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.

 

The Final Nail In The Coffin: Irrefutable Proof the Flight 93 Crash Scene Is a Lie

page: 31
12
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
As proven the firechief evacuated the firemen BEFORE the call to Silverstein, so when the fire commander made the PULL IT statement he could only have been talking about the building.

As proven no steel building has ever collapsed from fire and or structural damage in the US. no matter how severe.


As proven you cannot provide evidence that a burning 20+ story team had ever been brought down before, or even trained to bring down before, by a fire dept or demo team.


Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Thats so funny since no believer has ever paoted 1 piece of evidence to support thier claims or the official story.


I dont know of anyone that paoted evidence before. Sounds kinda kinky.

[edit on 4-8-2008 by gavron]




posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron As proven you cannot provide evidence that a burning 20+ story team had ever been brought down before, or even trained to bring down before, by a fire dept or demo team.


But there has been plenty of steel buildings brought down because steel buidlings have never collapsed from fire. As proven firemen and rescue workers go into burning buildings all the time.

Still waiting for you to post any evidnce to support your claims.

[edit on 4-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

But there has been plenty of steel buildings brought down because steel buidlings have never collapsed from fire. As proven firemen and rescue workers go into burning buildings all the time.


Then it should be easy for you to show an example of your claim. Please, ULTIMA1, show us an example. We all know you don't have ANY evidence of it being done before, or since for that matter.
Prove me wrong. I dare you.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Please, ULTIMA1, show us an example..


Right after you show me that it cannot be done. I mean you keep stating it please be adult enough to prove it.

Oh thats right your a believer and cannot post evidence.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by gavron
Please, ULTIMA1, show us an example..


Right after you show me that it cannot be done. I mean you keep stating it please be adult enough to prove it.


Haha! I knew you couldnt! Pure forum gold right here.

Thanks for proving that you cannot back up your ridiculous claims with any evidence, ever. Debate over.


[edit on 4-8-2008 by gavron]



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Haha!


Thanks for proving how immature you are and that you cannot back up anything you claim.

I have posted evidence and now have to call in the mods to help you understand the facts as shown.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have posted evidence and now have to call in the mods to help you understand the facts as shown.


Please do, perhaps this thread can get back to what the OP was asking.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Please do, perhaps this thread can get back to what the OP was asking.


It would have been on track earlier if you were adult enough to admit to facts and evidnece posted. And admit you cannot post evidence to support your claims.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


ULTIMA....pot calling kettle black.....neither have you psted anything to support YOUR 'claims'. All you do is ask 'others' to provide proof.

Might work in defense, on the stand in a courtroom....doesn't fly here on ATS. You can dance, but we ain't buyin'

OK then - you want to play that game?

Show 1 piece of evidence that the "pull it" comment was in relation to the fire fighters and not the building.


@Gavron:

Then it should be easy for you to show an example of your claim. Please, ULTIMA1, show us an example. We all know you don't have ANY evidence of it being done before, or since for that matter.
Prove me wrong. I dare you.

You have your next post in this thread to show me proof that contradicts ULTIMAs position, and answers my challenege (above in this post). Note carefully that I said AND.

[edit on 4-8-2008 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

Do you realize the iconic 'sonic boom' is a double boom? That's just from one aircraft....it is a boom - boom. Sounds very similar to a bomb blast....of course, we aren't even discussing possible echo effects, depending on the recording source, and the surrounding buildings, are we???

G'day Captain Weedwhacker, long time! I was thinking of you when I heard that fuel tank retrofit order from the FAA, supposedly in response to TWA 800. Now you know I think that's total BS (as do a number of former TWA pilots and investigators), especially 12 years later and without ever having found an ignition source from that 747 center fuel tank. This is O/T and I'm not looking to start a debate, but it's stuff like this that makes some people question every word out of the government's mouth.

Now sir, is it really your position that the blast heard at the beginning of this video is a sonic boom? I've never heard a sonic boom that sounded like that. To me, this is a very distinct sound:




posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit]
You have your next post in this thread to show me proof that contradicts ULTIMAs position...


You want me to post pictures, videos and interviews of firemen and demo crews NOT bringing down 20+ story buildings with charges? Videos of them NOT training to do that.

ok...here are firefighters not bringing down burning 20+ story buildings with charges:

www.youtube.com...

Glad I could prove my point, that it has never been done.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Good, I am glad that we all agree with the experts that a Boeing 757 (Flight93) DID NOT crash in shanksville on 911. Sp we can we stay on topc?

thanks.






As you can see, it is impossible for a Boeing 757 to have made that small 10x30 foot crater.

