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.

 

FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

page: 63
24
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by apex

johnlear, all very well, but how much force does it take to stop the tail of an aircraft before it hits the ground, and how much does it take to break the tail up? I'd think the force would be a long way above the ultimate load for it's structure, but your idea would be nice.


Before or after it plops on the ground at a 45 degree nose stop? You best be specific if you wish to obtain a specific answer.




posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Originally posted by IvanZana



Captain Obvious, Mikevet and partners, you have spent 2 weeks TRYING UNSUCCESSFULLY that a planed crashed.



I agree IvanZana. I was on the Jim Fetzer show with Morgan Reynolds yesterday for 2 hours and mentioned the level of intelligence that we are experiencing on this particular thread.

I was addressing the impossibility of the alleged 587 mph that the airplane allegedly obtained with facts about parasite drag which doubles with velocity and parasite power which cubes with velocity plus how a fan would not work above 400 kts and why.

But while I deal with facts and experience, there are those, like you mentioned, whose evidence is rumors, innuendo and government supplied handouts.

The exposure of the 911 scam will take patience and time. People are now ready to listen. Remember that its not the CaptainObvious, Mikevets that we have to inform. We know where they stand. So don't waste to much time there.

Thanks for your efforts and patience.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 11:07 AM
link   
The following fact of plane components in commericial jetliners has been repeatedly been ignored by the opposition.

If no one found any of these 757 components in all that "debris", in the crater or surrounding the immediate area of an alleged 757 crash, we keep hearing and reading about, they found no Boeing 757 at Shanksville, PA and are lying:

Fiberglass
Kevlar
Kevlar-graphite
Graphite
Hardened graphite
Hybrid (very likely fiberglass hybrid)

That is a fact not an opinion. They better not be finding it buried in that area 6 years 3 months later, because many people are going to know it was a plant at this point in time.

After all, I recall it being posted they dug down into the ground in the area of alleged crash, and did not locate anything then resembling any Boeing 757. Those components are not going to bury themselves under any plane crash conditions. There are too many of those components to do that top, middle and belly of commercial jetliners. Those components are subject to shatter and fall in the immediate vicinity of any plane crash.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
The cause was obvious (or seemed obvious enough at the time), no suggestion of mechanical/electrical failure or pilot error so why go to the extent of over-analysing the bit & pieces apart from ID'ing the victims when resources for investigation were being stretched to the limit already with a disaster recovery, not a crime scene investigation.

I have to disagree with this Pilgrum as there were two reports of a bomb on board. What I'm finding is that the FBI determined that bombs were not the cause only 13 days after the crash. To me that seems hardly enough time to even find and identify all the parts, let alone testing for bomb residue. The articles I found about this didn't have any more details.

Also from the articles I'm finding from that time, it's saying that they turned over the parts to United Airlines even though they were predicting at least 5 more weeks in their investigation. That's odd, seeing as they still hadn't fully analyzed the cockpit voice recorder. Also, some articles were saying 95% of the plane was found and turned over to United, while others are saying 95% of what was found was turned over. That's a big difference.

But I suppose that's what we get from reading newspapers. No clarity.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars

Originally posted by apex

johnlear, all very well, but how much force does it take to stop the tail of an aircraft before it hits the ground, and how much does it take to break the tail up? I'd think the force would be a long way above the ultimate load for it's structure, but your idea would be nice.


Before or after it plops on the ground at a 45 degree nose stop? You best be specific if you wish to obtain a specific answer.


As in, while it is decelerating as it hits the ground. The force will slow it down from the point when the nose hits, to when it hits the ground itself.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by apex
 


Out of curiosity, exactly what do you mean asking your question the way you worded and presented it? Because the variables of what it takes it takes to stop something, under any conditions, are all important to consider.

Stopped by what? What is being stopping? Material specs? Speed? Mass and weight? All resistance against the mass being stopped, including that mass doing the stopping? Etc. John did explain that he termed "parasite" resistance. Do you know what he means by that?

Details are highly important when desiring specific answers. Do you want mere scenarios (hypotheses) or specifics requiring all known variables? You did not say. From the appearance of your vague question, are you presenting the question merely to receive vague answers or nothing but hypotheticals?

That way people can continue circular arguments as long as their opponents agree to engage in circular argument. Otherwise, when opponents stop, people are left to engage in circular arguments with themselves or others agreeing with their points of view (opinions).



