Flight 93: Lets talk about (HOW) what you actually think hit it...

Forget arguing over why someone else is wrong about what they think made that crater, how about HOW what you think hit there actually did it. What made that debris?! HOW?! Too much talk about what else is wrong, lets talk about what is right. Something did that... but WHAT?

Please attempt to explain it. With all the different stuff about the towers, and the Pnetagon, you'd think Shanksvillle would be fool-proof. The amazing thing is it just could be the most debatable. But all the videos I've seen from both sides they each attempt to debunk the conventional wisdom of the other side, yet both fail to actually reasonably explain the actual logistics of their idea of how it happened.

It's a mindjob, I can see where the lack of anything resembling other plane crash sites, while at the same time how did all that debis get to where the disturbance etc is?

EDIT: I hadn't properly explained my actual question.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

The plane Lee Purbagh saw flying 50 feet over his head was lining up to drop some kind of bomb on an existing water ditch, similar to the one seen in that 1994 aerial that looked like wing scars.

The evidence this plane dropped something on the existing water trench was because:

1) It was flying much much lower than the official flight path (Lee described about 50 feet over his head only about 400 yards from the crater).

2) The plane was flying upright because Lee, a Navy vet, never mentioned it flying upside down which the official version claim Flight 93 was upside down right before it crashed.

3) Lee described the plane rocking it's wings up and down which is what you'd expect for a plane to do that was lining up to make an accurate drop of a bomb. If it was a 757 going upside down at 550+ mph, there wouldn't be enough time for a large plane going that fast to rock its wing up and down in the 400 yards it had left until it crashed -- not to mention physically impossible.

4) Lee also mentioned that it dropped all of a sudden when it reached the crater area which I believe he was actually describing the dropping of whatever that smaller plane dropped on the water ditch because it would be impossible for a long upside down 757 to drop all of a sudden if it was only 50 feet above ground at 400 yards away from the alleged impact point.

5) It left only a 10 foot deep crater. If a 757 crashed at 45 deg and burrowed deep into the ground as the official story states, there would be a deep 45 deg angle hole in the ground, not a shallow crater.

6) The amount of dirt that was pushed up out of the ground looks the same to fill the crater back up level. There would be a large mountainous hump if you pushed the dirt back over the hole if a 100 ton 757 was buried under it. If the dirt was really so soft that a 757 could penetrate deep down through it, you wouldn't have a small patch of dirt just pushed to the side. The soft ground would have been torn up so bad (remember it supposedly hit at a 45 deg angle) the ejected dirt would have been violently ejected outward and scattered in a huge fan shaped pattern with a GIANT HOLE left in the ground. Not a shallow crater.

7) Hardly any grass fires around the crater (I think there was one camp-size fire in the grass) and no raging forest fire when first people arrived (Flight 93 was said to have over 5,000 gallons of fuel at the time of its alleged impact). First arrivals put the small fires mostly out with extinguishers before the only small non-foam fire truck arrived. Certain types of bombs wouldn't have caused much fire.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by ATH911]

reply to post by ATH911


Water Trench?

10' crater?

Camp fires?

All the plane buried?

You know if you didn't just make crap up it would be easier to understand. But that is your call.

Originally posted by ATH911

4) Lee also mentioned that it dropped all of a sudden when it reached the crater area which I believe he was actually describing the dropping of whatever that smaller plane dropped on the water ditch because it would be impossible for a long upside down 757 to drop all of a sudden if it was only 50 feet above ground at 400 yards away from the alleged impact point.

This is beyond dumb.

Bombing from less than 50' would destroy the airplane when it gets caught in the blast.

Ask Lee about that...

Originally posted by ATH911
The plane Lee Purbagh saw flying 50 feet over his head was lining up to drop some kind of bomb on an existing water ditch, similar to the one seen in that 1994 aerial that looked like wing scars.

Yeah, I have to agree with the others. This explanation lacks even the basics of logic.

Originally posted by ATH911
The plane Lee Purbagh saw flying 50 feet over his head was lining up to drop some kind of bomb...

This is what I'm talking about, not all that other stuff. WHAT kind of bomb? Did they engineer a special bunker buster / MOAB filled with all that debris?? There were actually plane parts there. There was debris. There were witnesses to a plane.

