Evidence no plane crashed & buried in Shanksville; piles of dirt, but no piles of plane debris, page 29

Pages: << 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 26 times

reply posted on 28-1-2011 @ 06:12 PM by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma
Truthers, for the most part ignore them.

Kinda like you skeptics keep ignoring our request to tell us what you guys think the official Flight 93 crash details are?

reply posted on 28-1-2011 @ 06:17 PM by ATH911

Originally posted by amy2x

Hands,feet,fingers are the easiest body parts to procure and "dispense" for their fake crash sit. Probable is speculation and not fact.

Skeptics can't understand that type of logic, Amy. They can't conceive a group could stage a plane crash, so they can't envision ways perps would stage the scene, even when they are show evidence of a staging over and over and over again. One photo of one piece of debris is all they need to convince them.

reply posted on 28-1-2011 @ 06:32 PM by Six Sigma

Originally posted by ATH911

Kinda like you skeptics keep ignoring our request to tell us what you guys think the official Flight 93 crash details are?

ATH911... You failed at all 10 points before, you failed at offering a hypothesis on what you know happened in Shanksville, and you failed at explaining anything regarding the phone calls.

You get hung up on the crash scene, where there isn't a SINGLE PERSON from the thousands that were there on 9/11 that do NOT think Flight 93 crashed there.

reply posted on 28-1-2011 @ 06:35 PM by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Originally posted by ATH911

Kinda like you skeptics keep ignoring our request to tell us what you guys think the official Flight 93 crash details are?

ATH911... You failed at all 10 points before, you failed at offering a hypothesis on what you know happened in Shanksville, and you failed at explaining anything regarding the phone calls.

You get hung up on the crash scene, where there isn't a SINGLE PERSON from the thousands that were there on 9/11 that do NOT think Flight 93 crashed there.

Thanks for proving my point about keep ignoring our request for the crash details. I like your lie and your logical fallacy too.

reply posted on 28-1-2011 @ 06:44 PM by Six Sigma

Originally posted by ATH911

Thanks for proving my point about keep ignoring our request for the crash details. I like your lie and your logical fallacy too.

How did the families talk to their loved ones before they died? Please, explain the phone calls.

Thank you!

reply posted on 28-1-2011 @ 07:04 PM by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma

How did the families talk to their loved ones before they died? Please, explain the phone calls.

Thank you!

You can ask me those types of question on the appropriate threads. This thread deals with the allege burying and excavation of Flight 93 and the lack of evidence supporting that claim.

Phone calls from the alleged passengers are off-topic.

Thank you.

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 05:36 AM by Six Sigma

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma

How did the families talk to their loved ones before they died? Please, explain the phone calls.

Thank you!

You can ask me those types of question on the appropriate threads. This thread deals with the allege burying and excavation of Flight 93 and the lack of evidence supporting that claim.

Phone calls from the alleged passengers are off-topic.

Thank you.

There you have it. The typical dodge of the truther!

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 07:32 AM by amy2x

reply to post by Six Sigma

10) 95% of the aircraft that was recovered by professional investigators and by civilians was returned to United Airlines after being examined for evidence of explosives use.

Where's the picture of all the plane parts?

I don't expect to change your mind.You've probably seen all the video's of local residents that don't believe flight 93 crashed there. Plus your opening comment indicates that you've arrived at a final conclusion that it crashed there.No if ands or buts.

This short video explains how the phone calls were faked on flight 77. May apply to flight 93.

YouTube Link

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 07:40 AM by Six Sigma

Originally posted by amy2x

This short video explains how the phone calls were faked on flight 77. May apply to flight 93.

I am at work today, unable to watch Youtube Videos. Perhaps you can explain to me what the video is about?

If it AT ALL talks about voice morphing, it's rubbish. I will explain why when I start a thread about thew phone calls.

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 11:05 AM by ATH911

Originally posted by Six Sigma

There you have it. The typical dodge of the truther!

Like you skeptics keep dodging tell us what the Flight 93 crash details are?

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 12:16 PM by thedman

reply to post by amy2x

Where's the picture of all the plane parts?

One of bins used to hold recovered aircraft parts .....

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 12:31 PM by ATH911

Originally posted by thedman
Where's the picture of all the plane parts?

One of bins used to hold recovered aircraft parts .....

Where's the other 9 you claim existed?

Why don't any of those pieces of scrap metal have any of the UA logo colors on them? Odd.

Also, what was the nearest business to the crater again?

.

edit on 29-1-2011 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 01:21 PM by Six Sigma

Originally posted by ATH911

Also, what was the nearest business to the crater again?

Wasn't it a junk yard? Yeah and they paid off Fred Sanford and his son Lamont to get their pick up truck and make a few trips to the ol strip mine to do sum gubmint work! The MIB also provided them a template to dig a ditch that resembled the outline of a plane and scatter some junk in there too.

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 02:47 PM by amy2x

reply to post by ATH911

That old crater was probably used to dump waste by a farmer. Tractor parts, household garbage and other farm refuse. May not have been used for that purpose for decades. None of the photo's show a plane. Just a smoldering hole. If it was me,I would not be standing next to hole with a plane load of passengers burning! Burning bodies is not a nice smell. Either is burning jet fuel, Plastics and other toxic materials.

I think that hole may have been doused with a flammable liquid and maybe a plane flew over the area and dropped the refuse. I hand held rocket launcher also could been used to ignite the hole.

