How'd all that debris land on top of Shanks crater?

reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE


No, I'm not.

But I also don't think it's evidence of a government conspiracy to blow up the twin towers or fire a missile at the Pentagon.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Hay wait a minute this is about a little hole in the ground an the lack of wreckage
around said hole that was supposed to have swallowed up a huge jet plane, an i asked you about the news coverage which said there was surprisingly very little wreckage around the little hole! yea understand now?

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE

Hay wait a minute this is about a little hole in the ground an the lack of wreckage
around said hole that was supposed to have swallowed up a huge jet plane, an i asked you about the news coverage which said there was surprisingly very little wreckage around the little hole! yea understand now?

You have been shown ten facts surrounding flight 93 and all you did was post You Tube Videos?

Please tell us all what the crash scene was supposed to look like. Please remember there were over 2 thousand people working that crash scene and do you know many of them agree with you?

NONE!

Now go run along and find a professional crash scene investigator that agrees with you.

reply to post by Six Sigma


How dare you insult my intelligence in such a patronising way,
that tells every guest an future member to be, just what they will have to put up with here on ATS! repeat its News footage! that would stand up in any court of law as evidence if we had a Lawyer with the balls enough an a Judge that wasn't in the pockets of TPTB ,PS are you saying that anyone who isn't an expert on plane crashes need not apply to this debate?

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE


How dare you insult my intelligence in such a patronising way,
that tells every guest an future member to be, just what they will have to put up with here on ATS! repeat its News footage! that would stand up in any court of law as evidence if we had a Lawyer with the balls enough an a Judge that wasn't in the pockets of TPTB ,PS are you saying that anyone who isn't an expert on plane crashes need not apply to this debate?

LMFAO...

Nice dodge. What did I get wrong with the 10 facts I posted.

Please list ANY of the 2000+ people that were at the scene that agree with you.

I also listed the contact information of the professionals that were on the scene. I have the to the OP author and he left the thread.

Are you interested in contacting them?

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Hay wait a minute this is about a little hole in the ground an the lack of wreckage
around said hole that was supposed to have swallowed up a huge jet plane, an i asked you about the news coverage which said there was surprisingly very little wreckage around the little hole! yea understand now?

I'm aware of what it's about.

You asked if I thought the news piece was nonsense. I said I didn't think it was. But I also don't think it particularly compelling evidence of government involvement in 9/11. If you do then I'd be interested in why.

You asked if I thought the news piece was nonsense. I said I didn't think it was. But I also don't think it particularly compelling evidence of government involvement in 9/11. If you do then I'd be interested in why.

you tell me?
then answer me this, why was it quickly taking off the News! I suppose the TPTB thought it was compelling evidence enough to do so! an why slag off Youtube? all Youtube is, is a medium for putting up Movies an Videos on to the Net, back to your question you would be interested to know why? well i think iv just answered it, they got rid of the CCTV vids very fast from the Pentagon, up on till this day 9 years later nobody has seen any of what they contain why? one Building coming down like a Demolition is almost believable, but three Buildings! one mirroring the other exactly is a bit on the far out side dont you think? so to sum up theres to many ifs an buts far to many unanswered questions, thats why you have the likes of me saying whats going on? but not you! an goodoldave, sixsigma, weedwhacker, tombham, an joey canoli ,,your all happy with the official story, just 5 of you trolling around all the 9/11 threads trying to debunk everything that says differently to the TPTB's official story!


[edit on 8-8-2010 by DCDAVECLARKE]

Originally posted by The Surgeon
UA 93 crashed at a 40 degree angle, while on its back (inverted). The crater at the crash site looks like it was caused by a plane that hit at a 90 degree angle (head on).

The crash site crater looks almost cartoonish. The crash site looks faked.

Do these photos look like they were caused by a plane that impacts at a 40 degree angle, upside down?

Note the lack of debris in the top photo. Also note there is almost no fire damage, yet the grass was quite dry and brown (which can be see in other photos of the site).

