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.

 

Body parts found at GZ Identified as Two passengers on Flight 11

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 01:10 PM
link   
edition.cnn.com...

I am only posting this because it will be interesting to see where the 9|11 Truth seekers take this story. I myself believe that 9|11 is being covered up majorly, and there are certain stories regarding the truth of the day that discredit some of the planes involvement in the WTC.

Any comments on the story? Figured I'd ask.




posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   
They must be hologram remains.
It may sound cold, but thats just the way it is in response about holo planes crashing into the buildings.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   
I'm surprised that they just happened to find people from the planes, but haven't ID'd anyone else yet.


Since then more than 200 body parts, ranging from 1 inch to 12 inches in length, have been found.


Out of these 200 body parts, they are only reporting on 2 people that were in the planes? To be honest, this sounds like a "see, we found body parts of people from the planes so it couldn't have been a hollograph" pre-emptive strike to me. Sorry to feel this way but I guess I'm just too skeptical about ANYTHING regarding 9/11.

BTW, as far as the hollograph plane theory goes, I haven't seen enough evidence to convince me that it is real.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Well they are bassicly saying that since people are now finding out flaws in the whole situation they need to say something back to prove that it happened that way. When you look at it its pretty stupid. Why wouldnt they check the whole area of something that is bassicly why we are at war!!! Also this

"The manholes where the bones were first discovered on October 19 had been covered by a temporary road built after the attacks to allow in cranes to start removing debris. On October 27 Bloomberg agreed to expand the search underground, on rooftops and in some of the buildings surrounding Ground Zero."

How the heck would it get under there? Why would they be checking on rooftops after 5 years? wouldnt t the weather and rain effect the rooftops of finding anything?bassicly i feel like im being lied to. I do not have any clue about the "hollograph" theory. Also

[edit on 2-11-2006 by jwater88]



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Umm Griff...they have identified around a 1,000 victims from the WTC/airliners....



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Umm Griff...they have identified around a 1,000 victims from the WTC/airliners....


So, why the NEWS story of just these 2 people? I don't see why they are of anymore interest from the thousand others. No offense to these people who died.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Ya and they were the flight attendant and a passenger.... Put it doesn't seem possible how they got BELOW the manhole....and why they wouldn't check everything around the area!!!



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Well if the explosion is so hot, so violent it say... disintegrates the plane entirely on impact (pentagon) or is so hot steel melts in an incredibly short amount of time that it brings down the towers.... I would only assume bodies would not last very long
The impact into the plane, toppled with impact from falling all those stories, topped with being crushed by the entire building... no.. they would not find a body part. Political BS because more and more people are believing the "CT'ers"



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Griff,

The article states the remains of the two people on Flight 11 were NOT part of the recently discovered remains.

So I guess these are remains that were found previously and it's taken five years to identify.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Well if the explosion is so hot, so violent it say... disintegrates the plane entirely on impact (pentagon) or is so hot steel melts in an incredibly short amount of time that it brings down the towers.... I would only assume bodies would not last very long
The impact into the plane, toppled with impact from falling all those stories, topped with being crushed by the entire building... no.. they would not find a body part. Political BS because more and more people are believing the "CT'ers"


Ignorance at it's absolute best!

If you fail to even recognise the photo's of plane wreckage and passengers from Flight 77 taken of 9/11 - you have issues. No one ever said the plane disintergrated. There are photo's of the wreckage of an American Airlines 757. There are eyewitnesses describing a 757 hitting the building. What more do you need for Christ's sake.

Nor did anyone say that the steel on the towers melted. That is impossible. The towers would have fallen long before the steel had the chance to melt. Why? Because steel is weakened to 70% after being exposed to burning jet fuel. As you can see in this picture, a minor section of the bars are glowing red hot. Weakened - but not melted.



The towers cannot physically stand after having a large portion removed by the impact followed by a further weakening of the steel bars that held the towers up.

Tell the victim's families that the body parts of their relatives that were found are just "political BS" and see what kind of response you get.

