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.

 

40 'Smoking Guns' Collectively Proving That 9/11 Was An Inside Job

page: 19
14
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
911research.wtc7.net...

As noted on the pages describing Flight 93 and its crash site, there were a number of debris fields. Small debris descended over Indian Lake and New Baltimore, about three and eight miles from the primary crash site, and an engine core was separated from the main impact crater by about 2000 feet.

Some officials have suggested that wind scattered the debris once on the ground, but wind certainly couldn't have blown a one-ton engine a half-mile, nor could the 9-mile-per-hour wind have blown debris for eight miles.


Debris fields from Flight 93 were scattered across eight miles.
An article in Popular Mechanics attempts to explain the far-flung debris by suggesting that the engine "tumbl[ed] across the ground" and that the light debris was "blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash." Such scenarios are impossible given the nature of the crash, wherein the plane dove into the soft ground from a nearly vertical trajectory. This is evident in the deep impact crater whose shape mimics the cross-section of the aircraft, and by the agreement among eyewitness that the plane dropped from the sky in a vertical fashion.


Map showing 2 distinct debris fields.
911research.wtc7.net...




posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Ultima,

There were debris scattered across 8 miles. Please tell me what debris were found at the furthest point from the crash site.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
There were debris scattered across 8 miles. Please tell me what debris were found at the furthest point from the crash site.


Well it does not really matter what debris was found (there are differnt reports on debris found), the main point is there were 2 distinct and differet debris fields and that an engine core was found a good distance away from the crash site.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well it does not really matter what debris was found (there are differnt reports on debris found),


Hold on. Debris found 8 miles away doesnt matter? You dont want all the evidence then?



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Hold on. Debris found 8 miles away doesnt matter? You dont want all the evidence then?


The main evidemce is the 2 seperate debris fields and other factors in the crash site.

Like that fact that the crator was almost the size of the crator made by Payne Stewarts small Learjet.

[edit on 3-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Ultima,

Stop moving the goal posts. Start a Payne Stewart thread if you want.

You bring up the debris fields.

You show a link that states there were "several" debris fields.

You show a map with only two.

The debris spread SSE consistent with the winds for that day.

IT was explained to you about the engine.

IT was explained to you what debris was found 8 miles away.


I asked you..

What debris was found 8 miles from the crash site? Please show me the differing accounts of this section of the debris field.


[edit on 3-8-2008 by ThroatYogurt]



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
IT was explained to you about the engine.

IT was explained to you what debris was found 8 miles away.


No, there was no explanation for the engne core found that far away.

That still does not explain the 2 seperate debris fields.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


LAST time ultima.

There have been EXPERTS that have come out and stated that it is not out of the question to have an engine that far away.

Here why don't you contact him:

Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards."

www.popularmechanics.com...


LAST TIME:

There was one debris field. This was shown to you as well. The furthest debris that was found was 8 miles away. LIGHT WEIGHT MATERIALS.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
LAST TIME:

There was one debris field. This was shown to you as well. The furthest debris that was found was 8 miles away. LIGHT WEIGHT MATERIALS.


Thanks for the infomration i ill add him to my e-mail list and try to get more informattion from him. Oh, by the way Popular Mechanics has been debunked many times and long ago, also they are not a investigating agency for 9/11.

As shown by the map i posted there were 2 debris fields.

Please check the location of the debis fields and the wind direction for that day.



[edit on 3-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


I asked you to look into the expert. Who cares who the messenger is.

You showed a map with two circles. Ok. A drawing of a map with 2 circles.

Who drew it?



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
I asked you to look into the expert. Who cares who the messenger is.


I have lookd into experts (something beside the debunked Popular Mechanics)



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Please list the name of the expert in airplane disasters that states that the engine on flight 93 should not have ended up where it did.

Thank you.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   
wow. i know this is slightly off topic but it relates,i cannot help but notice that ever since we heard that throatyogurt is NOT a full time debunker because he only posts between 8pm and 10pm...he has been here 24/7. no how can i trust anything else from someone like that.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by re22666
 


not slightly... it is off topic. Further attempts at derailing will be reported.

Do you have anything to add to this thread? We are discussing flight 93 still.

Thank you for your contributions.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ThroatYogurt
 



it is on topic in that the discussion was held here and it stands to your credibility, sir. with all due respect, if you have that conversation here, and you state something is the truth, then blatantly prove it a lie, then what good is any other word that you say. as i have said, i contributed, directly to you. i am still waiting for you to answer my questions. in the mean time, if i see cracks in the story, i will point them out. i believe it is also against the t&c to knowing post lies isnt it?



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by re22666
[i believe it is also against the t&c to knowing post lies isnt it?


Funny coming from someone i have never seen post anything useful to any threads on this forum.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by re22666
 


1 - link me to the questions i didn't answer

this has been asked of you several times.

2- Show where I posted a lie.

I explained to you how I was able to post more frequently on another thread. Not that it's ANY of your business.

Now stop derailing and get on topic.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by re22666
 


1 - link me to the questions i didn't answer

this has been asked of you several times.

2- Show where I posted a lie.

I explained to you how I was able to post more frequently on another thread. Not that it's ANY of your business.

Now stop derailing and get on topic.



do you want me to stop derailing or respond to this post?



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by re22666
 


you stated that I did not answer your questions on this thread? If so, please point them out. I told you yesterday I am not searching for your inquiries.

Off topic by calling me a liar... but those are strong accusations. I won't let you talk crap about me and not be allowed to defend myself. Back it up.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by re22666
 


you stated that I did not answer your questions on this thread? If so, please point them out. I told you yesterday I am not searching for your inquiries.

Off topic by calling me a liar... but those are strong accusations. I won't let you talk crap about me and not be allowed to defend myself. Back it up.


i am sorry that you can neither remember what you say, nor the questions you run from. i told you i will not flip back a few pages for you. you can do it. and when someone says that you are here 24/7 (full time) and you respond that you are only here 2 hours a night, 5 days a week and that is it, yet the very next day your posts span the entire day. and again and again. so you finally got around that firewall at work. what about the weekends you never post on though? you said you are not here 24/7. anyone that looks at your timestamps can see you are a liar. you ducked my questions on 3 seperate threads. now you want me to hand them to you again? sorry but you have proven yourself to me to be untrustworthy so i could care less. but, if you are going to pretend to state facts, i will point out that you are a very misleading person. you can keep your answers.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join