Wreckage in this pic Cannot Be From Flight MH-17

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
Covered window photos debunked

And another debunking of "it's not the right plane" pictures just for good measure

These are exactly the false theories I mentioned in my op and it has nothing to do with my op.

I'd appreciate it if you not derail my thread with off topic and unrelated debunking, especally if it shows that you didn't read my op.

and this one too?

Actually the EXACT PIECE of wreckage that forms you "case" is what is debunked in the first of those links - so it is clear to me that it is you who is not reading the information.

there are multiple theories about the "wrong aircraft" being photographed, the wreckage isn't real, etc in various shapes and forms - yours is debunked.

Get over it.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
The pic is photoshopped, or the piece in the pic is not MH17.

I thought you weren't trying to claim that it isn't flight MH17? But here, you suggest that it isn't flight MH17?

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Again, this is not about the point I am making. i specifically distanced myself from these theories, and now you think you can debunk my claim without even touching it.

This is thread derailment, if it continues I will alert mods.

a reply to: stumason

I offered two options of which only one can be true.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: Vasa Croe

It is the correct plane, it even says RD on the noseplate.

Look, I am not going to have this off topic discussion with you. It doesn't matter, the pic in my op looks exactly the same as any other pic of 9m-mrd in its latest state, wether you believe it is correct or not.

See...this is where threads like this just go all retarded. It is NOT the same plane. You state that the pic is of mh17 at the gate and it is simply not true. With it being a different plane the lettering could be in a different position. If you are going to compare things that you state are the same then burden of proof is on you to show that the planes you are posting are the planes you claim. I have shown the one at the gate is not. Your childish attitude is getting old. Don't hold your breath for the media to beat down your door and tell you that you have uncovered amy thing at all....you haven't and are wrong...plain and simple.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: stumason

I offered two options of which only one can be true.

No, that isn't how it happens at all. There is a third option...

3) You're wrong.

But despite being pointed out by several members (including the resident Aircraft expert, Zaphod and the Site owner, Skeptic Overlord) why your theory is flawed in oh so many ways, you refuse to accept the idea you might just be wrong.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Actually the EXACT PIECE of wreckage that forms you "case" is what is debunked in the first of those links - so it is clear to me that it is you who is not reading the information.

The pic I am discussing doesn't even appear in that link. You are talking complete nonsense.

Alert sent.

a reply to: SirElrondofRivendell
you asked about what might have happened - the links answer your questions.

you are being prissy now.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Again, this is not about the point I am making. i specifically distanced myself from these theories, and now you think you can debunk my claim without even touching it.

This is thread derailment, if it continues I will alert mods.

Why would you alert the mods? Because none of us are agreeing with you and we are asking intelligent questions and giving evidence to the contrary of your point and it is making you look like a fool in your own thread? By all means....please alert them to the fact that your post is showing two different planes and you are claiming they are the same when they are not. I think that is a banning offense here....to knowingly hoax the posters on this site.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

See...this is where threads like this just go all retarded. It is NOT the same plane.

Still beating a dead horse?

It wouldn't even matter, other pics have alreay been posted that show the problem even more clear. Stop derailing my thread.

I feel like I'm being ganged up on a bit here.......

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because all your arguments do not apply to my op.

Alert sent.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: Vasa Croe

See...this is where threads like this just go all retarded. It is NOT the same plane.

Still beating a dead horse?

It wouldn't even matter, other pics have alreay been posted that show the problem even more clear. Stop derailing my thread.

I believe the dead horse has been thoroughly beaten by everyone else in this thread as well. Your OP is incorrect and has been thoroughly proven by numerous very well versed members of this board.

Quit trying to push your garbage....the flight that is in the dirt is MH17....no other plane. The flight you posted to compare it to is not that flight.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because all your arguments do not apply to my op.

Alert sent.

Every single one of mine did. They are your pics that you posted for us to compare and they are not the same plane.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Quit trying to push your garbage....the flight that is in the dirt is MH17....no other plane. The flight you posted to compare it to is not that flight.

The piece of wreckage in that pic cannot be MH17 because it doesn't match up.

Other posters have posted another pic, independant from me and the problem is still clear.

Your argument that my original MH17 gate pic, is not MH17 is based on the false notion that the nose cover reads RC. It doesn't, it reads RD. This is actually discussed in the link that TheGaul posted to debunk my op,lol.

Maybe he can school you a bit.

Quit derailing ma thread.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

They are your pics that you posted for us to compare and they are not the same plane.

This poster is continually spreading lies about my op.

Why is this being allowed?

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
The piece of wreckage in that pic cannot be MH17 because it doesn't match up.

Perhaps you might be able to explain what's it's doing in the debris field under where international commercial flight radar lost track of the flight with MH17's transponder?

There are many questions surrounding this tragedy. Doubt about the flight associated with the debris is not one of them.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I think my op is very clear mister SkepticOverlord.

Something is wrong. Either that wreck in the pic is not of MH17 or the pic is faked. It seems more probable the pic is faked.

Why would reuters photoshop such a pic?

It seems you are also having trouble sticking to the topic. I am not going to send an alert about you just yet but if you keep it up I will.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: Vasa Croe

They are your pics that you posted for us to compare and they are not the same plane.

This poster is continually spreading lies about my op.

Why is this being allowed?

Sorry...i may have flaws but lying to make an obviously incorrect OP look bad isn't one of them. I will state again....they are not the same plane.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I think my op is very clear mister SkepticOverlord.

Something is wrong. Either that wreck in the pic is not of MH17 or the pic is faked. It seems more probable the pic is faked.

Why would reuters photoshop such a pic?

It seems you are also having trouble sticking to the topic. I am not going to send an alert about you just yet but if you keep it up I will.

He owns the site fool.....