20 9/11 Questions Remain Unanswered over 8 Years Later

page: 5
79
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
[edit on 25-10-2009 by Nutter]




posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

How did the aircraft have eight miles to come apart if it crashed in the strip mine in Shanksville?

Please notice that the alleged 'found' engine in the pond would presumably be in the direction of flight, and yet the alleged debris fields are not in the direction of flight.


I'm not noting anything on your behalf.
I'll do all the explaining you want when you can expain to me how a engine becomes dislodged 2 miles away from a crash site. Remember, the official explanation is that the passengers fought for control of this flight and that's why it crashed.

So please be my guest to explain to the audience how an engine is found 2 miles away from a plane that allegedly nose dived into the ground of a heavily wooded area.


As to your flight paths, you can speculate all you want on that one. Who knows for sure? But I do know that a plane does not disintegrate in midair just because there's a scuffle on board. But it will sure as hell disintegrate if a....... Missile hits it!!!



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by 3DPrisoner
 


Umm, the engine piece you are referring to, was found about 900 feet from the crash site. Not two miles.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by 3DPrisoner
 


Umm, the engine piece you are referring to, was found about 900 feet from the crash site. Not two miles.

Can you please provide photographic evidence of that claim?



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


i would like to see that evidence too. can you provide it swampy?



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Attention Please....

The word/term "TRUTHER" is an acceptable idiom.

However the bastardization of the word "Truther" is an insult and from here on will be treated as such.

I am not going to go back and take any action on past offenses, but any future instances and action will be taken.

Thank you

Semper



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by bsbray11
 


6) What allowed WTC7 to accelerate vertically at the rate of free-fall in a vacuum?

Please substantiate the free fall in a vaccum claim.

I guess Dr. Sunder saying so doesn't count? Or do you NOT believe the NIST anymore?


In all fairness to hooper, I don't think he actually read the OP, but just skimmed the big bold sentences. I had already provided sources for both of the things for which he requested a source before he even posted.

As anyone can find on the first page of the thread, the source for WTC7 accelerating at the rate of gravity is now NIST (previously it was measured by all number of independent researchers online, including ATS member "WeComeInPeace," demonstrating the same thing). The sources for Flight 93 being spread out over 8 miles were also provided in the OP but hooper missed that as well.


Still no "debunker" has attempted to "refute" any of the 20 unanswered questions....

[edit on 25-10-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911
Can you please provide photographic evidence of that claim?


Nope, I can't because I should have said 1/5 of a mile through densely wooded area, not 2miles. Typo on my part.


[edit on 25-10-2009 by 3DPrisoner]



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Please substantiate the free fall in a vaccum claim.

If you ever decide to read the NIST report, you'll see where NIST plot a scatterplot, then use regression to show that for 2.25 seconds, early in the collapse sequence, the building falls with an acceleration equal to gravity.

Please post here after you have read the report with your independent findings that confirm free-fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
If you ever decide to read the NIST report, you'll see where NIST plot a scatterplot, then use regression to show that for 2.25 seconds, early in the collapse sequence, the building falls with an acceleration equal to gravity.


This is also equal to an object accelerating in a vacuum, ie 32.2 ft./s^2 in US measurements. Again, it's in the report.

I'm not here to tell anyone how it is even possible for a building to accelerate into itself without so much as air resistance, because I honestly do not know the answer to that. All I am here to say, is that's what the data shows, and it is a very obvious and simple proof that the buildings own PE/KE was not being converted to other forms of energy, as per very, very basic laws of conservation of energy.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   

posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by 3DPrisoner
 


Umm, the engine piece you are referring to, was found about 900 feet from the crash site. Not two miles.


posted by ATH911

Can you please provide photographic evidence of that claim?


posted by 3DPrisoner

Nope, I can't because I should have said 1/5 of a mile through densely wooded area, not 2miles. Typo on my part.



How come nothing you guys claim ever adds up?

