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.

 

Did Flight 93 Have Wings? Nope, No plane Crashed In Shankville.

page: 6
8
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



You forgot "....... claims the plane shrank and lost its wings on impact vaporizing the jet full and leaving a small shallow crater." as you stated in the other thread. Keep your stories together man, it makes you look more credible.


Link?




posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 



This next photo IS NOT FLIGHT 93 but an Iranian plane crash that recently happened. The Iran plane crash was very close to the offical events that cause the small 10-30 foot crater in Shanksvile. i.e Terrain, speed, and size of craft.
Here is the Shanksville crater. Now proven NOT to have been caused by a Boeing 757 a.k.a Flight 93 as even a child can see.


Hooper we have proven and you have agreed that the ditches on either side of the oblong crater was not caused by any plane crash and was present before 911. So therefor there is a small crater way too small to have been caused by a commercial airliner. Hopper said the wings broke off vaporizing the fuel. If I missed something please clarify.
edit on 24-1-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Hooper we have proven

To yourself and that doesn't really count.

and you have agreed that the ditches on either side of the oblong crater was not caused by any plane crash and was present before 911.

I agreed to that?????? When????

So therefor there is a small crater way too small to have been caused by a commercial airliner.

Why? Forget all that stuff above that you think I agreed to, but what physical formula dictates that the impact crater must be at least the same size of the plane?

Hopper said the wings broke off vaporizing the fuel. If I missed something please clarify

Yeah, you missed the part where I asked you to provide a link to all of these quotes I supposedly made.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
You have failed still to explain what caused that very small 40 foot 10-15 deep hole.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
You have failed still to explain what caused that very small 40 foot 10-15 deep hole.


You've attributed statements to me that I don't remember making, Please provide links or retract your statements.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
You have failed still to explain what caused that very small 40 foot 10-15 deep hole.


You've attributed statements to me that I don't remember making, Please provide links or retract your statements.


Explain how a 124+ foot aircraft can leave a crater smaller than 30 feet and shallower than 16 feet.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Explain how a 124+ foot aircraft can leave a crater smaller than 30 feet and shallower than 16 feet.


Exactly how is the above an appropriate response to a request for appropriate attribution?

C'mon you said that I stated the plane shrank. Maybe I did, I don't remember, please help me.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Thats what i thought hooper. You have no knowledge or common sense in regards to these topics. Therefore you should cease trolling and insulting people here if you cant debate in a non childish manner. I think people give you too much credit.

The crater in Shanksville was measured to less than 16 feet deep and less than 31 feet wide. 1. So how can (other than in your closed mind) explain how something as large as a Boeing 757 cause a crater only 30 feet wide when a plane is over 123 feet wide? 2. If the plane was inverted and had wings consitant with a Boeing 757, how come none of these essential components in an airplane did not strike the ground. All the evidence shows that the crater was not caused by a Boeing 757.

We have been down this road before Hooper, Deny, ignore deny ignore but understand that most people here deny and ignore you for you have not learned anything in the 4+ years you have trolled here.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



We have been down this road before Hooper, Deny, ignore deny ignore but understand that most people here deny and ignore you for you have not learned anything in the 4+ years you have trolled here.


And when are you going to direct me to where I made the statements that you attribute to me?

Also, I have been a member since 9-2-2009. It is now 2011. Thats not quite two years. Or in your math 4+. No wonder you are so easily confounded with simple physics.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


I saw a plane crash in my town - hit ground going 350 mph at 80 deg . Did not leave a crater



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


I saw a plane crash in my town - hit ground going 350 mph at 80 deg . Did not leave a crater

Ya but i bet it left a trench but years ago I saw one 1/4 the size stall at 800 feet and it left a crater twice as big as the shanksville crater. Similar soil composition as the shanksville crater too.

1. Eyewitnesses do not describe a boeing 757. Witness saw something "no bigger than her van" crash.

2. The crater was measured to be less than an estimated 30 feet and a depth (at center) if only 10-15 feet deep.
Boeing 757 is 155 ft long and 125ft wingtip to wingtip, it weighed 115,680 kg, The vertical stablilzer was is 44ft tall from the ground.

. Those are facts. If there is a debate over the size of the hole than show some official calculations. I understand they claim to have dug over 50 feet deep to retrieve all missile err umm plane fragments but thats beside the points.
edit on 1-2-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



1. Eyewitnesses do not describe a boeing 757.

Thats a cute little bit of parsing. Why would they describe a 757 anyway? It was a Boeing 757-222, so unless someone specifically states they saw a 757-222 then I guess we can just dismiss all those statements.

Witness saw something "no bigger than her van" crash.

She did? She saw it crash? Into the ground? Link please!

2. The crater was measured to be less than an estimated 30 feet and a depth (at center) if only 10-15 feet deep.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!! The crater was MEASURED to be ESTIMATED!!!!!!




top topics



 
8
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join