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.

 

Shanksville Deconstructed - Part Two...

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey





The crash report for this.

M-kay?




posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
The crash report for this.

The alleged crash crater in Shanksville will do fine, Joey.

Please show us the official government crash report dats for the crater and the immediate surrounding areas.

Admitting that there isn't a report actually weakens your position even further.

Why wouldn't there be a thorough report for one of the biggest alleged crimes - ever - on US soil?

Come on, Joey. The forum is waiting for you to stumble over your next answer...

[edit on 20-10-2009 by tezzajw]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
The crash report for this.

M-kay?



Originally posted by Rewey
Nope. I'm not playing that game. I outlined very clearly above where the photo came from, and all the information which was provided with it. If it's good enough for 'OS' supporters to raise and refer to, then suffice to say there should be no qualms about me doing the same. If you want it that bad, go and ask your 'OS' buddies for it. That's where the photo came from.


M-kay?



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Let me get this straight. You claim that from the photo in the OP, you can’t tell the direction the plane was moving, and refuse to address it without seeing the official crash report.

Hmmm… let’s consider some of your other posts. In this one you state that simply from a photo you can determine the age of the crater AND the compaction level of the soil.


Originally posted by Joey Canoli
It's obviously fresh, since the soil inside the crater appears loose and friable. Not hard and compacted on the surface from rains like if the crater had been there for a while.


Then in this post, you make it quite clear that you can discern the direction of the plane from the photo. IMPORANTLY, you also specifically note that the location of the debris is ‘testimony to the k[inetic] e[nergy] direction’.


Originally posted by Joey Canoli
This assymetrical crater supports the "os". The plane came down from the right at ~40 degrees, and the kinetic energy "blew out" the left side... The dirt piled to the left, circled in pink, also is testimony to the ke direction.


Yet now, from the photo in the OP, you refuse to speculate unless someone provides you with the official crash report?

Tell me – did you refer to the ‘official crash report’ for these other two comments with regards to Flight 93? If so, there’s a whooooole bunch of people here on ATS who would like a copy of that report. Can you provide a link to it?

You would claim that such a person was LYING, and their credibility was shot (all your words from Part One). Others here would say that you’re trying to dodge and duck what is being asked.

I’ll merely say that I think you’re being subjective – your bias towards the ‘official story’ means you’re only seeing what you want to see. Or you'll simply repeatedly ask for information that no-one has access to, and hold that up as a grand flaw in the argument, rather than simply addressing what it being raised.

I’ll tell you what. You put your hand up and admit to the forum that you can’t work out the photo posted in the OP, and we’ll walk through it with you step by step.

Rewey


[edit on 21-10-2009 by Rewey]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by wholetruth

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Rewey
 


The "plane" stopped existing as a single entity the moment the nose made contact with the earth. At that moment the plane began a process of catastrophic deconstruction with each element acting on its own course. That is why there is no discernible forward movement of the "plane", just plane fragments.


so you're saying once the planes nose touched the ground the whole plane shattered into millions of little unrecognizable pieces including the landing gears and rows of seats as if they were made of glass?


Pretty much. Maybe not seat cushions, or some of the larger parts, but yes, almost as if they were made of glass. Don't forget that plane went from 550 mph to zero in a fraction of a second.


rows of seats and landing gears and tires and engines didn't shatter like glass as soon as the nose touched and vaporized. i suppose you're free to believe whatever you choose in this world but there is no precedent for this especially when the fbi claims to have recovered over 90% of the plane from the 10 foot deep crater.

the plane didn't go 550mph into anything.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Maybe you should check your directions.


i have.

many times over.

the plane was coming out of the northwest and was heading southeast. indian lake is southeast of the crater. new baltimore is southeast of the crater.

the blast trajectory is west of the crater. there is not one single piece of debris on the east or southeast side of the crater. not one.

theres no trail to indian lake or new baltimore from the crater.

the blast trajectory is the opposite direction of these 2 locations.

this is not possible.

the plane is not responsible for the explosion or the crater.

if you have evidence that contradicts the plane was coming out of the northwest and heading southeast please present it to us all.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:30 AM
link   
reply to post by wholetruth
 


This might help, wholetruth...



Rewey



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   




ahhh yes the pop mechs disinfo which is inconsistent with all eyewitness accounts and even government supplied data.

if they said the plane was the wind line then they would be telling the truth.

p.s. val mcclatchey actually heard the plane go the opposite of what was in that pic as it continued on to indian lake. this is corroborated through all the accounts of people at indian lake hearing a plane fly over prior to the explosion and jim stop in the tribune review who was fishing in the lake and saw it fly over head.

in loose change final cut mayor barry lichty also confirms that the plane was coming from the crash site and not heading to it although he doesn't believe it was flight 93. still there remains no other possibility.

thanks for the pic!

notice how indian lake is the opposite direction of the blast trajectory?



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:40 AM
link   
One thing that I find strange about the whole crash sequence is that if you compare the CVR with the last seconds of the flight whats being recorded doesn't exactly fit whats happening with the plane(being rolled upside down, and nose dived).

Especially, the last thing recorded by the CVR a American voice calmly instructing to "pull it up".



Hoglan said the hijackers inside the cockpit are heard yelling "No!" at the sound of breaking glass — presumably from the food cart — and that the final spoken words on the recorder seemed to be an inexplicably calm voice in English instructing, "Pull it up." She said the English voice toward the end of the recording was so distinct that she believes it's evident the speaker was inside the cockpit.


www.foxnews.com...\

Why this last statement is not on the CVR transcript and the fact that they still have not released the audio may be more proof that its true.

