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.

 

Pennsylvania crash site coincidence?

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


I agree with you. I used that cannon reference and should not have. It was inappropiate and I can admit that. But we cannot forget the following:


The (NORAD) tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public."


That radically different story in my opinion is that it was shot down.




posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Please, mikelee, learn how to provide the links to your sources.

We will NOT listen to those ridiculous "sources", unless you provide reference to where they come from.

BECAUSE, the provenance of the source is IMPORTANT!!!!



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Please, Please to you also - Learn to get your own sources, why must we always do the work for you??

It don't matter if I linked to the 911 Commissioner's private library, you guys say its either out of context, not true or YOUR sources don't support it. I'm tired of the run around...sorry but thats how I feel. You guys never source anything here for us and I'm tired of doing for you all.

The MAJORITY of the time I do provide sources. If in the future I don't for whatever reason, USE THE INTERNET like I did!!

Lastly, why in the heck would you ask for a "source" for that when it explains itself clearly and states it is derived from the FDR of the flight?????

[edit on 24-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Hand-waving noted.

Pleaee comply.

(You are distracting, it would seem, whenever your argument weakens....sorry).



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Oh geez. Its self explanatory for God's sake! Look at it or ignore it, at this point I can care less.



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


....

.....USE THE INTERNET like I did!!


LOL!!!!!

THAT is MY point!!!!

Hint: WHEN you 'Google' something, take care to go deeper than the first page that displays....

...because, IF you don't understand just HOW Google works, then you will fall into the same trap that causes this mess in the first place.

And, please, don't just take my word for it....take time to ask araund, so you WILL understand (hopefully) HOW Google works, how any Internet search Engine works, and WHY you must dig deeper, and deeper....

...because, mike, I don't think you are getting it.

MANY, many of us who bother to attempt to refuet the nlonsense do so ONLY because we don't care to see the same LIES repeated, over and over again, ad infinitum....and those LIES are promoted by just about ANY 'truther' website you care to visit....just look, and pay particular attention to those that ASK FOR DONATIONS (or that sell stuff, same difference).

Get it yet?????

(or not....feel free, it IS a free World, a fool and his money are soon parted....)



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Wonder if the 1994 photo is real.
Then what would make the highly unusable mark in the land in PA.
Are the any more land marks like that.
Well the terror bomb in flight over Scotland made the same type of
impact grove.
So the mark is similar to that impact in Scotland.
That is undeniable.



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 



Wonder if the 1994 photo is real.


????

Well, then let's us, all of us QUESTION EVERY photo every taken, mmmmkay????

(Sheesh).....

BUT, to say this:


Well the terror bomb in flight over Scotland made the same type of impact grove.


Displays a terrible lack of comprehension of facts, at least as compared to Pan Am 103 in lockerbie, Scotland and United 93, in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

But, thanks for planying!!

BUZZZZZ!!!! You're out...next contenstant please!


So the mark is similar to that impact in Scotland.


NO. See above. ANYONE who has bothered to research can tell the difference, in SO MANY WAYS!!!!

It would HELP to actually do the studying, rather than relying on certan (baseless) websites to provide your 'opinions'....I mean, really, it isn't hard to tell the difference...



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 






The top two are from Lockerbee Scotland. The one below is Shanksville PA. They look NOTHING alike.




posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 



They look NOTHING alike.


AND there is a very good reason why, they look NOTHING alike, if you have been paying attention to the KINETIC ENERGIES involved.

BUT, and this is IMPORTANT!!!!!

Please pay attention!!!!!

mikelee, your assertion that the Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland airpalne crash remains NOT resembling the United 93 in Shansville, Pennsylvania is the IMPORTANT BIT!!!!!!

Pan Am 103 BROKE APART in flight, from a cruise altitude of OVER 30.000 feet, due to the bomb on board that EXPLODED, and caused substantial damage, due to its location, to cause the break up....

Pan Am 103 CVR AND FDR STOPPED!!!!! Let me say that again, they STOPPED recordig when the power was lost, due to the explosion!!!!!