In this next photo you will see that the small crater does not show any evidence of a plane or fuel being present. . Also, the grass is not even burnt. There is no evidence of a Boeing 757 crashing there.


Images provided by flight93hoax.blogspot.com... . Read more there.




Not one person or group has been able to prove a Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksville. Tell everyone to investigate this. Dont believe the lies from the truth deniers that troll these 911 forums. They obviously have a bad agenda amd doesnt matter how many diffrent log in names you have, it still doesnt put a plane in the shanksville crater.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 10:42 PM
link   



You silly debunkers said that this picture was wrong but the ntsb proved the debunkers as careless and ignorant of the facts. THe above picture proves the offcial story a lie. The crater gives way to the fact that no plane crashed. Wake up.

I am glad you debunkers and official story tellers agree that the official story is debunked concerning Flight 93.

No plane crashed in Shanksville as all the experts agree.



posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 10:42 PM
link   



You silly debunkers said that this picture was wrong but the ntsb proved the debunkers as careless and ignorant of the facts. THe above picture proves the offcial story a lie. The crater gives way to the fact that no plane crashed. Wake up.

I am glad you debunkers and official story tellers agree that the official story is debunked concerning Flight 93.

No plane crashed in Shanksville as all the experts agree.



posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron Glad I could prove my point, that it has never been done.


So you have proven my point that you cannot post any evidence to support your claim that its never been done before.

Thanks for proving my point yet again.



[edit on 5-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by gavron
 


You did not answer mirage's question. If you could comprehend what you are reading, you would note that Mirage was asking you to provide evidence that the "pull it" comment meant the firefighters AND contradicts Ultima's position.
Since your post did not include anything that was evidence of Silverstein's "pull it" comment meaning the firefighters, you have failed.



posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 

It's not gavron's job to comprehend what he reads and provide evidence to back up his assertions.

Gavron's job is to debunk, cast doubt, obfuscate, sidetrack and attempt to attack the credibility of anyone who dares provide evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.



posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Ivan....please help me to understand, the few poorly done frames in this post that I am responding to.

It shows the 40 degree angle, inverted, then there is a link to 'ntsb', which when linked, just shows the same stupid picture!

OK...then, there is the big arrow labeled 'MOMENTUM'.

The next frame shows debris spewing all over the place, and the claim is that this would happen. Seems whoever designed these 'visuals' didn't have the faintest clue about 'momentum' and Kinetic Energy.

Ivan, there had never been an example before of a jet impacting at those speeds into the same ground as at Shanksville. You can cite the USAir in PA, the Pan Am in Lockerbie....they were all different. Did you bother to look up the UAL 595 in Colorado Springs, CO? Although that airplane was not going nearly as fast as UAL93, the terrain and the impact zone were remarkably similar.

Of course, ignore anything that refutes your premise....that seems to be your style.

Was there, or was there not, debris dug out of the ground in Shanksville? You conveniently NEVER answer that question, you deflect and change the subject, and claim it's 'faked'. You violate your own rules of 'DisInfo Agents'.

You, Ivan, love to keep showing the same photos, over and over and over again, and neglect any others that might weaken your case.

Once again, for the sake of posterity: The CVR and DFDR were recovered at Shanksville. DNA was collected, along with many, many pieces of debris. Pieces of an actual airplane, shredded to be almost unrecognizable. This is a result of the energies....the Kinetic Energies involved!

You claim 'fake!'....but then you provide no proof of fakery. Just saying it's fake doesn't make it so, sorry.



posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
You did not answer mirage's question. If you could comprehend what you are reading, you would note that Mirage was asking you to provide evidence that the "pull it" comment meant the firefighters AND contradicts Ultima's position.


Actually, my post proves my side perfectly. ULTIMA1 said "pull it" meant the building and not the firefighters. However, when asked to provide evidence that a building has ever been "pulled" prior to 9/11, ULTIMA1 caves in and cant back up that claim.
Since there is no video evidence, interviews or photos of a firefighting team or demo team going into a 20+ story building and "pulling it" prior to 9/11, that speaks for itself.
You want to prove me wrong? Then show me just one single example of a 20+ story burining building being "pulled" by a fire dept or demo team.
Otherwise, that claim is as far fetched as saying directed energy weapons were used to bring them down - no evidence needed, just a wild theory.



posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by gavron
 


So, then you have no evidence that Silverstein was talking about the firefighters when he said "pull it"? All you had to say to mirage was, "I have no proof that 'pull it' meant the firemen, it is just an theory that has no evidence supporting it."



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join