Flight 93 Did Not Crash In Shanksville or Shot Down.

page: 30
28
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 




The crater was measured at around 15-30 feet in diameter and no more that 15 feet deep.




YOU (and only YOU) on this Board keep repeating this (although the exact dimensions change...even NOW there is a 100% variation, base don YOUR OWN WORDS of "between 15-30 feet" in the "claimed" dimensions!!
)


YET, when asked, repeatedly to CITE your source for hte claims...nothing. Zilch. Nada...


Sigh... how ignorant can you be considering how long you have been here and how many times you have seen the facts..... I will repeat what the first responders and actual eyewitnesses have seen in the flesh.



The Dayton Daily News of September 12, 2001, described the scene:

The impact of the crash left a crater estimated by authorities to be about 10 feet deep and 20 feet wide. It appeared the plane first hit on the downward slope of a hillside [/ex

Nena Lensbouer, who had prepared lunch for the workers at the scrap yard overlooking the crash site, said she was the first person to reach the crater. Lensbouer said that the crater was five to six feet deep and smaller than the 24-foot trailer in her front yard. She described the sound as "an explosion, like an atomic bomb" -- not a crash.


Capt. Frank Monaco:
“The gouge was 8 to 10 feet deep and 15 to 20 feet long, said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police. “
(AP, 9/12/01 )
www.courier-journal.com...



FBI Special Agent Bill Crowley said the recorder was found at about 4:20 p.m. in the 8-foot-deep crater caused by the crash.
WPXI11 Pittsburgh

The plane left a crater 20 feet wide and 15 feet deep.
(Plain Dealer, 9/12/01)

Reporters said the crater was about 40 feet wide and more than 8 feet deep.
(Los Angeles Times, 9/12/01)

The impact of the crash left a crater estimated by authorities to be about 10 feet deep and 20 feet wide.
(Cox, 9/12/01)

[I]“Pittsburgh's WTAE-TV reporter Michelle Wright toured the crash scene and said that a crater of about 30 to 40 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide and 18 feet deep was created by the crash.”
www.newsnet5.com...



Ladies and gentlemen, the 3-4 resident debunkers here willfully ignore the facts and are hoping you people are stupid and will not believe eyewitnesses. They can only insult peoples intelligence, resort to name calling and hand waving when confronted with the facts.

Many people who were at the crash site said the crater was too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757 who's wing span is over 123 feet with a fuselage diameter of over 15 feet and tail height over 20 feet. The crater has been estimated to be no more than 15-30 feet which makes the conspiracy theory that a Boeing 757 (flight 93) caused that small crater when the eyewitnesses and common sense proves it not only absurd but impossible.








[edit on 16-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]




posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 11:00 PM
link   

More than 80 investigators and emergency workers from the FBI, National Transportation Safety Board, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and other agencies were scouring the crash site until it became dark on Wednesday. The crash impact left a crater estimated to be 10-feet deep and 20-feet wide.
www.pittsburgh.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Source

Shanksville Volunteer Fire Department From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




On September 11, 2001, the Shanksville Volunteer Fire Department responded to the United Airlines Flight 93 crash scene to search for survivors.[1] They found a smoking crater 8 feet (2.4 m) to 10 feet (3.0 m) deep, and 30 feet (9.1 m) to 50 feet (15 m) wide surrounded by burning wreckage of the aircraft
en.wikipedia.org...



I could go on and on.........

[edit on 16-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


So lets review:

You're unofficial list of descriptions of the crater:

Reported depths: 10, 6, 8-10, 8, 15, 8, 10, 18, 10, 8-10.
Reported widths: 20, 24, 15-20, 20, 40, 20, 40, 20, 30-50.

So the remaining open questions for you are:

1) Why can't you show scientifically and mathematically why none of this is consistent with the impact / explosion of the aircraft in question?

2) Please show some factual support for your earlier conjecture that most people do not believe that the crater was casued by the impact of the aicraft in question.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Ok Hooper, you seem to be the only one having difficulties understanding the basics.