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


moment of truth. Jesus gave the parable of the fig tree. The fig is a summer fruit and that fruit is wisdom. The fruit is hidden under the leaves and the fig tree is in its early stages. People are waking up. Wisdom is showing herself to all that will raise her garment. this is the year. The beast has already set up one of his enormous bronze statues titled saviour of the world in the amazon jungle. Everyone that watches American IDOL are already worshipping the image of the beast. All of today's reality shows are the voice of Rome in her gladiator days when the people decided in the blood games of the arenas. This is the 7th year after 911 july is the 7 month and casini on the 7th day. casino royale 777 lucky number slevin. The bears in golden compass \ great bear or magnificent 7. this message was removed as soon as i posted it . I must be right. Boeing 777 the 77 bombings buiding 7 flight 77 into the pentagon. There going to hit all 50 first dates or states at 6 am. These people think we're sleep



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Originally posted by apex




johnlear, all very well, but how much force does it take to stop the tail of an aircraft before it hits the ground, and how much does it take to break the tail up? I'd think the force would be a long way above the ultimate load for it's structure, but your idea would be nice.



The instant the nose contacts the ground that force is transmitted through the fuselage to the tail which breaks off and in this case, because the airplane was in an allegedly inverted 41 degree dive, the tail would have gone skipping across the countryside.

The vertical and horizontal tail assembly includes spars and forgings that cannot be disintegrated in this type of crash. They are too massive. And they certainly couldn't have disappeared beneath the earth for the simple reason that airplanes crashing at a 41 degree angle aren't angled enough in the vertical direction.

The tail assembly is the last part of the airplane to arrive at the scene of the accident and has been considerably slowed by 'telescoping' which is simply the fuselage crumpling into itself. By the time the tail catches up with the rest of the wreckage it has lost the major portion of its speed and energy.

When a LearJet crashed in Clarendon, Texas in the middles 60's I was on scene with the investigators.

The aircraft has gone in almost vertically at almost Mach 1. There were scattered pieces of debris and the only thing intact was the vertical and horizontal tail assembly, while pretty much destroyed was still on top of the ground.

Same thing in Palm Springs when a LearJet impacted vertically in the Chocolate Mountains to the east in 1965. Lots of debris and body parts but the vertical horizontal tail assembly was recognizeable and not buried in the ground.

That a vertical horizontal tail assembly could be swallowed up by the ground after a vertical dive is what is called the "Wile E. Coyote syndome of accident investigaton myths." It is proposed by those who have no qualifications in airplane accident investigation.

It would be nice if those who propose the "Wile E. Coyote Ground Swallowing Act of the Alleged Shanksville Airplane" would state their qualifications to make such a determination for instance:

"I base this theory on my 6 and a half years of bartending, 2 of those years which were on back bar."




[edit on 9-1-2008 by johnlear]



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear


Now, whether or not I suffer from PTSD or some other psychological disorder it does not include suffering from "There was an airplane crash in Shanksville despite no evidence" syndrome.


Now can't you realize that crashing in that position is going to leave most of the horizontal and vertical stabilizer above ground?

Those are huge pieces. Its physically impossible for the tail to have disappeared nto the ground. The airplane is 155 feet long and its 124 feet wide. Under no stretch of the imagination would an airplane that size be able to completely disappear in the ground.

While I enjoy reading your speculation I find it uninformed at best.



1- believe me, we don't need your confirmation about whether or not you have PTSD. The truth is painfully obvious.

2- prove that with facts, not your dubious opinions.

3- It would dispel our concerns about your health if you were to quit lying. Nobody is claiming that the plane "disappeared in the ground". Truthers use this absurd and easily ridiculed strawman as a ploy to convince no one but themselves. Funny, you want to appeal to others that you are professional and have unassailable knowledge on the subject, then you stoop to this. Obviously, you know there are holes in your theory.

4- you may indeed be one of the most informed here on certain subjects. Plainly, the facts about what happened on 9/11 isn't one of them.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Those are huge pieces. Its physically impossible for the tail to have disappeared nto the ground. The airplane is 155 feet long and its 124 feet wide. Under no stretch of the imagination would an airplane that size be able to completely disappear in the ground.


Really? Tell that to the folks who investigated ValueJet 592.

Remember the problems that they had with wreckage recovery? Or is that not a good enough example, because I can find more.

[edit on 9/1/08 by COOL HAND]



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear


I was addressing the impossibility of the alleged 587 mph that the airplane allegedly obtained with facts about parasite drag which doubles with velocity and parasite power which cubes with velocity plus how a fan would not work above 400 kts and why.



So what would happen to a plane's engines in a 40 degree dive at over 400 kts?

Cuz I would suppose that even if the engines no longer delivered ANY thrust, the plane would continue on down and crash.

Oops, that happened, didn't it?

Or are you suggesting that something else should have happened, like say maybe the plane should have slowed down and eeeeeeased into the ground?