In this article from the September 14th 2001 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, State police Major Lyle Szupinka said searchers found one of the large engines from the aircraft "at a considerable distance from the crash site." and "It appears to be the whole engine," he added.

He was just previously discussing the pond, yet he did not say the whole engine was found in the pond. Anybody seen a photo of a whole engine from Shanksville?

Now 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY defenders also claim this 2nd alleged engine piece was also found at the alleged crash site buried just below the surface in the plane swallowing crater.



So perhaps this incomplete engine piece was originally planted in the pond from the truck which hauled it in, and then the 9-11 cover-up crew having second thoughts, moved the engine piece to the alleged plane swallowing crater with the backhoe. Or perhaps the backhoe operator moved the prepped engine piece directly from the truck to the plane swallowing crater for photo ops?



Crowley said the FBI and NTSB have not determined whether a bomb exploded inside the aircraft before it crashed. Residents of nearby Indian Lake reported seeing debris falling from the jetliner as it overflew the area shortly before crashing.

State police Maj. Lyle Szupinka said investigators also will be searching a pond behind the crash site looking for the other recorder and other debris. If necessary, divers may be brought in to assist search teams, or the pond may be
drained, he said.

Szupinka said searchers found one of the large engines from the aircraft "at a considerable distance from the crash site."

"It appears to be the whole engine," he added.

Szupinka said most of the remaining debris, scattered over a perimeter that stretches for several miles, are in pieces no bigger than a "briefcase."

"If you were to go down there, you wouldn't know that was a plane crash," he continued. "You would look around and say, `I wonder what happened here?' The first impression looking around you wouldn't say, `Oh, looks like a plane crash. The debris is very, very small.

"The best I can describe it is if you've ever been to a commercial landfill. When it's covered and you have papers flying around. You have papers blowing around and bits and pieces of shredded metal. That's probably about the best way
to describe that scene itself."

Tribune-Review staff writer Jason Togyer and The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Source (cached)


It seems strange that the alleged black boxes were found at 15 feet and 25 feet deep, but this heavy engine piece impacting at an alleged 500 knots was found near the surface? No I say the backhoe placed it there from the truck it was hauled in on.

Also it seems curious that Indian Lake residents reported debris falling from the aircraft because officially Flight 93 never flew over Indian Lake. It allegedly crashed into the plane swallowing crater 2 miles short of Indian Lake. Something certainly stinks about this wild fantasy tale.

Official 9-11 Whitewash Commission Flight 93 flight path graphic

Please notice that the alleged 'found' engine in the pond would presumably be in the direction of flight, and yet the alleged debris fields are not in the direction of flight.



And this alleged Flight 93 fuselage piece certainly looks larger than a "briefcase". Perhaps this piece arrived after State police Major Lyle Szupinka made his inspection of the alleged Flight 93 crash area.



Anybody else having trouble believing this poorly written official Flight 93 script?

United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash According to ATC Radar



posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


I agree SPreston, it looks like the 911 commission, and the FBI can’t keep their lies straight. I cant wait for enough people to wake up and realize they have been hoodwinked. Then perhaps we will see some real justice.



United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar

04/28/09 (PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Recently it has been brought to our attention that Air Traffic Control (ATC) transcripts reveal United 93 as being airborne after it's alleged crash. Similar scenarios have been offered with regard to American 77 and American 11 showing an aircraft target continuing past its alleged crash point in the case of American 11, or past the turn-around point in the case of American 77. However, both these issues can be easily explained by "Coast Mode" radar tracking. This is not the case with United 93.


pilotsfor911truth.org...



[edit on 26-10-2009 by impressme]



posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by hooper
Please substantiate the free fall in a vaccum claim.

If you ever decide to read the NIST report, you'll see where NIST plot a scatterplot, then use regression to show that for 2.25 seconds, early in the collapse sequence, the building falls with an acceleration equal to gravity.

Please post here after you have read the report with your independent findings that confirm free-fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds.