The eye witness and experts estimated the crater diameter easily under 40 feet. Tell us how you think a plane (boeing 757) with a wing span of over a 123 feet and a fuselage diameter of over 15 feet a vertical stabilizer of over 40 feet from the ground can leave a crater 5-15 feet deep and under 40 feet in diameter (conservative estimates) when the plane came in a under a 45 degree angle inverted at 'high speed'. Keep in mind the laws of momentum and inertia.


This is basic physics so you should have a little trouble understanding it but we look forward to your answer no matter how entertaining it is.

Face it hoop, you debunking days are over.




[edit on 17-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 17-6-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Quick question - what happened when the plane hit the ground?



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Question with a question is juvenile. Answer my questions first since you 4 here have been getting schooled with facts.

The question is 2 posts above. Still waiting to here your silly logic.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Yeah, I was pretty sure you were going to run away from that one.

You know the plane exploded within milliseconds of making of impact.

You know the entire plane never made it to the ground.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Your contention is that since the impact crater was not 155 ft (lenght) by
125 ft (wing span) then United 93 did not crash there?

Apparently thnk this a ROADRUNNER cartoon in which Wiley Coyote leaves a perfect outline when crashes.

Reality is much different....

According to Wallace MIller, Somerset County coroner, forward 1/3 of the
aircraft broke off and was thrown into the woods. So would not be part of crater

Wings - the wing outboard of the engines are made of light gauge aluminium/composites to save weight. On impact they fragment and do
not leave much of impression. Same for tail (or empennage) - only as
strong as need to be. In fact 2 months after 9/11 tail broke off AiRBUS
shortly after takeoff from JFK in New York.

Size/depth of crater depends on number of factors - spped of aircraft, angle of impact, type of soil, etc

Not all aircraft crashes leave a crater - seen it myself when Lear 35A
crashed in my town. No crater was formed even though aircraft hit at 80 deg angle and 350 mph - ground here is very hard, rock only few inches unfer soil



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

You know the plane exploded within milliseconds of making of impact.

Source?


You know the entire plane never made it to the ground.

Which part didn't hooper?



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
According to Wallace MIller, Somerset County coroner, forward 1/3 of the
aircraft broke off and was thrown into the woods.

If a plane crashed at almost 600 mph nose first, how is that even remotely possible?!


On impact they fragment and do
not leave much of impression. Same for tail (or empennage) - only as
strong as need to be.

So plane's tail hit "soft" ground at nearly 600 mph, shattered against it, yet barely leaves an impression?!


Size/depth of crater depends on number of factors - spped of aircraft, angle of impact, type of soil, etc

How does a 155 ft plane mostly bury at 40 deg, but only leaves a 10ft crater?



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   
If UA 93 did not crash at Shanksville can anyone please tell me :-

(a) what happened to it and its passengers.

(b) why anyone should wish to pretend it came down in a field in rural PA.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

If UA 93 did not crash at Shanksville can anyone please tell me :-

(a) what happened to it and its passengers.

(b) why anyone should wish to pretend it came down in a field in rural PA.

Talk about your argument from personal incredulity.

So what you are saying Alfie is that if we can't answer those two questions of yours to your personal satisfaction, then UA93 must of crashed in that field?



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by Alfie1

If UA 93 did not crash at Shanksville can anyone please tell me :-

(a) what happened to it and its passengers.

(b) why anyone should wish to pretend it came down in a field in rural PA.

Talk about your argument from personal incredulity.

So what you are saying Alfie is that if we can't answer those two questions of yours to your personal satisfaction, then UA93 must of crashed in that field?


What I am saying is that there is evidence that UA 93 was hi-jacked and crashed at Shanksville.

There is evidence of passengers boarding UA 93, including 4 hi-jackers under their own names. There is radar evidence. There is air traffic control evidence. There is evidence of phone calls from passengers. There is evidence from at least two other planes who had sight of UA 93, one of which reported smoke from the ground after it lost sight. There is evidence from eyewitnesses on the ground. There is photographic evidence of the smoke cloud above the crash site. There is evidence of Boeing 757 wreckage on and in the ground . There is evidence of personal possessions and body parts of passengers and crew being recovered at Shanksville.

