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: 21
26
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



So why is thedman saying 10 were filled? You guys realize you can't have it both ways.


Ask thedman - he read it somewhere, I don't know where.

You also realize that you can't have it both ways either, right? You want there to be mountains of plane debris visible from low earth orbit, but its only one plane. Not that much material, correct? So, if you want mountains of debris then you have to agree with thedman, if you don't then you agree with me that there is actually very little material to be accounted for, ergo there would not be mountains of plane debris.




posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 



So why is thedman saying 10 were filled? You guys realize you can't have it both ways.


Ask thedman - he read it somewhere, I don't know where.

Um, he just posted it.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


So how much material is involved in 95% of a 757? Is it 1000 cubic yards? 100? 5? 500?. C'mon - you're "proof" that Shanksville was staged is that there should have been mountains of plane debris in that one photo and there wasn't, so simply - how much space does the remains of a 757 occupy?



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 


So how much material is involved in 95% of a 757? Is it 1000 cubic yards? 100? 5? 500?. C'mon - you're "proof" that Shanksville was staged is that there should have been mountains of plane debris in that one photo and there wasn't, so simply - how much space does the remains of a 757 occupy?

Compressed, as when a car junk yard crushes cars into compressed blocks?



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Nope, shredded like when they shred cars into small pieces. In other words, take out the air. How much physical space does the remaining material need to occupy if you remove the "air" from the structure? Is it mountains worth? Huge hulking piles? C'mon its not that hard to calculate.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 

I don't see ANY plane debris that was supposedly dug out of the ground. Just many piles of dirt, enough that looks like they would completely fill back in the excavated hole as if nothing was buried there. More proof nothing buried.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Skeptics, most of this was supposedly dug out of the ground in that Shanksville field...



Why did we only see one piece of it (a smashed-up engine part that conveniently fit in the backhoe's bucket) coming out of the "hole"?



Seems to be a severe lack of evidence most of a 757 was buried under that field.



(Thanks to weedwacker for the photo that helps prove my case.
)



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Because thats what Wallace Miller was quoted in as reporting an interview with Pittsburg Post-Gazette

We have pictures of at least one of the bins with aircraft debris in it

You asked for source - I gave it to it to you

Just because you are too delusional to believe it is a different matter ......



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by ATH911
 


Because thats what Wallace Miller was quoted in as reporting an interview with Pittsburg Post-Gazette

We have pictures of at least one of the bins with aircraft debris in it

You asked for source - I gave it to it to you

Just because you are too delusional to believe it is a different matter ......


thedman, I highly recommend you take back that insult. No, not because I'm going to alert the mods about it, but because you're going to get your foot put in your mouth if you don't. I'll give you one chance.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by hooper
 

I don't see ANY plane debris that was supposedly dug out of the ground. Just many piles of dirt, enough that looks like they would completely fill back in the excavated hole as if nothing was buried there. More proof nothing buried.


That wasn't the question - how big of a pile would the plane occupy? Since YOU insist that the official story has 80% in the ground, then how big of a pile would 80% be?

You say YOU don't see any plane debris that was dug out of the ground - here's a question - why is that meaningful? I never saw any of the human remains either (and really don't care to), but I realize that I am not the measure of all things. Are YOU the measure off all things? Must you be satisfied in order for the remainder of humanity to be satisfied?

So far your "staged" argument is empty. Your cherry-picking quotes and obsession with trivia has not compelled anyone to examine Shanksville.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
That wasn't the question - how big of a pile would the plane occupy?

Big enough to see and I don't see any piles of debris. Do you?


Since YOU insist that the official story has 80% in the ground

I didn't make that up. You saying the Ambassador made that figure up?


You say YOU don't see any plane debris that was dug out of the ground - here's a question - why is that meaningful?
So far your "staged" argument is empty.

When seeing no debris coming out of the ground, the "buried" argument is empty, literally.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Dude.Is this really necessary?Do we really have to get into why a plane didn't crash in Shanksville?Seriously?There's nothing but a Roadrunner cartoon-like plane shaped hole in the ground.Who made this plane...Acme?
Someone obviously just took an excavator & dug this #in hole.Its common #in sense.Planes don't disappear on impact.If a plane had crashed there,there'd be no question about it.We'd see huge,blazing pieces of plane everywhere.The ground would've been #ed up.There'd be at least some remnance of the huge 44 ft tall solid medal tail section left.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



Big enough to see and I don't see any piles of debris. Do you?


So how big? What is the cubic volume of 80% of the plane physicallity when you deduct the space?

Thats 80% of 220000 lbs. or about 176000 lbs.

You still haven't explained why the would dig up the material and just heap in a big pile like so much garbage. Is that the way you would handle something as special as the physical remains? You know you wouldn't and of course they didn't either. That's why there are no big piles and also why no one else is asking such a stupid question.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
You still haven't explained why the would dig up the material and just heap in a big pile like so much garbage.

Heaps on the ground, or heaps in a large container (like garbage), regardless -- visible heaps.


Is that the way you would handle something as special as the physical remains? You know you wouldn't and of course they didn't either. That's why there are no big piles and also why no one else is asking such a stupid question.

Then where are the big piles in containers that there would have been? How did all that tons and tons of debris mysteriously not be seen?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



Then where are the big piles in containers that there would have been? How did all that tons and tons of debris mysteriously not be seen?


Again,

not being seen by YOU does not = does not exist.

You are not the measure of all things.

You posted an article from Catholic paper. Did you ever ask anyone mentioned in the article, that was on the site, whether or not they saw any remains?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
not being seen by YOU does not = does not exist.

Did you see any?


You posted an article from Catholic paper. Did you ever ask anyone mentioned in the article, that was on the site, whether or not they saw any remains?

You'd think if tons and tons of plane debris came out of the ground, one wouldn't need to ask.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 



Big enough to see and I don't see any piles of debris. Do you?


So how big? What is the cubic volume of 80% of the plane physicallity when you deduct the space?

Thats 80% of 220000 lbs. or about 176000 lbs.

You still haven't explained why the would dig up the material and just heap in a big pile like so much garbage. Is that the way you would handle something as special as the physical remains? You know you wouldn't and of course they didn't either. That's why there are no big piles and also why no one else is asking such a stupid question.
Your turd polishing skills are without a doubt every bit the equal of Dave's.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by dillweed
 


Can you imagine that an estimated 24-cars worth of plane debris came out of the ground and in 21 pages now, the skeptics can't even come close to proving that?!



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Hey skeptics, you think you'll be able to show some kinda proof most of a 757 was pulled out of the Shanks field before this thread hits page 25?



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



You'd think if tons and tons of plane debris came out of the ground, one wouldn't need to ask.


You'd think if you really wanted answers you would consider asking the right questions to the right people.

I guess this finally proves you have no desire to learn anything.

Case closed.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join