It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Plane shredded to pieces

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

One also shows a crash that hit hard ground, and one that shows a plane that hit soft ground.

According to this logic, ValuJet didn't crash in the Everglades either, because there was no obvious sign of wreckage and no large pieces found there either.




posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   


This is just hilarious that this pic is supposed to be proof of a plane crash.

How about the pic showing a tiny little scrapped engine that someone placed there.

If the pic is supposed to show it being buried and uncovered: It's funny how the ground layer dirt looks perfectly undisturbed, next to a hole with the thing just sitting there. It does NOT look like the dirt was exploded by a plane crash and then the dirt covered over it.

Nope, looks like undisturbed ground layer dirt, with a hole next to it.

Of course this is speculation based on the photo, but photos are really the best evidence for figuring out what actually happened.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Speculation based on not knowing what to look for, or what you're looking at.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: peacefulpete

One also shows a crash that hit hard ground, and one that shows a plane that hit soft ground.

According to this logic, ValuJet didn't crash in the Everglades either, because there was no obvious sign of wreckage and no large pieces found there either.


I'm not compelled by the theory of hard ground / soft ground, making the difference of wreckage being there, or not.

My logic actually means that Valujet DID happen because there are ample pics of actual wreckage.

My logic is that I'll believe something happened if there is compelling proof, and won't believe it if there's not proof.

Valujet crashed into water apparently but there is still obvious wreckage.




posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: peacefulpete

Speculation based on not knowing what to look for, or what you're looking at.


A sarcastic way of saying: "Analyzing photographic evidence."

People don't need to be an airplane expert to look at photos and interpret what the photos are showing.

A hole in the ground, is a hole in the ground. Not a plane crash.




posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Not sure where you found that photo, but that isn't the ValuJet crash. Nor does that appear to even be a DC-9.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:36 AM
link   
The consensus here is that planes crashed. That they crashed and that "High speed impacts tear planes into very small pieces" . So small infact that huge jet airline engines are reduced to mere square feet.
So how do they find eligable passports of said hijackers after the crash?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Hurky1

An A-6 Intruder did a nose dive into the ground, and hit at nearly Mach 1. The engines were found 6-8 feet deep, and had compressed themselves to less than three feet long.

So yes, this matches perfectly.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Good try. Next time try harder. That was a single engine SR-22 that crashed in the Everglades in 2011, killing two people.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
You might need the google translator (site is in german), but a little bit of googling let me to this site:
www.medienanalyse-international.de...

The site contains photgraphic evidence of the plane debris from 9/11. Scroll a little bit down the page and you will find photos from the pentagon (from 9/11) and from the days after the attacks which show debris like that of the Germanwings plane.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: peacefulpete

Not sure where you found that photo, but that isn't the ValuJet crash. Nor does that appear to even be a DC-9.



Well I did a quick Google search, since I hadn't previously heard about this specific crash. I guess the pic was wrong.

I'm actually having trouble finding any good pics of any significant wreckage for the Everglades crash. Here's one though:



But I'm not sure I'm convinced that was a real plane crash either lol.

edit on 1-4-2015 by peacefulpete because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Talliostro
You might need the google translator (site is in german), but a little bit of googling let me to this site:
www.medienanalyse-international.de...

The site contains photgraphic evidence of the plane debris from 9/11. Scroll a little bit down the page and you will find photos from the pentagon (from 9/11) and from the days after the attacks which show debris like that of the Germanwings plane.


OK I looked at it but it's the same unconvincing photos that we've seen before. I'll never believe there were Pentagon corpses that were found still belted in their chairs. No proof means I don't believe it happened.

Photos of tiny debris don't convince me there was a plane there.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Try again. Irkutsk, Russia. Tupolev Tu-154, July 2001.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete




But I'm not sure I'm convinced that was a real plane crash either lol.

By using your logic Germanwings didn't crash either.
And there were certainly no humans on board either.

What do want to bet that in the coming weeks we see photos of passports and other personal effects.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete
I'm actually having trouble finding any good pics of any significant wreckage for the Everglades crash. Here's one though


Why are you just finding random plane crashes and claiming they are the Everglades crash?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

Here, let me help you out, instead of you just posting random crashes claiming it was ValuJet 592.

Impact site:


Wreckage in hangar:





posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 04:31 AM
link   
since your comparing plane crashes heres one that might be of interest, lightpole appears too shred up part of tail , although plane is smaller



edit on 5-4-2015 by ShadowChatter because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 05:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete
People don't need to be an airplane expert to look at photos and interpret what the photos are showing.


Phuleeease, people here don't know the first thing about air crash investigations, and watching a TV show does not make you any more of a "specialist" in this than I am in the breeding habits of Amazonian tree frogs.

This happens all the time here, a bunch of teenagers with far too much time on their hands decide they are as skilled as people who have spent their entire working lives researching, studying, and in the field working on such scenes.

Given that there are usually more than a couple of hundred people from all over the world working on such crash sites, don't you think SOMEONE would come out and say "hang on, my 30 years of experience in air crash investigations tells me that this is all wrong"?

And lets ignore the fact that these people have pic their way through the remains of the dead, I would LOVE to know how someone "fakes" that. Let me guess, they murdered all the passengers the week before, without anyone noticing they were gone, then buried them all in a "fake" plane crash, just to be dug up in that "fake" plane crash and be found... WHY NOT JUST CRASH THE PLANE?



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 05:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete
Photos of tiny debris don't convince me there was a plane there.


How far do you go with this failed "logic"?
Do you refute the existence of Mars because you haven't been there and the evidence for its existence is not compelling enough?
How about the existence of Nuclear energy?
What about the existence of gravity? All you see is the effect it has on everything in the world, but "pics or it didn't happen"


Nonsense, utter childish nonsense.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013


Phuleeease, people here don't know the first thing about air crash investigations, and watching a TV show does not make you any more of a "specialist" in this

This happens all the time here, a bunch of teenagers with far too much time on their hands decide they are as skilled as people who have spent their entire working lives researching, studying, and in the field working on such scenes


I see and this why you do not believe the pilots when they say the maneuvers preformed were next too impossible ....or maybe you were reffering to crash investigators who worked on the TWA flight 800 crash who claim it was compromised & are calling for a new investigation
Former investigators from the NTSB suggest that missiles caused the plane to explode


once again , the propagandists have been exposed....

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont think you can fully judge teenagers without looking at the positive qualities of the teenagers themselves..they have a long tradition existence & the community at large...


edit on 5-4-2015 by ShadowChatter because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join