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7da759fb3f62.jpeg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5b250f8ec20d.jpg[/atsimg]

And this is the size of the Plane thats surpossed to of made that little scrach on the ground!



[edit on 8-8-2010 by DCDAVECLARKE]

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
And this is the size of the Plane thats surpossed to of made that little scrach on the ground

When are you going to respond to the 10 facts?

How come not one professional crash scene investigator agrees with you?

reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE


That USAir airplane in the video?

It's an Airbus. NOT a B-757.

A320 (might be a 321...that's the stretch version). Quick way to tell??? The wingtips. The wingtip vertical thingies? Those are designed to reduce airflow drag by altering the wingtip vortices flow, and improve (slightly) fuel economy and performance. (We call them "winglets". Cute, eh??)

On the Airbus models (A319, 320 and 321) they are those little triangle-shapes. You may see SOME B-757s (and even some B-737s) with wingtip extensions, bigger, and swept UPWARD. Same principle, different design.

(However....in terms of comparable size? Well....an Airbus A320 and a B-737 are about equivalent. The B757 IS larger than both).

Airbus A321 specs and info.

Typical B-757 specs and info.

(That site, "airliners.net" is a very good place to go, to learn about airliners. It's designed mostly for avid airliner hobbyists/enthusiasts, but professional aviators and other aviation professionals contribute also).

SO, your "argument" may appear more valid to you, except for one thing.

The aerial photo of the impact site??? The ones you copied from The Surgeon's post?

Tell me please, how do you judge the size of that impression seen in those photos?

They are taken from a height above...what height, do you reckon?

Can you see the point of my questions?








[edit on 8 August 2010 by weedwhacker]

Common sense! which you an your ilk seem to be badly lacking.........

reply to post by Six Sigma


Because there all in Bed with TPTB as you are!

Up to 7 pages and no explanation from skeptics about how all that debris landed on top of the crater even though the earth supposedly fell back in on itself after a 757 supposedly burrowed a deep hole in the ground.

I'm kinda liking Wally Miller's thoughts on the debris in the crater:

Miller was among the very first to arrive after 10:06 on the magnificently sunny morning of September 11. He was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, "like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it."

And that Ladies an Gentlemen of the jury is that, I rest my case,,now wheres me Coat!

Originally posted by ATH911
Up to 7 pages and no explanation from skeptics about how all that debris landed on top of the crater even though the earth supposedly fell back in on itself after a 757 supposedly burrowed a deep hole in the ground.

I'm kinda liking Wally Miller's thoughts on the debris in the crater:

Miller was among the very first to arrive after 10:06 on the magnificently sunny morning of September 11. He was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, "like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it."

Hey ATH911... long time no see! Have you had a chance to contact any of the professionals I gave you the info for?

yeah... lol... I didn't think so.

What Willy miller stated was called a simile. Do yourself a favor, look it up. Better yet...here is a great video where Dylan Avery picks a scab on his arm as a journalist explains to him what a simile is. (there is a cameo from Wally Miller himself in this brief video)

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by Six Sigma

 

Because there all in Bed with TPTB as you are!

GAME

SET

MATCH


When a truther is unable to come up with a reasonable response to a question...the old "in bed with" ...or .. "in on it".... gets thrown out there.

Thanks for playing DCCLARKE... you failed.

Just for the other readers...here is a partial list of those involved with the investigation in Shanksville. If they are all in bed with TBTB...it must be one heck of an orgy!

• 8 Police Departments
• 7 EMS Services
• 8 Fire Departments
• 10 Emergency Management Agencies
• NTSB
• ATF
• FBI
• CISM
• Red Cross
• United Airlines

Yea and its amasing there all as blind as you!

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
Yea and its amasing there all as blind as you!

Yet another fantastic contribution to this thread by Mr. Clarke. Thank you for your input sir!

I rest my case.

If there are 12 Honest Men an Women Guest's or members out there looking at this thread could we have please your verdict !

Why can't skeptics explain how that debris landed on the "just filled-back hole"?