(Please, feel free to research the instances and facts of Pan Am 103, they are free to look into...)

mike, WE, as airline crewmwmbers, have been studying such accidents for many years. As a PILOT we also are keenly aware, and tuned into the circumstances and the effects, we KNOW a lot more than we can let on, or even convey, in this sort of internet forum....but, I try, even if it seems pointless at times....because I sometimes feel I am a one voice against the insanity....


[edit on 24 January 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Only two think I'm wrong.
Not bad.
Too bad the PA grove was already in place before any imaginary plane crashed.



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I was pointing out to the other gentleman about the impact site. Not the dang gummed energy expended when it blew up over Scotland then fell to the ground...GEEEEEEEEZ Weedwhacker!



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 



Not the dang gummed energy expended when it blew up over Scotland then fell to the ground...


BUT, you just (again) showed the problem with comprehension, about the DIFFERENCES in the way each airplane crash site looked, BECAUSE of the differences in the stories of WHY they crashed!!!

I understand this, many others here have TRIED to explain it, along with myself, but it seems those efforts to explain are LOST on certain people, because they simply cannot or (will not) care to understand the differences...

Shame, really, but it GOES to the HEART of the misunderstandings that infest this topic.......
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Had to fix the word "teh"!! (LOL!!!)


[edit on 24 January 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Please provide the EVIDENCE for this assertion...

You mean the FDR that has not been properly matched to the plane?


Very plain and simple.

There is no FBI crime scene report that matches the FDR to the plane by serial number.



[edit on 25-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Please provide the EVIDENCE for this assertion...

You mean the FDR that has not been properly matched to the plane?



Very plain and simple.

There is no FBI crime scene report that matches the FDR to the plane by serial number.


Please keep it accurate - there is no report that YOU have seen. Nobody has cared to share the report with you. That doesn't mean there isn't one. Like it or not, you do not qualify to have any crime scene report released to you just because you say so. And there is no great crying out for its release.



[edit on 25-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Please keep it accurate - there is no report that YOU have seen.


Sorry but the report has not been released to anyone.

Unless you can show the report that matches the FDR to the plane by serial number then anyone stating that the FDR is from the plane is lying.



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
Please keep it accurate - there is no report that YOU have seen.


Sorry but the report has not been released to anyone.

Unless you can show the report that matches the FDR to the plane by serial number then anyone stating that the FDR is from the plane is lying.


Hold on a minute. You just admitted that you have not seen the report, but are accusing them of lying. How does that work???

The only way you can accuse them of lying is if you know the perfect truth and then you have to prove that they knew the perfect truth and knowingly and puposefully stated the opposite in an attempt specifically intended to decieve.

Or are we now at that point were you have presumed them to be guilty until they can prove to you that they are innocent??



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



There is no FBI crime scene report that matches the FDR to the plane by serial number.


Ther doesn';t need to be....

FDRs and CVRs don't just grow on trees, or in a laboratory, or drop out of the sky fully loaded with the parameters of the airplane they were installed in RECORDED unless they were INSTALLED in the airpane that they were recording!!!!

ALL of this bogus nonsense about "serial numbers" is pure deflection and hand-waving.

We are covering this very well in a thread about AA 77's FDR.

THE FDR FOUND at the scene of the crash IS the one onboard the airplane that crashed!!!

They cannot be "faked"....and only an illogical and desperate wish to make any claim to the contrary regarding the FDR evidence merely plays to the ignorance of those who do not yet know, and THAT is the crux and ploy of this so-called "truth movement" from the outset.

FOOL those who don't know any better, in order to sell the trinkets to make the income to keep the entire charade in motion....



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Ther doesn';t need to be....


Lets start out with baby steps.

Is 9/11 a crime scene, YES or NO?

If it is a crime scene then we must have proper ID of parts and arcraft.


[edit on 26-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper.
Hold on a minute. You just admitted that you have not seen the report, but are accusing them of lying. How does that work???



Completly wrong.

I am stating that anoyone who states the FDR is from the plane is lying unless they have the proper evidence to back up that the FDR is from the plane.



[edit on 26-1-2010 by REMISNE]

[edit on 26-1-2010 by REMISNE]



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join