So, you must have very substantial reasons for thinking UA 93 did not crash at Shanksville and should be able to answer my 2 very elementary questions.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
What I am saying is that there is evidence that UA 93 was hi-jacked and crashed at Shanksville.

Tell me, if someone staged a plane crash, would you find evidence that a plane crashed?


There is evidence of passengers boarding UA 93, including 4 hi-jackers under their own names.

Yet most of these people were "last-minute" passengers, including one of the pilots who never flew with the other pilot, the plane was mostly empty for a cross-country flight (just like all the other "hijacked" planes), and there is a eyewitness who was sitting on an adjacent plane on the tarmac who witness passengers boarding UA93 from the tarmac as opposed to the skyway as reported by the media.


There is radar evidence.

And who controls that? There was also multiple wargames going on that morning, some with hijacking scenarios and false radar blips.


There is air traffic control evidence.

The ATCs at Johnstown Airport commented how strange it was that they couldn't spot a 757 with their binoculars when I should have been in distance.


There is evidence of phone calls from passengers.

Hi Mom, this is Mark Bingham. Plus, phone calls from a plane doesn't prove they crashed. How many phone calls mentioned the plane was flipping over? Zero.


There is evidence from at least two other planes who had sight of UA 93, one of which reported smoke from the ground after it lost sight.

The report on the Piper was vague that it saw the plane. It wasn't an exact quote from the pilot and wasn't even in Shanksville airspace. The corporate jet, that reported came to the scene many minutes afterward at a high altitude was NOT the white military-looking aircraft seen by Susan McElwain and other BEFORE the "crash" circling around at tree-top level. As for reporting smoke, no one is saying an explosion didn't happen and plane crashes aren't the only things that cause explosions.


There is evidence from eyewitnesses on the ground.

Contradictory accounts. A couple said they say a plane dive at 90 deg, yet the official crash angle was inverted at 40 deg. Only ONE person, Lee Purbagh, saw something hit and the aircraft he saw fly over his head, he claims was rocking its wing (impossible for an inverted 757 to do at that speed in that short distance from him to the crater) and didn't even report is was upside down, proving what flew over his head was NOT a 757.


There is photographic evidence of the smoke cloud above the crash site.

The ONLY photo of the alleged crash plume was shown to have been photoshopped. Confirmed its fake by witness Kelley Leverknight.


There is evidence of Boeing 757 wreckage on and in the ground.

Please show evidence of a 757. I still haven't seen any. As to the debris at the scene, it doesn't even come close to 95% of a 757 and no physical proof most of a 757 had buried.


There is evidence of personal possessions and body parts of passengers and crew being recovered at Shanksville.

NONE shown at the scene. All that was given to the coroner where given to him by the FBI in the days following. Coroner commented he never saw a drop of blood at the scene. Military had total control of the DNA testing.


See the problem with you skeptics is that you're trying to prove a plane crashed, but not trying to prove one did in accordance with the official story.

[edit on 19-6-2010 by ATH911]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by hooper

You know the plane exploded within milliseconds of making of impact.


Source? Reality


You know the entire plane never made it to the ground.


Which part didn't hooper? All the parts that were effected by the jet fuel deflagration. You want part numbers? Then that is undeniable proof that you are simply trying to dodge the truth.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Originally posted by ATH911
Originally posted by Alfie1


Tell me, if someone staged a plane crash, would you find evidence that a plane crashed?


Please prove it was staged. Names of persons staging, date and time material was staged, part numbers of the staged items, equipment used in the staging, eyewitnesses to the staging.


Yet most of these people were "last-minute" passengers,


Names please, date and time of ticket purchases.


including one of the pilots who never flew with the other pilot, the plane was mostly empty for a cross-country flight (just like all the other "hijacked" planes),


You, of course, have evidence that the flight crews of all the hijacked flights had never flown with each other before and also plese post statistical evidence that this should be considered exceptional.


and there is a eyewitness who was sitting on an adjacent plane on the tarmac who witness passengers boarding UA93 from the tarmac as opposed to the skyway as reported by the media.


