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.

 

Evidence no plane crashed & buried in Shanksville; piles of dirt, but no piles of plane debris

page: 16
26
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


i agree with the official story? a story is not factual based. when did i agree with the story? my observations are based off tangible evidence which includes photos. if i had the capability i would go directly to the source report. not the report of the report of the report. first hand not 3rd, 4th, 5th so on. this is where information gets skewed. i listen to what people say and see if that fits into what the evidence shows. if it does they are what yo can call a credible witness.




posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2
reply to post by ATH911
 


i agree with the official story? a story is not factual based. when did i agree with the story? my observations are based off tangible evidence which includes photos.

OK, lets start with this, do you believe the "media's story" is correct?


if i had the capability i would go directly to the source report. not the report of the report of the report. first hand not 3rd, 4th, 5th so on. this is where information gets skewed.

Why did you omit 2nd-hand reports, which would be the mainstream media?


i listen to what people say and see if that fits into what the evidence shows. if it does they are what yo can call a credible witness.

OK, some witnesses say the plane hit at about 90 degrees, however the NTSB said it hit at 40 degrees. How so you explain that?
edit on 22-12-2010 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



OK, some witnesses say the plane hit at about 90 degrees, however the NTSB said it hit at 40 degrees. How so you explain that?


People are not very good judges of things like size, distance, directions or speed when only using the naked eye in judging the particulars of an event with an extremely short timeline (seconds or less). This is why mankind evented and uses measuring TOOLS. You know, like the data electronically recorded on board the plane.

Thank you.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I can tell you one thing: I'm not going to make a judgment based on four photographs with no proof of exactly what, when, where, etc.



edit on 23-12-2010 by Royzer because: removed extra word keyed in error ("if")



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by ATH911
 


Why did the "NWO" hijack a plane, only to not use it in any sort of attack or goal, and then just completely mess up a random field somewhere in Pennsylvania to make it look like they crashed there is the better question.

This will probably get deleted too


I'm just "asking questions" here.


There were contingency plans... who says it was a plane anyway? The "NWO" is not a gang. It's what we are living in right now. I like the passive thread derailing though.



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



OK, some witnesses say the plane hit at about 90 degrees...


Well....eyewitnesses (meaning to include many laypersons) who viewed the crash....AND, there are a variety of (very few actual) eyewitnesses to the final impact.....BEST we have is the actual data from the Flight Recorder. Specifically the SSDFR....("Solid State Digital Flight Recorder"). SO...."90" degrees, "85" degrees.....OR "70" degrees....THE ANGLE OF IMPACT is not relevant....it is used to distract.


Google Video Link


And.....shorter version.....




posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Witnesses are not accurate in describing what they saw. NTSB those guys are incredible in how they investigate. You are always going to have someone try and discredit someone else.

I still have yet to see anyone provide an official link to a report and i only believe half of what the media says. I worked a train wreck a couple of years ago and I provided a typed report of what occurred because I knew if i didnt it would get warped into something else. Guess what? They changed my report as to what occurred and then they had to print a retraction because what they printed was not truthful



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


i disagree to a point on this as to after some practice and time working accident reconstruction you get to a point where you can ball park distances, time and speed before you actually investigate. and when you actually do the reconstruction the ballparks are very very close. things got to a point when i was given an accident i was able to determine what happened before i got there, based off listeninng to the information being provided. is it 100 percent all the time, of course not



posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


witnesses are good for several reasons. they provide information that potentially no one else saw. but you have to be careful of how much a witnesses statement influences the investigation. in fact there are new studies that suggest not interviewing a witness right away or follow up with them later to let the adrenaline come down and give their mind time to process the information



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
OK, let's see if I can do this without getting "warned" for being offensive to anyone......

Those of you who believe that no plane actually crashed in Pennsylvania, where do you believe the plane went? There was a plane. If it didn't crash at the reported site, where do you believe it went?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2
reply to post by hooper
 


i disagree to a point on this as to after some practice and time working accident reconstruction you get to a point where you can ball park distances, time and speed before you actually investigate. and when you actually do the reconstruction the ballparks are very very close. things got to a point when i was given an accident i was able to determine what happened before i got there, based off listeninng to the information being provided. is it 100 percent all the time, of course not


OK, but if you have a choice between a "ballpark" and the results of a measuring tool then you go with the measuring tool, correct?



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
THE ANGLE OF IMPACT is not relevant....it is used to distract.

Distract from the holes in the official story? I agree.

Btw, still waiting to see evidence of the tons and tons of debris allegedly unearthed out of that field.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2
reply to post by ATH911
 


Witnesses are not accurate in describing what they saw.

So we shouldn't put any weight behind those witnesses you guys like to use who claim to have seen a plane crash?


I still have yet to see anyone provide an official link to a report

Did I claim there was one?


and i only believe half of what the media says.

So we should be skeptical about the media reports that all the passengers were identified?


I worked a train wreck a couple of years ago and I provided a typed report of what occurred because I knew if i didnt it would get warped into something else. Guess what? They changed my report as to what occurred and then they had to print a retraction because what they printed was not truthful

You never answered, what will you think if what I tell you is the official story is actually the official story -- how it totally contradicts what you think happened based on your observations of the photographic evidence?



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


ATH.... can you please post your inquiries to the professionals that were in Shanksville on 9/11 and during the recovery process?

Oh, and please don't forget to list the professional crash scene investigators that were there that also believe that a plane did NOT crash there.

Oh...one more thing... WHO made all the phone calls to the victims families? (provide evidence please)



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Six Sigma
 

As soon as you post some riveting evidence that tons and tons of plane debris was unearthed from that field. Shouldn't be that hard to do if tons and tons of plane debris was really unearthed out of that field.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by Six Sigma
 

As soon as you post some riveting evidence that tons and tons of plane debris was unearthed from that field. Shouldn't be that hard to do if tons and tons of plane debris was really unearthed out of that field.


Please show the official report that states clearly that " tons and tons of plane debris was unearthed from that field".

Thank you!



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Please show the official report that states clearly that " tons and tons of plane debris was unearthed from that field".

Thank you!

I'll play your little game. Please show the official report that states clearly that all of the passengers from Flight 93 were identified.

Thank you!



PS - it's funny that skeptics don't even believe the official Shanksville story!
edit on 30-12-2010 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Please show the official report that states clearly that " tons and tons of plane debris was unearthed from that field".

Thank you!

I'll play your little game. Please show the official report that states clearly that all of the passengers from Flight 93 were identified.

Thank you!
edit on 30-12-2010 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)


Hold the phone Chief... You are the one that is implying that there is an official report that states there was tons and tons of debris unearthed. I didn't say it.

Let's work on that...then we can move on over to the passengers DNA.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six Sigma


Hold the phone Chief... You are the one that is implying that there is an official report that states there was tons and tons of debris unearthed. I didn't say it.

Let's work on that...then we can move on over to the passengers DNA.

Where did I say there was an official "report"?



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma


Hold the phone Chief... You are the one that is implying that there is an official report that states there was tons and tons of debris unearthed. I didn't say it.

Let's work on that...then we can move on over to the passengers DNA.

Where did I say there was an official "report"?


Okay, fair enough. There is not ANY report that states there were tons and tons of debris unearthed that I am aware of. So, let's agree that tons and tons of debris were not recovered from Shanksville.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join