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.

 

Flight 93 Did Not Crash In Shanksville or Shot Down.

page: 22
30
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Apparently you missed this question I asked of you:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also, just as the crater size keeps changing with each post you write, now the B-757 wingspan has grown. Twice you've written it as "144 feet".

That's understandable, since you aren't trained to fly the thing, nor have much of the details of the airplane memorized.

For posterity's sake, 124'10".

Oh, and the portions of the wings extending outboard of the engine mount hardpoints? Not very substantial, in terms of structure, compared to the center sections, which are stronger to support the weight (and thrust) of the engines, and the main landing gear assemblies, which must support the entier weight of the airplane when on the ground.




posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

Where did most of the wing remnants go? Remember, 95% of UA93 was reportedly discovered, so odds are, most of the wings remnants would still be visible somewhere.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   

This image above taken by Stahl. He was standing in a trench that most people think was created by the wings and as you can see they werent. The indentations were there before 911 and the crater was created on top of it. No denying this known fact.


" As Wally Miller, the somerset coroner stated multiple times " It look like someone gouged a 10 foot x 10 foot deep hole and dumped scrap in it". IN other interviews he said it was 6-8 feet deep and around 15 feet wide."

"The wingspan of a Boeing 757 is over 124 feet, the diameter of the fuselage is 15 feet and the tail fin is over 43 feet tall. None of the dimensions are possible considering the small crater. So in conclusion using common sense and physics. The crater was not caused by a Boeing 757.
"









[edit on 8-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 9-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

Where did most of the wing remnants go? Remember, 95% of UA93 was reportedly discovered, so odds are, most of the wings remnants would still be visible somewhere.


They visible, maybe not just recognizable. And only to those people that were actually on the scene of the disaster. Not armchair doubters looking at a handful of photos 9 years later.



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Originally posted by Shadow Herder

This image above taken by Stahl. He was standing in a trench that most people think was created by the wings and as you can see they werent. The indentations were there before 911 and the crater was created on top of it. No denying this known fact.


Denied. No known evidence, proof or even hearsay. Just a product of your imagination.



" As Wally Miller, the somerset coroner stated multiple times " It look like someone gouged a 10 foot x 10 foot deep hole and dumped scrap in it". IN other interviews he said it was 6-8 feet deep and around 15 feet wide."


So you are offering proof that the impact crater dimensions are not well documented by the county Coroner? That's not to suprising, its not exactly his job, now is it?


"The wingspan of a Boeing 757 is over 124 feet, the diameter of the fuselage is 15 feet and the tail fin is over 43 feet tall. None of the dimensions are possible considering the small crater. So in conclusion using common sense and physics. The crater was not caused by a Boeing 757."


Are you quoting yourself???

Ever find that post where you said I posted that photo and wherein I stated the excavation was 40' deep?

Thought not.







[edit on 8-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 9-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Originally posted by Shadow Herder

This image above taken by Stahl. He was standing in a trench that most people think was created by the wings and as you can see they werent. The indentations were there before 911 and the crater was created on top of it. No denying this known fact.


Denied. No known evidence, proof or even hearsay. Just a product of your imagination.




Are you saying the that "wing marks" were not there already on 9/10?



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by hooper
Originally posted by Shadow Herder

This image above taken by Stahl. He was standing in a trench that most people think was created by the wings and as you can see they werent. The indentations were there before 911 and the crater was created on top of it. No denying this known fact.


Denied. No known evidence, proof or even hearsay. Just a product of your imagination.




Prove it. Show me a photo of the site taken at 10:01 AM on Sept. 11, 2001.

Are you saying the that "wing marks" were not there already on 9/10?



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


How about a picture from 1994?





posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Nope.

Sept. 11, 2001. On or before 10:01AM of that date. And it must match the impact crater outline exactly. Nothing less.

I am sure you would settle for no less if someone else were making the claim.



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Nope.

Sept. 11, 2001. On or before 10:01AM of that date. And it must match the impact crater outline exactly. Nothing less.