The family members who heard the tape say they believe that this was proof that the passengers(along with a few other things) had also made it back into the cockpit and had actually attempted to regain control of the doomed aircraft.

My thing is if the plane is upside down, everyone would have been on the roof of the jet correct? As it is barreling towards the earth and your watching , as the ground approaches ,are you really going to attempt to regain control of the plane. Is not one person going to scream in fear?



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey

Let me get this straight. You claim that from the photo in the OP, you can’t tell the direction the plane was moving, and refuse to address it without seeing the official crash report.



I want to see if they have the roll angle on the wings AND direction.

Cuz I think you're wrong about the fuselage/nose gouging out the slash. IMHO, I believe it's the wings.

Without any info, we have nothing but opinions. You're saying that you're comfortable with that?

Doesn't that go against what you said in your OP? Namely, to give backup to your claims, do honest discussion, no bickering, etc.

Without it, you've gone against the OP.

Man up.

ETA: I don't see that photo in the previous thread.

[edit on 21-10-2009 by Joey Canoli]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Man up.


Good to see you're using my terminology. My invitation for you to do the same in Part One still stands...

Rewey



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Without any info, we have nothing but opinions. You're saying that you're comfortable with that?

The point that you overlook, Joey is are you happy having no info?

Truthers have been crying for years that there is little information regarding some aspects of 9/11.

You don't understand how illogical it is for you to be asking if people are happy with no info!

As an official government story believer, you should be able to provide the info about the Shanksville crater. Yet, you have not. Of course people are not happy having little info to work with.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Rewey
 


What are you talking about?

I already destroyed your OP in that thread,along with any shred of credibility you might have with the rational.

I has a post with several photos in it that you avoided responding to. That's because you realize it shows your delusional thinking yet again.

The heading, roll angle, pitch angle, speed for 93 is available. You used it, so it's there. That's all that is needed for THIS thread to annhilate you in this thread also.

Your avoidance to supply any info for the crash photo in THIS thread proves that you realize that you got destroyed by myself, waypasvne, and several others.

And so now you're hiding.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. So continue hiding where it can't get to you.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
reply to post by Rewey
 

What are you talking about?

I already destroyed your OP in that thread,along with any shred of credibility you might have with the rational.


Wow. All I can say is wow. THAT'S your idea of 'destroying' someone's thread???

After numerous posts of being too scared to present an opinion of your own, you finally provide your own opinion, which differs from my opinion, and has ABSOLUTELY no basis in fact or evidence to support it, and you 'destroy' my thread???

How very narcissistic of you (look it up, Joey).


Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Your avoidance to supply any info for the crash photo in THIS thread proves that you realize that you got destroyed by myself, waypasvne, and several others.


What the??? For the THIRD time, I've pointed out where the photo came from, and all the information that was provided by your 'OS' supporting buddies.

Do you not get the irony that THEY are entitled to introduce the photo to the forums and use it as a comparison, but as soon as I do, you rant and rave about hiding and being destroyed?

It's like the video waytpastvne posted in Part One. He posted it to show how fuel can be thrown from a crashing plane, pointing out a similar angle of impact.

But I'll bet if I point out that at the end of the video, there are HUGE pieces of wreckage left with people walking around it, you'd want me to provide more info about where the video was from, where the crash report is, and other nonsense.

And before you claim there was more wreckage because the plane was travelling slower than Flight 93, remember you're basing that opinion on this comment:


Originally posted by waypastvne
I would estimate the speed of this crash in the 300 mph area.


Well, I guess that's evidence now, is it? You have stated numerous times that without crash reports or data or evidence, opinions are completely baseless.

However, unlike you, I have great respect for waypastvne as he actually puts himself out there and contributes with estimations of his own. This is how adults discuss and debate. Put an opinion out there, see what everyone thinks.

He doesn't just sit there crying about other people having an opinion that doesn't agree with yours. We can talk later - I think I hear your mum calling you...

Rewey



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
ETA: I don't see that photo in the previous thread.



Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Keep up



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Here's a clip of that wreckage from waypastvne's video, Joey. See any wreckage like this at Shanksville?



I know, I know... I don't have the crash report.

I know, I know... waypastvne estimates that the plane was going slower.

I know, I know... the Shanksville ground was very soft.

Strike the photo from the record. Man... I hate being 'destroyed' by Joey...

Rew

[edit on 21-10-2009 by Rewey]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey
Strike the photo from the record. Man... I hate being 'destroyed' by Joey...

Joey serves a useful purpose to bump your threads with his illogical statements about the Shanksville crater.

The more bumps you get, the more exposure you receive.

I just wish that Joey would hurry up with that official government story crash data that he was going to provide for the story he believes.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey

In other words, this (and all of the other plane crashes in the archive link above) shows a crater which is PARALLEL with the direction the plane was traveling in.


And that would beeeeeee?

The jet in the video didn't show that. Does this make you a liar, or just wrong?



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey

you finally provide your own opinion, which differs from my opinion, and has ABSOLUTELY no basis in fact or evidence to support it,


this is evidence that the grass wasn't undistirbed.

The rational understand this to be true.




posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey

However, as this photo was originally brought into the 9/11 debate by an ‘Official Story’ supporter,



Where.

In what thread?

By who?



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join