[edit on 9-1-2008 by MikeVet]



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

The instant the nose contacts the ground that force is transmitted through the fuselage to the tail which breaks off and in this case,

The vertical and horizontal tail assembly includes spars and forgings that cannot be disintegrated in this type of crash. They are too massive.


So they're strong enough to avoid disintegrating in a 580 mph crash, yet at the same time are fragile enough to snap off cleanly in a 580 mph crash.......


Ah man, I needed a good laugh, thanks John.....



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeVet
 


Did you try all the other forums on the Internet, only to discover they did not want your personal attack flame war instigation on their forums either or what? Keep it up. You are going to hit the wrong person with slander. And that person will move mountains to take you to court on general principle if nothing more.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Some of you people seem to think that the ground there was swampy or soft loam..like some giant tiller had softened the dirt up so objects would disappear under it. That is not the case. The ground was hard enough to drive on and walk on, and that ' plane ' would have left major parts all over the place. One poster above claims that those of us who do not believe a plane crashed there claim that the entire plane ' disappeared ' under the earth.

While that may be inaccurate to some degree, one can easily see why many would believe that: There are NO parts in ANY photos that have recognizable plane or body parts. None. Scrap and debris, perhaps, but NO suitcases..NO clothing fluttering from the nearby trees..NO large aircraft parts, NONE. All there is are pictures of people milling around a smoking slash on the ground. NO photos of trucks hauling massive engines out..WHY IS THAT? Not one. No interviews with truck drivers who hauled away large parts, parts that CANNOT shred on impact? NONE.

No fire spread out in the area from the fuel blast fire that would have happened if the official story were true..NONE. The physical evidence does NOT match the purported cause, and that is a stone cold fact. No detective worth a damn would accept the verdict that the government claims with all of the events of 9-11. HUNDREDS of ' inexplicable anomalies' means nothing to them!! It is as if they are not real! They simply ignore them or give an insulting answer that is not even possible, and smugly waltz onward with their certainty that there is a plane there..somewhere.

There is not.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by MikeVet
 


Did you try all the other forums on the Internet, only to discover they did not want your personal attack flame war instigation on their forums either or what? Keep it up. You are going to hit the wrong person with slander. And that person will move mountains to take you to court on general principle if nothing more.




You just made me squirt milk out of my nose...

You can't even get this one right.....

dictionary.reference.com...

3. Law. defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing, pictures, etc.

You guys are too much.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeVet
 


Thank you for confirming you are as unversed in the law, as you have redundantly reconfirmed concerning science.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


Orion,

I will ask you one more time. Please address the phone calls that were made from flight 93. Heck, lets call them "alleged" phone calls. Please explain your opinion. Please do not even THINK about bringing up the 0 alt. again, as this was addressed in detail on 2 occasions by me alone and you ignored it.

You will probably do what you did last night and dissapear to another thread.

I see that Mr. Lear was unable to adress my 10 points of evidence that I posted. Just as I expected.



[edit on 9-1-2008 by CaptainObvious]



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


How many more times are you going to ask the same redundant question, I have wasted my time redundantly answering?

I asked you how any alleged passengers made at least one zero altitude call, from alleged Flight 93, if that alleged flight never landed between alleged take-off and crashing? You were incapable of explaining that. Nor could you explain why that alleged zero altitude phone call was of a duration of 7565 or some such 7500+ number, whatever that meant, but should be time on open line.

As I recall, I stated that list had to be false, or it implied alleged Flight 93 did indeed land at Cleveland Hopkins Airport, as reported one day by all Cleveland media, and media flip-flopped the next. Plus, alleged line open finally shut down by the phone company for lack activity. One of your side attempted to excuse that number away, by stating the 0 altitude call was because the alleged passenger told the alleged wife to leave her line open as he would his.

You can either keep asking and getting no other response again to that same question. Or stop asking, until you can prove any of the those calls were made by alleged passengers on any alleged Flight 93. The choice is entirely yours.

Stop falsely accusing people of not addressing your questions. I have seen them quite logically address your sides' same questions, many times more than once, and the plural you have clearly indicated they are not the answers you wished to read according to your biased opinions.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
Really? Tell that to the folks who investigated ValueJet 592.

Remember the problems that they had with wreckage recovery? Or is that not a good enough example, because I can find more.


What about flight 800. It broke in half in mid-air and hit the water at several hundred miles an hour. But a large sections of the tial was found, and the Navy spent months finding enough pieces to do a good reconstruction.



posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


Can someone point out the call that was made at 0ft?

Calls made from flight 93

I must have missed it.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join