We already know that the internal collapse within WTC 7 started 6+ seconds before the facade began to collapse. We also know that there was a 2.25 second free fall period in the middle of the facade collapse, preceded and followed by slower than free fall speeds.


The approach taken by NIST is summarized in Section 3.6 of the final summary report, NCSTAR 1A (released Nov. 20, 2008; available at wtc.nist.gov...) and detailed in Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at wtc.nist.gov...).

The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:

* Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
* Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
* Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

www.nist.gov...


There is nothing suspicious here, as Truthers want us to believe there is.

This only points out that the validity of Truther questions is always suspect and twisted in such a way to imply something is "suspect" or "unexplained." It only works with other Truthers, not with those of us who actually are skeptics and insist that Truther "questions" be based on truthful and accurate facts. As we see once again, there is no validity to the "question."



posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by SPreston
 


I agree SPreston, it looks like the 911 commission, and the FBI can’t keep their lies straight. I cant wait for enough people to wake up and realize they have been hoodwinked. Then perhaps we will see some real justice.


How will you do that when the 9/11 Truth Movement has been sleep-walking for 8 years, unable to convince anyone of anything?

Just what do you intend to do, finally?



posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Now isn't this a bit of a ridiculous request? A picture showing the fan (thats what it was, a large section of the fan of the engine) 900 feet away....I mean, do you want a state trooper holding a tape meaure next to it that says 900 feet? Because there is absolutely no way to judge that in a photo. So for PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence, there is none. There are only the statements from the evil government employees....and I know you won't accept those.



posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   

posted by impressme
reply to post by SPreston
 


I agree SPreston, it looks like the 911 commission, and the FBI can’t keep their lies straight. I cant wait for enough people to wake up and realize they have been hoodwinked. Then perhaps we will see some real justice.



United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar

04/28/09 (PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Recently it has been brought to our attention that Air Traffic Control (ATC) transcripts reveal United 93 as being airborne after it's alleged crash. Similar scenarios have been offered with regard to American 77 and American 11 showing an aircraft target continuing past its alleged crash point in the case of American 11, or past the turn-around point in the case of American 77. However, both these issues can be easily explained by "Coast Mode" radar tracking. This is not the case with United 93.


pilotsfor911truth.org...



If the Indian Lake residents were factual about an aircraft dropping debris onto Indian Lake south of the alleged aircraft swallowing crater, then what aircraft was dropping that debris since officially Flight 93 never went closer to Indian Lake than the aircraft swallowing crater? Was it a C-130 flying up from the Pentagon dropping the aircraft debris or perhaps some other military aircraft? Perhaps the C-130 dropped some aircraft debris at the Pentagon, and then hustled up to Shanksville to drop the rest of the aircraft debris?



Crowley said the FBI and NTSB have not determined whether a bomb exploded inside the aircraft before it crashed. Residents of nearby Indian Lake reported seeing debris falling from the jetliner as it overflew the area shortly before crashing.

Tribune-Review staff writer Jason Togyer and The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Source (cached)


Could a 9 to 12 mph northwest wind blow light aircraft debris 2 and 8 miles almost immediately? Winds of 9 to 12 mph are not exactly hurricane force winds are they?


posted by SPreston

Also it seems curious that Indian Lake residents reported debris falling from the aircraft because officially Flight 93 never flew over Indian Lake. It allegedly crashed into the plane swallowing crater 2 miles short of Indian Lake. Something certainly stinks about this wild fantasy tale.

Official 9-11 Whitewash Commission Flight 93 flight path graphic

Please notice that the alleged 'found' engine in the pond would presumably be in the direction of flight, and yet the alleged debris fields are not in the direction of flight.



Anybody else having trouble believing this poorly written official Flight 93 script?

United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash According to ATC Radar


A graphic from the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY Popular Mechanics GURUS and official Military Industrial Complex representatives.



Source

[edit on 10/26/09 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics

top topics



 
79
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join