But on the other hand the part where debris was found in that lake miles away doesnt make sense either. So the moab was powerful enough to launch it into the airstream? Well if the moab had high explosives inside it with the debris this would increase the odds of weak debris being vaporized, which these over the top planners would have considered. But even if we were to entertain the idea of a bomb launching the debris upward, we now might as well discuss the planes energy being able to.

While I do have problems with the idea of that hole being the whole story, on the other hand if it were shot midair I would assume that'd increase the odds of plane parts everywhere.

So I've never been convinced any one idea is right, but something has to be right... but I'd say CT side also has the problem of trying to explain WHAT or HOW that debris ended up in the lake, not that it DID as some sort of proof against the OV.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

But on the other hand the part where debris was found in that lake miles away doesnt make sense either.

It's not without precedent.

www.ntsb.gov...

Several light-weight items (for example, pieces of interior insulation and a passenger
business card) were discovered as far as 2½ miles east-northeast of the main wreckage;
these items exhibited soot and smoke damage. One witness stated that he heard the sound
of the crash while he was playing golf about 2 miles east-northeast of the accident site;
about 2 minutes later, he observed blackened insulation falling onto the golf course.

Originally posted by hooper
Water Trench?

Yes...

"Other photos taken at the scene by Miller show a small furrow, like a hand-dug drainage ditch, running back from the crater. This was the mark left by a wing." - theage.com.au

10' crater?

Yes...

"The crash impact left a crater estimated to be 10-feet deep and 20-feet wide." - pittsburgh.com

Camp fires?

Yes, about the size of the biggest fire seen on the ground at the alleged crash spot. If you can find footage showing a fire larger than a camp-sized fire, please post.

All the plane buried?

Quit playing stupid. You very well know what I meant.

You know if you didn't just make crap up it would be easier to understand. But that is your call.

Stop lying that I'm making stuff up. Your credibility gets shot when you lie like that.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by ATH911]

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
This is beyond dumb.

Bombing from less than 50' would destroy the airplane when it gets caught in the blast.

Ask Lee about that...

You're dumb if you think all bombs behave the same way, or explode the same size.

You are also dumb if you think an upside down 757 can behave like a rightside up smaller agile plane rocking its wings up and down lining up for something as Lee describes. Or is Lee a liar?

reply to post by ATH911


LIKE - like a..... You realize that is a simile, correct? He was saying it was like a ditch, not that it was a drainage ditch.

Estimated. That is another word similar to like.

Please look at the photos of the blackened woods - is that how you make a camp fire - one acre at a time?

You keep insisting that all of the plane was buried and then act astonished that all the plane was buried.

Originally posted by trebor451
Yeah, I have to agree with the others. This explanation lacks even the basics of logic.

But it fits the logic better of an upside down 757 flying over 550 mph?

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
WHAT kind of bomb? Did they engineer a special bunker buster / MOAB filled with all that debris??

I don't know. Let's check out their website.

how-we-pulled-off-911.gov...

There were actually plane parts there. There was debris.

So? Do you expect perps to stage a plane crash without planting debris? Think.

There were witnesses to a plane.

Like the high school kids that saw a FIGHTER plane seconds after the explosion -- consistent with my theory about the rightside up plane Lee saw flying very low over his head and rocking its wings as if it was lining up to drop something? Or the small white wingless aircraft people saw before and right after the explosion?

So the moab was powerful enough to launch it into the airstream?

Just a heads up, you sound really stupid when you take something I didn't say and you run with it.

While I do have problems with the idea of that hole being the whole story, on the other hand if it were shot midair I would assume that'd increase the odds of plane parts everywhere.

You also sound stupid when you bring up the shoot down theory I don't believe in.

I'd say CT side also has the problem of trying to explain WHAT or HOW that debris ended up in the lake

Many witnesses saw a plane exit past the lake. Maybe that plane was dumping debris? Not necessarily saying that happened, but would explain the one report of debris showering down on the lake.

"Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes after hearing the explosion that signaled the crash at 10:06 a.m. Tuesday." - post-gazette.com



[edit on 19-10-2009 by ATH911]

Originally posted by hooper
LIKE - like a..... You realize that is a simile, correct? He was saying it was like a ditch, not that it was a drainage ditch.