The debris field was over a very large area. If a plane crashed right there, most of the debris would be in that area. There was even debris past a treed buffer that is a fair
ways away.

I noticed a lot of previous posts have been removed, I imagine that this forum picks up keyword (bad language) and then the moderator is dispatched.
Would be to tedious to have every post checked IMHO.

edit on 29-1-2011 by amy2x because: edit

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 06:38 PM by 007Polytoks

Strange that your bin's are not in the Ariel photo's at all, and that the engine part only shows up in one photo.

This is how a real murder investigation goes... As per "Wise Geek" investigative blog on murder scene investigation. www.wisegeek.com...

""A log of all individuals on or around the site is immediately established. Usually the medical response team will be finger and foot printed, along with any bystanders, so that markings found on the scene can be readily identified. The next step for murder investigations is to observe and photograph the scene. Nothing is moved, including the body, until the scene has been fully written up and photographed, to ensure that nothing is missed. As crews photograph the scene, they put tags on items that should be collected for evidence, such as bloodstained clothing, weapons, and other objects of interest on the site.""

Where are the pictures that HAD as per any investigations guidelines be taken?

Where is this log of all individuals on or around the site?

Most of all where is the plane that we are told crashed here?

www.planecrashinfo.com...

Here is photographic evidence of what happens when planes really crash into the ground.

See this? Its called a real crash site. Jet fuel burns things you know....

Omg look picture of them reconstructing the aircraft... Why was this not done for 9/11??

Strange that Shanksvill is the only picture without large amounts of debris...

Another real crash...

Where is the debris that was supposedly dug up at Shanksvill debunkers? I thought you guys were good at this. Strange that everyone decided on 9/11 that the procedures we have been following when investigating incidents that might involve corruption, and governmental conspiracy for years were no longer to be followed on that day.

Convenient.

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 11:00 PM by thedman

reply to post by 007Polytoks

Just one problem - you are not dealing with a conventional murder investigation, but a crime scene/aircraft crash

Why would you need fingerprints/footprints - its not as if someone standing in the field was responsible for
the crash

Also reconstructing an aircraft is only used if the investigators do not have a definitive reason for the crash

Was fairly obvious why Flight 93 crashed - they had the flight and voice data recorders and could match up the
actions of the hijackers with the aircraft.

reply posted on 29-1-2011 @ 11:06 PM by thedman

reply to post by 007Polytoks

See you playing the usual truther games - choosing aircraft crashes from landing accidents , low altitude. low
speed, low angles crashes. They leave lot of large pieces of debris

Have nothing in common with Flight 93 which hit at speed of 580 mph, upside down - impact like this smashes
aircraft into lot of little pieces. Also the fuel is aersolized and burns off fairly rapidly, low speed crashes where
fuel tanks are ruptured burn slowly in a large pool fire.

reply posted on 30-1-2011 @ 12:27 AM by 007Polytoks

reply to post by thedman

Usual "truther" games?

Where do you get off attacking people for pursuing the truth?

I picked this from a list of the worlds 100 worst crashes, there was no cherry picking....

Nor were all these crashing landing accidents if you even looked at them....

""
Was fairly obvious why Flight 93 crashed - they had the flight and voice data recorders and could match up the
actions of the hijackers with the aircraft.

""
So you assume that voice/data recorders cant be manipulated?
They cant ever have inaccurate data?

You assume that machines can never be wrong?

""
Have nothing in common with Flight 93 which hit at speed of 580 mph, upside down - impact like this smashes
aircraft into lot of little pieces. Also the fuel is aersolized and burns off fairly rapidly, low speed crashes where
fuel tanks are ruptured burn slowly in a large pool fire.
""
Airbus A-300-605R

Was going about 300 + miles an hour when it crashed into a residential community, and it did a direct nose dive.

Why did all the fuel blow up, and create fires that spread?
By the looks of things the grass around the crash site would light up pretty fast.

www.youtube.com...

www.planecrashinfo.com...

I don't see how the fuel could have burned so very differently...

reply posted on 30-1-2011 @ 12:38 AM by 007Polytoks

Clearly people like to pretend that their is no one questioning this.

www.wanttoknow.info...

You have people ranging from Homeland Security officials, to 30 year Air-force veterans who are highly decorated.

firefightersfor911truth.org...

pilotsfor911truth.org...

It seems like every day the "skeptics" grow smaller, and smaller in number.

reply posted on 30-1-2011 @ 08:02 AM by thedman

reply to post by 007Polytoks

Yes you are still playing games ......

In the examples cited:

Procedural errors by the crew, led to the crash of this AVIANCA Boeing 747 while attempting to land at Madrid, Spain

Do you have a problem with reading comprehension ? Clearly states it was A LANDING ACCIDENT!

Or this (did a quick search - something you should have done)

July 4, Irkutsk, Russia: Russian Tupolev-154 crashed on its third approach to the runway for a refueling stop, killing all 145 people.

3rd approach to runway? Sounds like landing accident

Typical tactic by conspiracy nutz - pick out a few landing/takeoff accidents then start shouting " LOOK AT THESE PICTURES! WHY DOES FLIGHT 93 NOT LOOK LIKE THEM! MUST BE FAKE..."

Try researching PSA 1771 - has simularities to Flight 93

High speed crash into ground, large degree of fragmentation of aircraft