[edit on 2/11/2006 by doctorfungi]



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi

Ignorance at it's absolute best!

Because steel is weakened to 70% after being exposed to burning jet fuel. As you can see in this picture, a minor section of the bars are glowing red hot. Weakened - but not melted.





Well Doctor, you were right about one thing. "ignorance at its best". Why do you always refute the most ridiculous arguments only. The whole 'hologram' thing is bull that some idiot came up with who saw what appeared to be a transparent plane, due to the fact that he was looking at a freeze inbetween two frames....as the plane was still moving it created a blur effect making parts of it appear to be invisible. Nobody is arguing this point with you cause all but 2 know its wrong.

I need a source that explains that steel is weakened to 70% after being exposed to burning jet fuel. That doesnt even sound scientific. I dont think there is any equation that suggests how weak steel gets when exposed to different fuels, temperatures maybe, but not fuel. Sounds like you made this up on the spot.
87% of all statistics are made up on the spot ya know.

And last but not least, your picture argument is ignorant at best. The collumns are not glowing red. that is an entire floor fire being seen through windows. if you trace the grid lines you can see the red is in between.

So disinfo agent, you need to understand, you aren't dealing with moron kooks here.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Thankyou Pedro.

I'm glad someone is thinking clearly.

And as for doctor fungi's comments...

They seem much like the "facts" that the government was putting out right after the attacks.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The towers would have fallen long before the steel had the chance to melt. Why? Because steel is weakened to 70% after being exposed to burning jet fuel.


Source please? I'd also suggest looking into the difference between heat and temperature.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
it's taken five years to identify.


do you know if this is normal???

in my no-experience with identifying body remains, i would assume that this process would be very rapid, especially with the remains of the most famous terrorist attack victims...

i wonder why it took so long...





posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by they see ALL

Originally posted by Valhall
it's taken five years to identify.


do you know if this is normal???

in my no-experience with identifying body remains, i would assume that this process would be very rapid, especially with the remains of the most famous terrorist attack victims...

i wonder why it took so long...



Whether it's identifying the remains of soldiers found on the battlefield, or the remains of crash-victims, it can take many years, even decades, to confirm their identities.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Ok? But this is UNDER a freakin Manhole...not a battle field.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jwater88
Ok? But this is UNDER a freakin Manhole...not a battle field.

As the aforementioned CNN article points out, "The identified remains were not among those turned up by recent searches in the Ground Zero area."



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Egotosum
Whether it's identifying the remains of soldiers found on the battlefield, or the remains of crash-victims, it can take many years, even decades, to confirm their identities.


w0w...

never knew this...

thanks






posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 11:18 AM
link   
In regards to the steel weakening comment:

What I have read, and I will quote sources when I'm able to find references to them that I do not have at my current location (a bunker 25 floors underground
), is that the estimated heat of the fires in the towers from the jet fuel was around 600 degrees. This is far from the 2700 degrees reguired to melt steel....or weaken it, in my common sense opinion. However, I am more than willing to read and consider something to the contrary, given documented proof.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The towers would have fallen long before the steel had the chance to melt. Why? Because steel is weakened to 70% after being exposed to burning jet fuel.


Source please? I'd also suggest looking into the difference between heat and temperature.


I don't think there's any reason to wait on this reply, Griff. It's not applicable to the situation in the towers as described by NIST. I'm sure you could set up some situation with jet fuel where you could make his statement correct (of course you could), but that doesn't have anything to do with the towers. As has been stated a multitude of times here on ATS, at the temperatures reported in the NIST report the steel would have been at 80% or greater of its original strength. (80% for 600 F under sustained fire exposure which the NIST report specifically states no structural elements were exposed to the fire for the duration of the time prior to collapse. What everyone seems to not take into account is that the strength degradation is not permanent. If the fire moves on to another location and a given element starts cooling off, it regains the strength. The loss is only while the element is at the elevated temperature.)

[edit on 11-4-2006 by Valhall]




top topics



 
0

log in

join