Very coincidentally that he's describing what is seen in that 1994 aerial, huh?

Estimated. That is another word similar to like.

OK know-it-all, how deep was the CRATER (not a hole) and how would you describe the depth of that CRATER if you don't like me describing it as shallow? Btw, why don't you like me describing it at shallow?

Please look at the photos of the blackened woods - is that how you make a camp fire - one acre at a time?

What part of "Hardly any grass fires around the crater (I think there was one camp-size fire in the grass)" did you not understand? God you're stupid.

You keep insisting that all of the plane was buried and then act astonished that all the plane was buried.

There you go lying AGAIN. I'm insisting that the official story claims most of the plane (80% to be exact) was buried and yes, I am astonished that much could be buried as you seem to be too as you keep fighting tooth and nail that officials never claimed most of the plane buried.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by ATH911]

Anyone want to know how they got all the personal belongings and DNA in this...Damn... what do you call a bomb that has plane parts, body parts, seat cushions, drivers licenses, credit cards, etc??

This is exactly what happens when someone makes an attempt at an alternative story on 911... It sounds silly.

Originally posted by ATH911
Or is Lee a liar?

No.

www.independent.co.uk...

"The fate of United Airlines Flight 93, the last of the four hijacked planes to go down in the United States on 11 September, holds no mystery for Lee Purbaugh. He saw what happened with his own eyes. He was the only person present in the field where, at 10.06am, the aircraft hit the ground.

"There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head – maybe 50ft up," says Purbaugh, who works at a scrapyard overlooking the crash site. "It was only a split second but it looked like it was moving in slow motion, like it took forever. I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived."


He saw the plane hit.

He never saw any bombs being dropped - that's your statement, not his.

Nor did he say that he believed that it was lining up for a bombing run - that's your statement, not his.

Nor did he make ANY statement about whether the plane was inverted - that's your statement, not his.

That would make you either a liar about what he actually said, or willfully ignorant.

And the rational here realize that there is an answer C) all of the above.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Joey Canoli]

Originally posted by ImAPepper
what do you call a bomb that has plane parts, body parts, seat cushions, drivers licenses, credit cards, etc??

One that IgnoranceIsntBlisss created out of his ass, because that's not was I was theorizing.

This is exactly what happens when someone makes an attempt at an alternative story on 911... It sounds silly.

No, it's exactly what happens when a ignorant skeptics makes an attempt at an alternative version of what a truther said ... It sounds stupid.

reply to post by ATH911



Well, there you go with the "the official story states" and yet you kind find no reference to an official statement.

The crater is as shown in the photos, I do not have dimensions, neither do you.

Why are you obsessed with just selected areas of grass that were not burnt when there is a whole area of blackened woods right by the crater?

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
He saw the plane hit.

What kind of plane?

He never saw any bombs being dropped - that's your statement, not his.
Nor did he say that he believed that it was lining up for a bombing run - that's your statement, not his.
That would make you either a liar about what he actually said, or willfully ignorant.

I never said it was his statements. Can't you read?

Nor did he make ANY statement about whether the plane was inverted - that's your statement, not his.

So the plane he saw was rightside up?


His testimony fits my theorize very well. Now make it try to fit the officials story if you scoff that it fits mine.

Originally posted by hooper
Well, there you go with the "the official story states" and yet you kind find no reference to an official statement.

I've shown you. You're just too dumb to remember obviously.

Don't bother responding to me anymore. I'm putting you on ignore because you are a worthless troll.

shanksville was a preplanned event which had as much time and preparation put into it as the pentagon and the towers.

the little white plane eyewitnesses describe being there after flight 93 flew over is responsible for the explosion. whether it fired a missile into a drainage ditch or not i am not sure of since there is not any witness to what really happened there other than purbaugh. purbaugh started the day before and is ex-military and just happened to be the only person outside at that time and the only eyewitness who allegedly saw a 757 impact the ground.

obviously his credibility is questionable due to his past ties and suspicious hire date.

since many witnesses said they heard flight 93 or saw flight 93 fly over indian lake it is obvious mr. purbaugh isn't being 100% honest.