How was there even an explosion at Shanksville (officially speaking)?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
What you are confusing for wing scars are anything but. The trenches are weathered. The crater site is on an incline and was covered with lose dirt recently before 9/11 as it was a surface coal site before. The crater left on 911 is oblong and no more than 30 feet wide and no more than 15 feet deep.

There were no impacts that coincide with a Boeing 757 wingspan at the crater site in Shanksville on 911.

As you can see in this next photo. The photographer is standing in what is commonly confused as 'wing scars' but as you can see they are weathered trenches and not connected to the events on 911.


For those of you tuning in. This image was used to claim a fully fuel commercial airliner, a Boeing 757 A.k.a Flight 93 crashed upside down at a 40 degree angle. This has been proven to be a hoax and no Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksville on 911. The crater was caused by something else.
edit on 21-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



There were no impacts that coincide with a Boeing 757 wingspan at the crater site in Shanksville on 911.


Except for impact that caused the huge smoking hole in the middle of the photo you just posted.


Weathered? Says who? Who put you in charge of crash scene descriptions?



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
so this is all based on what Jim, a local landowner, thinks ?

ok



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 





The crater left on 911 is oblong and no more than 30 feet wide and no more than 15 feet deep.


They found the recorder 25 feet down. Please check your facts.

Failure to fact check leads to incorrect conclusions. That's why we have special agencies to investigate these kinds of events.
Otherwise we save money and let conspiracy sites produce the conclusions.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


There were no impacts that coincide with a Boeing 757 wingspan at the crater site in Shanksville on 911.



Except for the 124' 10" wing marks.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


There were no impacts that coincide with a Boeing 757 wingspan at the crater site in Shanksville on 911.



Except for the 124' 10" wing marks.


Reading comprehension or any kind of comprehension seems to be an overrated act for you. You should read the evidence rather than making yourself look like a bafoon.

It is a fact that what looks like wings scars are anything but. The scars were present before 911. Now go to another site and ignore the 3-4 resident debunkers here at ats who troll 911 threads all day long.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



There were no impacts that coincide with a Boeing 757 wingspan at the crater site in Shanksville on 911.


Except for impact that caused the huge smoking hole in the middle of the photo you just posted.



Yes hooper. Good boy. There is a smoking hole in the middle of that weathered depression. That hole was estimated at 30 feet wide (max) to around 10-15 deep. What is confused for dents made by wings are anything but. They are trenches were there prior to the crater being made as anyone can see.
edit on 21-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



14 more posts to bury this page.
edit on 21-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Yes hooper. Good boy. There is a smoking hole in the middle of that weathered depression.

Prove the existence of the weathered depression. Never mind, you can't. Just more truther make-believe.

That hole was estimated at 30 feet wide (max) to around 10-15 deep.

Really? I've seen 50 feet deep in the paper. And a hundred foot wide. In fact I am going to pretend I am truther, look at the photo you posted and estimate the hole is 130 feet wide and 40 feet deep.

What is confused for dents made by wings are anything but. They are trenches were there prior to the crater being made as anyone can see.

Nope, unlike you I can't look at a photo and see things the way they were before the photo was taken. So unless you have some hard proof (you don't) you are just submitting unfounded opinions to support your hyper-unusual bias.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



That hole was estimated at 30 feet wide (max) to around 10-15 deep.

Really? I've seen 50 feet deep in the paper. And a hundred foot wide.


Sources. Sources sources or get lost creep. You troll



People who were there said 30 feet wide 10 feet deep.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


Reading comprehension or any kind of comprehension seems to be an overrated act for you. You should read the evidence rather than making yourself look like a bafoon.




You never did answer this question, how did they rotate the gash 80 deg. The gash is not any where near the same angle as the 124' 10" wide wing marks, How can you explain this.

Can you back up the evidence you are putting forward.



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 





People who were there said 30 feet wide 10 feet deep.


