plane site". I understand that this film doesnt have much credibility in the community, but I have a fe questions regarding the qualms tht have been raised about it. The main issue is the "pod" theory, i.e. that there was something attached to the bottom of the plane that hit the S Tower. Now, this has been debunked on the basis that this is in fact a "fairing", i.e. a standard piece of equipmennt attached to the base of planes to join the wings and the fuselage. But there is something that doesnt stick. Here is the pic from IPS: And here is an image of a fairing: There is a clear issue, namely that the fairing is located solely between the wings, not extending further up the fuselage, whereas the "pod" extends all the way up the fuselage from the fairing to the front of the base of the plane, and back from the fairing to the back of the base of the plane. So it would appear to me that what pod proponents are calling a pod, and what pod debunkers are calling a "fairing" are 2 different things. That being said, I may be missing something. Can someone help me if so? thanks M
Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #867 Joined: 09/27/08


mjd1982	Sep 27 2008, 12:04 PM Post #2
Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #867 Joined: 09/27/08	Problem with posting images here it seems. Heres #1: and #2: http://tinyurl.com/45u57m Edit by JFK - embed image and http://tinyurl.com Edited by JFK, Sep 27 2008, 12:09 PM.
Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #867 Joined: 09/27/08


JFK	Sep 27 2008, 12:14 PM Post #3
Posts: 4,220 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	I see you have neglected this analysis. http://www.amics21.com/911/report.html
Posts: 4,220 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


mjd1982	Sep 28 2008, 03:20 PM Post #4
Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #867 Joined: 09/27/08	Right, and that analysis serves to further undeline the point, right? Quote: The detected objects have varying luminosity around them because they are in relief (this is the only possible explanation). The detected objects are clearly distinct from the landing gear Which only adds further to the confusion.
Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #867 Joined: 09/27/08


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · United Flight 175 · Next Topic »