I am sure you would settle for no less if someone else were making the claim.


LOL. So you think that they filled in the ditch that happens to be in the exact same spot before the plane crashed and then after it crashed, old grass magically sprouted back up in the crater? That is your logic?



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Nope.

Sept. 11, 2001. On or before 10:01AM of that date. And it must match the impact crater outline exactly. Nothing less.

I am sure you would settle for no less if someone else were making the claim.


LOL. So you think that they filled in the ditch that happens to be in the exact same spot before the plane crashed and then after it crashed, old grass magically sprouted back up in the crater? That is your logic?


You must be tired by now! dont let the fecker's get to yea, Peace.



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


2001-1994 = 7 years. 2555 days. Yeah, I think there is a possibilty that at some point between Clinton's second year in office and Sept. 11 somebody may have backfilled a ditch at a strip mine reclamation site.

By the way, you have not proven the ditch matches the outline of the impact crater.



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Its not the point as to how long before the trenches that are confused for wings scars were there before 911. The point is that the trenches were not caused by wings of the 122+ feet wide wingspan of a Boeing757. They were already there before the crater which is way too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757 as proven before.

Here is another Stahl picture. As you can see the crater is very small and not very deep. What was confused for wing dents are not at all and were there before the crater was made allegedly on September 11th 2001 around 10am.




[edit on 9-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Here is the crater minus the aged trenches that were once confused to be caused by wings The dents/trenches are confirmed not to have been caused by a Boeing 757.


As you can see that the crater was not caused by a boeing 757. So therefore a Boeing 757 did not crash in Shanksville on September 11th, 2001 near rollock scrap yard.

[edit on 9-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



They were already there before the crater


Do you have proof that they were there on Sept 11, 2001 at 10:01AM?

Do you have any proof that the ditch in the 1994 aerial has any relationship with the impact crater caused by the crash of Flight 93 on Sept. 11, 2001?



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Originally posted by Shadow Herder


Wow, that is a huge smoking hole filled with airplane wreckage, huh?



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Wow, that is a huge smoking hole filled with airplane wreckage, huh?


LOL,, wow you really do live in a fantasy world if you see a hole filled with airplane wreckage.



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
Wow, that is a huge smoking hole filled with airplane wreckage, huh?


LOL,, wow you really do live in a fantasy world if you see a hole filled with airplane wreckage.


Well, me and the rest of humanity. Really, post that on the net, without any other context, and ask if you think this portrays the site of a plane crash or the site of a.....whatever you think it is.

By the way, don't you believe that Flight 93 was shot down? If so, where do you think it crashed if not here, and if not here please try to explain why "they" would shoot down Flight 93, cover up the shoot down and the real crash site and fake this crash site.



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



They were already there before the crater


Do you have proof that they were there on Sept 11, 2001 at 10:01AM?

Do you have any proof that the ditch in the 1994 aerial has any relationship with the impact crater caused by the crash of Flight 93 on Sept. 11, 2001?


The ditch from 1994 is close by the one found beneath the crater caused on 911.
I am glad hooper you agree that that 'ditch' was not from a boeing 757 and was there for sometime considering there is dry grass growing out of it and for your fantasy claim that the little crater was full of airplane debris, maybe so but not from a Boeing 757



Yes.... full of 'airplane debris' rrrrriiiiiighht.


[edit on 9-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Mar, 9 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Nope.

Sept. 11, 2001. On or before 10:01AM of that date. And it must match the impact crater outline exactly. Nothing less.

I am sure you would settle for no less if someone else were making the claim.


LOL. So you think that they filled in the ditch that happens to be in the exact same spot before the plane crashed and then after it crashed, old grass magically sprouted back up in the crater? That is your logic?


You must be tired by now! dont let the fecker's get to yea, Peace.


Thanks for saying what I was thinking. It is tiring dealing with people that are so obviously just saying anything they can in order to keep their fantasy alive. Unfortunately, now I am really only tired of asking people something 4 times and then hitting ignore. These boards are getting thinner and thinner.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join