Please post the name of this witness and physical evidence that they were on the scene and in such a position to make such a witness. Ticket stub, and a secondary eyewitness to confirm.


And who controls that?


Controls what? Persons? Who controls you?


There was also multiple wargames going on that morning, some with hijacking scenarios and false radar blips.


False radar blips on ATC's screens?


The ATCs at Johnstown Airport commented how strange it was that they couldn't spot a 757 with their binoculars when I should have been in distance.


Dennis Fritz, the air traffic manager, got a call from controllers in Cleveland warning the Johnstown airport -- which has no radar of its own -- that a large aircraft was 20 miles south and had suddenly turned on a heading for Johnstown.

"It was an aircraft doing some unusual maneuvers at a low level, which is unusual for an aircraft that size," Fritz said last night. "It happened so quickly."

He said workers in his own tower scanned south, toward the horizon, with binoculars, but couldn't see any aircraft, leading Fritz to believe that the plane was flying somewhere in the 2,800 foot high ridges in that part of the Allegheny front.


Where is the word "strange"?



Hi Mom, this is Mark Bingham. Plus, phone calls from a plane doesn't prove they crashed. How many phone calls mentioned the plane was flipping over? Zero.


Phone calls from the plane proves there was a hijacked plane.


The report on the Piper was vague that it saw the plane.


Your opinion. Nothing else.


It wasn't an exact quote from the pilot and wasn't even in Shanksville airspace.


Shanksville airspace????


The corporate jet, that reported came to the scene many minutes afterward at a high altitude was NOT the white military-looking aircraft seen by Susan McElwain and other BEFORE the "crash" circling around at tree-top level.


Is this the same woman who reported that when she thought that her van was going to be hit by an unidentified flying object that she instinctively ducked and, of course, turned off her car radio so that she could confirm that the unidentified flying object made no sounds? And also please remember that this woman's so-called "testimony" was recorded by a
with no date or time of incident? Pass.


As for reporting smoke, no one is saying an explosion didn't happen and plane crashes aren't the only things that cause explosions.


No they are not. So?


Contradictory accounts. A couple said they say a plane dive at 90 deg, yet the official crash angle was inverted at 40 deg.


How is that contradictory? What a person estimates as a witness in the field compared to digital readout from the flight recorder? No contradiction.


Only ONE person, Lee Purbagh, saw something hit and the aircraft he saw fly over his head, he claims was rocking its wing (impossible for an inverted 757 to do at that speed in that short distance from him to the crater) and didn't even report is was upside down, proving what flew over his head was NOT a 757.


That's proof? How so? Who said it was impossible?


The ONLY photo of the alleged crash plume was shown to have been photoshopped. Confirmed its fake by witness Kelley Leverknight.


Uh oh, we have a killclown fan here!!



Please show evidence of a 757. I still haven't seen any.


Yes you have, you just won't admit it.


As to the debris at the scene, it doesn't even come close to 95% of a 757 and no physical proof most of a 757 had buried.


Opinions are like......, well you know the rest.


NONE shown at the scene. All that was given to the coroner where given to him by the FBI in the days following. Coroner commented he never saw a drop of blood at the scene. Military had total control of the DNA testing.


Please prove that the coroner never handled or collected any human remains at the site. Also please prove that ALL human remains were collected and handled EXCLUSIVELY by agents of the FBI. Now please prove that all these agents and all persons at the DNA lab are "in on it".


See the problem with you skeptics is that you're trying to prove a plane crashed, but not trying to prove one did in accordance with the official story.


See the problem with you conspiracy fetishist is that you keep making up your own "official story" and then asking everyone else to provide evidence of your fabrication.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Well it has been proven that the crater in Shanksville was too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757 so therefore a Boeing 757 did not crash in Shanksville on 911.

Shanksville crater no more than 30 feet wide. Boeing 757 wingspan 123+ feet, predator drone 45+ feet, cruise missile wingspan 12+ feet.