Would you agree that parts of the aircraft were burried below the surface? ie the recorder at 25 feet?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Parts, or the whole plane?
Which is it?
How many parts didn't make it into the hole?
Can you prove this?
What are your sources?

Sound familiar samkent?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Sources. Sources sources or get lost creep. You troll

Sources? Why do I need "sources"? You declared something you think you saw in a photo as a "weathered depression" where's your source other than your imagination?

People who were there said 30 feet wide 10 feet deep

Really? Thats it? Everyone agreed that it was 30 feet wide and ten feet deep? Source for this consensus? Did they have meeting? Take a vote? Issue a white paper?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
so this is all based on what Jim, a local landowner, thinks ?

ok


Are you calling the landowner stupid?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


They found the recorder 25 feet down. Please check your facts.

Failure to fact check leads to incorrect conclusions.

Like you forgetting to mention they had to dig below the 10 foot-deep crater to allegedly find the black boxes at 15 ft and 25 ft down?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
OK, back to discussing the ridiculous notion that a 757 with about 7,000 gallons of fuel can crash and bury and self-seal itself at 580 mph, except for the cockpit section, and cause an large explosion to produce a 700+ yard wide smoke plume with no scorching of the tall dry grass around the crater where the fiery explosion would have happened and just a small section of forest getting damaged by an exploding cockpit section that contains nothing in it to even cause an explosion, just like the exploding wooden horse-drawn buggy in that 'Family Guy' episode.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:40 PM
link   
The flight 93 smoking gun is how can a plane crash at 563 miles per hour at a 40-degree nose-down, inverted attitude leaving a crater only eight to ten feet deep and 30 to 50 feet wide when the plane is over 123 feet wide?
edit on 23-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
The flight 93 smoking gun is how can a plane crash at 563 miles per hour at a 40-degree nose-down, inverted attitude leaving a crater only eight to ten feet deep and 30 to 50 feet wide when the plane is over 123 feet wide?
edit on 23-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


No wait, ATH911 is saying the plane was going 580+ and you're saying 563. And now its 8 to 10 feet deep, a couple of post ago it was definetly 10 feet deep. And now all of a sudden its 30 to 50 feet wide. How did it get 20 feet wider? Why is the hole size changing 10 years later?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
The flight 93 smoking gun is how can a plane crash at 563 miles per hour at a 40-degree nose-down, inverted attitude leaving a crater only eight to ten feet deep and 30 to 50 feet wide when the plane is over 123 feet wide?
edit on 23-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


No wait, ATH911 is saying the plane was going 580+ and you're saying 563. And now its 8 to 10 feet deep, a couple of post ago it was definetly 10 feet deep. And now all of a sudden its 30 to 50 feet wide. How did it get 20 feet wider? Why is the hole size changing 10 years later?


Hey not so smart guy. Read up on the facts. Your are getting quite annoying and you seem to have a hard time telling the difference between depth and width. This link should be able to clarify the differences in dimensions thinkmath.edc.org...

Tell us what it is "no credibility guy at ats".


At 10:03:11, near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, the plane crashed into a reclaimed coal strip mine in Stonycreek Township in Somerset County.[59] The National Transportation Safety Board reported that the flight impacted at 563 miles per hour (906 km/h) at a 40-degree nose-down, inverted attitude.[19] The impact left a crater eight to ten feet deep (c. 3 m), and 30 to 50 feet wide (c. 12 m).
en.wikipedia.org...

Ladies and gentlemen, Hooper is a resident troll here at ATS. Do not consider his views as sane or intelligible.... Read about internet trolls before you let a guy like Hooper ruin your ATS experience.

Here's a link TROLLS



edit on 24-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


8 to 10 feet, 10 feet, 30 feet, 30 to 50 feet, etc. etc. etc. When you decide how big you think the hole was, then maybe you can tell us exactly why the hole is the wrong size. 'Til then its 10 years and counting.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join