Pod Retraction
After further review, I have decided not to consider the strange bulge under flight 175 as a "pod": an added-on weapon of some sort. I think the "pod" is most likely just a trick of the light and angle of the plane. The "pod" was always quite unlikely anyway. Still unresolved, I think, is whether the plane that flew into the south tower was really flight 175. This is based on the proportions of the plane-- since the striking plane seems to look like a 757-300, not a 757-200 series.
I'm still working under the assumption that the plane that struck the Pentagon was not flight 77 (maybe a "plane-bomb" of some sort), and if I can make this assumption, then having flight 175 switched to another flight is not too hard to imagine. The key, really, is what happened at the Pentagon.....
I'm still working under the assumption that the plane that struck the Pentagon was not flight 77 (maybe a "plane-bomb" of some sort), and if I can make this assumption, then having flight 175 switched to another flight is not too hard to imagine. The key, really, is what happened at the Pentagon.....
1 Comments:
the "POD" is just a bad joke
it is a carefully selected, contrast enhanced photo of the normal oval shaped connection between the wing and the fuselage
http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html and http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/pod.html have good photographic debunkng of this
Post a Comment
<< Home