reply to post by Grock
what was it that made them incapable of making phone calls. i was under the impression you just had to turn that stuff off because it may interfere
with the plane's electronics
i don't know. you have a lady saying that somthing dive bombed her van, flew under power lines, then somehow managed to bank up and to the right hard
enough to NOT hit trees that are on the other side of a small rural road.
i mean, it's obvious that he recollevtion of the events isn't the most reliable especially since, she is saying that she didn't hear the exposion
until two days after it happened (WTF?) that means that she wasn't thinking clear as she said she was "because she was the only eye witness and
would have to tell everyone what she saw" im sorry, but she is not trained in doing things like that, IE being able to look at A LOT of details in a
short amount of time, because she may have to use it as evidence, much like a police officer is trained to do.
im not saying she is lying, but i think that MAYBE, just MAYBE, she is a bit fuddled over the entire ordeal and can't quite remember EXACTLY what
happened, because she is only human. not most people, when something like that happens tend to not think "ok i have to watch everything because i
will have to tell someone about this." on top of that i think the interviewers were kind of trying to coerce the answers they wanted out of her.
considering they asked the same things over and over, and even showeed her pictures of the planes, i know that in a time like that, i would most
likely have a pretty hard time remembering if what i saw was this kind of plane, or that kind of plane.
plain and simple, this doesn't provide definative proof, some people use that term, "definative proof" very loosely at times, what you showed is
some intruiging interviews, and the diagrams you showed witht he wings making the scar didn't come to any conclusions IMO.
looks at it like this, if a plane hits the ground upside down, or right side up, no matter how you look at it the wings are still in the same position
in relation to the rest of the fuselage, suppose it impacts and crushed up to the wings, then rolled over on it's belly/back (whichever you want to
believe) and the tail slammed into the ground.
as far as the wreckage, i can't answer that one, that is the most compelling peice that was brought forward here.
my question in all of this, IF this was faked, how do you explain the family of the man who said "let's Roll" or the rest of the passengers on the
plane? they never existed? the flight never happened? what? were they paid by the gov't to play dead and never say anything? (i find that one REALLY
hard to believe)
here is a link discussing cell phone calls on planes from 2004, it basically states that you were prohibeted for fear that it would play hell with the
planes navigation equipment. and that sometimes they were hard to make because towers are not built to project their signal that high, but if this
plane were highjacked then they may not have been at "cruising altitude"
Cel lphones on airplanes
[edit on 6/28/08 by SRTkid86]
[edit on 6/28/08 by SRTkid86]