Dont let these trolls tell you how stupid you are to believe that the crater in Shanksvilee was caused by a Boeing 757 when it has been proven time and time again to be an impossibility.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


No. This is not true. Something stated as a "fact", when it is shown to be untrue is usually called a "lie".


Well it has been proven that the crater in Shanksville was too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757...



Still waiting, so far NO so-called "Proof". It is only the strident (and woefully incorrect) voice coming from a certain poster here at ATS that makes this claim. A claim with no evidence to substantiate it. In fact, ample evidence refutes it.


....so therefore a Boeing 757 did not crash in Shanksville on 911.


Oh, really??

Explain:

The airplane parts, identified in the debris.

The DFDR.

The CVR.

And human remains, identified and verified (by DNA matching) to be the passengers and crew from United 93. ALL found in Shanksville.

Finally, explain the DOZENS of witnesses who were physically ON SCENE, for the recovery/clean-up process ... not ONE of them has ever come forward, going on ten years now, to say otherwise.

But, I call this the BIGGEST LIE of all, and one that is sad to see being repeated so many times here on the ATS Boards:


Shanksville crater no more than 30 feet wide.


Any simple review of Shadow Herder's own posts will see that the "size" of the Shanksville crater has been described, by said poster, to be MANY different "sizes", all depending onthe 'feeling' (apparently) of the day when the post was written.

There is noting credible coming from the opinions posted by this ATS member.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MY evidence, for perusal. (The OP has nothing but an ill-informed 'opinion'):


King: "We stopped and I opened the door. The smell of jet fuel was overpowering. I will never forget that smell; it is really burnt into my mind. ...I walked down the power line and got my first glimpse of human remains. Then I walked a little further and saw more."

Shanksville VFD firefighter Keith Curtis: "I walked up to where the tire was on fire, probably a hundred feet past the crater. It was a big tire. I was thinking that this is a big jet. I hit it good with the hose and put it out. I stopped and 'poof,' it just started on fire again."

Firefighter Mike Sube: "We made our way to a small pond. That's where I observed the largest piece of wreckage that I saw, a portion of the landing gear and fuselage. One of the tires was still intact with the bracket, and probably about three to five windows of the fuselage were actually in one piece lying there. ...There were enough fires that our brush truck was down there numerous times. ...I saw small pieces of human remains and occasionally some larger pieces. That was disturbing, but what was most disturbing was seeing personal effects."

Lieutenant Roger Bailey, Somerset Volunteer Fire Department: "We started down through the debris field. I saw pieces of fiberglass, pieces of airplane, pop rivets, and mail...Mail was scattered everywhere. ...the one guy who was with us almost stepped on a piece of human remains. I grabbed him, and he got about half woozy over it."

[People who were early to the scene didn't know what to expect. While some people were impressed by how small the crater was, others were impressed by how large it was.] Reporter Jon Meyer, WJAC-TV, Johnstown: "There was a spot at the end where the emergency crews were gathering. I could see that it was smoking and burning a little bit. So I ran as fast as I could towards that spot. I ran right up to the crater. I was standing a few feet away, looking down into it. I was overwhelmed by the crater's depth and size, but there was nothing that I could identify as having been an airplane, except that there was this incredibly strong smell of jet fuel."


I recommend people read this full description.





[edit on 6 July 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Well it has been proven that the crater in Shanksville was too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757 so therefore a Boeing 757 did not crash in Shanksville on 911.


I know you've proven that time and time again, but I seem to have misplaced the proof. Any chance you can post the proof again?

We would all really appreciate it.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
(Not sure why this thread was censored even though none of my many other Shanksville-related threads were, but whatever.)


If UA93 crashed at 40 degrees and most of the plane buried itself down to some 45 feet, then why did the FBI excavate straight down as if something had crashed at a 90 deg angle?



("An aerial photo shows the crash site of United Flight 93 near Shanksville, Pa., taken by the FBI Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2001")


I have an answer: because NO PLANE crashed there.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by ATH911]





new topics
top topics
 
28
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join