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.
Originally posted by ATH911
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by titorite
Someone challenged, up above, to prove UAL 93 crashed at Shanksville.
No, it's Prove that bulk of UA93 buried itself into the ground.
Maybe you can be the first skeptic to prove this extraordinary official claim.
[edit on 23-6-2009 by ATH911]
There is this extraordinary claim floating around that the bulk of the airplane at Shanksville buried itself into the ground which means it would be resting under the shallow crater in this field:
posted on 13-6-2009 @ 05:10 PM by Reheat
The bulk of the airplane at Shanksville buried itself into the ground, but there were also plenty of small pieces scattered over the general area of the crash site.
Originally posted by ATH911
Let me repost the OP again because apparently some skeptics can't read very well:
There is this extraordinary claim floating around that the bulk of the airplane at Shanksville buried itself into the ground which means it would be resting under the shallow crater in this field:
I also linked to who was floating around this thread:
posted on 13-6-2009 @ 05:10 PM by Reheat
The bulk of the airplane at Shanksville buried itself into the ground, but there were also plenty of small pieces scattered over the general area of the crash site.
Originally posted by hooper
So know this is just an extraordinary claim made on an internet forum [by a skeptic], not an "official claim"
Originally posted by ATH911
Originally posted by hooper
So know this is just an extraordinary claim made on an internet forum [by a skeptic], not an "official claim"
For this thread for you, sure.
Is Reheat lying?
Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by hooper
Well every time you skeptics want to know if truther think some official or 9/11 witness is wrong, you ask us if they are lying.
So is skeptic Reheat wrong then?
Originally posted by CaptainAmerica2012
A Boeing 757 would displace tonnes of dirt which is not the case. There is dry unbroken grass in the drainage ditch. The "ditch was used as a target for the systems involved. The pictures are indicative of a bomb or missile crater.
Coincidentally there were war game exercises taking place over Shanksville on 911 that involved cruise missile interceptions and live fly hijackings.
The crater was most likely caused by a bomb or missile. Passive plane crash exercises and live fly hijacking are common and take place ever 1-2 years.
Believe me. This was handed down from a RCAF pilot friend. What a BRAT he has always been.
[edit on 21-10-2009 by CaptainAmerica2012]
Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by hooper
You do agree that if a 757 buried in Shanks that the amount of dirt ejected out of the ground would be more than it would take to fill back up that shallow crater, right?
Originally posted by hooper
Huh? I really don't follow you. Where are you going with this?
It has been proven that NO official of any government ever made any claim as to ratios or percentages of the plane debris that was EMBEDDED or scattered or ejected or consumed.
"Because where [Flight 93] hit the ground, IT LITERALLY WENT INTO THE GROUND! They had to excavate and try and recover what they could and this top picture shows the excavation that they did. They excavated down about 40-45ft and the last pieces were recovered at about 30-35ft."
Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
The wing scars were a drainage ditch similar to the one seen in that 1994 aerial photo. You can tell because the surface of the dirt is still sun-dried.