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.

 

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

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by D8ncer
Investigators pore over the site of the nose-first, high speed-impact JF-104A crash that left this large crater in the desert near Edwards Air Force Base in December 1962. NASA test pilot Milton O.

Thompson ejected from this aircraft on Dec. 20, 1962, after an asymmetrical flap condition made the jet uncontrollable.

Actual high speed nose inpact by a jet fighter made this hole in the ground which is bigger than the crater shown in Shanksville.
My view is that had it been a large commercial airline, surely the crater at Shanksville, should have been huge.
i224.photobucket.com...


Different conditions, different results. Speed, impact angle, and most importantly the conditions of the ground to name just a few. Suffice it to say both planes hit the ground and both left a crater.




posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


There is an issue of forced perspective in the F-104 crater photo as well, I believe that particular impact crater was less than 20 feet at its widest.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 



I still don't see how an explosion could have happened at Shanksville.


Well, if you can't figure out how a plane with thousands of gallons of jet fuel hitting the ground at 560 mph can explode then having the "crash details" ain't going to help you. You need some very, very basic science instruction.

No, the crash details will help me.

What are they?



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Yes, can we get some 'official' dimensions and crash details?

Thanks in advanced.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Yes, can we get some 'official' dimensions and crash details?

Thanks in advanced.


As far as I know there are no "crash details" beyond what was read from the recording devices. There are no "official dimensions". Too bad. Not that a lack of evidence would ever stop you from making crap up, Mr. "weathered ditches".

So know what are you going to do?



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Yes, can we get some 'official' dimensions and crash details?

Thanks in advanced.


As far as I know there are no "crash details" beyond what was read from the recording devices. There are no "official dimensions". Too bad.

So know what are you going to do?


Provide sources and clippings from people that were actually there.

"The plane left a crater 20 feet wide and 15 feet deep, churning up chunks of deep brown earth and scorching trees in the nearby woods." (11)

"Pittsburgh's WTAE-TV reporter Michelle Wright toured the crash scene and said that a crater of about 30 to 40 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide and 18 feet deep was created by the crash." (9)
www.unitedflight93.com...




Schooling continued in next post.
edit on 3-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   
ThoatYogurt, Weedwhacker, hooper. Either you guys have amnesia or are trolls since this has all been discussed before and not too long ago.


Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 




The crater was measured at around 15-30 feet in diameter and no more that 15 feet deep.




YOU (and only YOU) on this Board keep repeating this (although the exact dimensions change...even NOW there is a 100% variation, base don YOUR OWN WORDS of "between 15-30 feet" in the "claimed" dimensions!!
)


YET, when asked, repeatedly to CITE your source for hte claims...nothing. Zilch. Nada...


Sigh... how ignorant can you be considering how long you have been here and how many times you have seen the facts..... I will repeat what the first responders and actual eyewitnesses have seen in the flesh.



The Dayton Daily News of September 12, 2001, described the scene:

The impact of the crash left a crater estimated by authorities to be about 10 feet deep and 20 feet wide. It appeared the plane first hit on the downward slope of a hillside [/ex

Nena Lensbouer, who had prepared lunch for the workers at the scrap yard overlooking the crash site, said she was the first person to reach the crater. Lensbouer said that the crater was five to six feet deep and smaller than the 24-foot trailer in her front yard. She described the sound as "an explosion, like an atomic bomb" -- not a crash.


Capt. Frank Monaco:
“The gouge was 8 to 10 feet deep and 15 to 20 feet long, said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police. “
(AP, 9/12/01 )
www.courier-journal.com...



FBI Special Agent Bill Crowley said the recorder was found at about 4:20 p.m. in the 8-foot-deep crater caused by the crash.
WPXI11 Pittsburgh

The plane left a crater 20 feet wide and 15 feet deep.
(Plain Dealer, 9/12/01)

Reporters said the crater was about 40 feet wide and more than 8 feet deep.
(Los Angeles Times, 9/12/01)

The impact of the crash left a crater estimated by authorities to be about 10 feet deep and 20 feet wide.
(Cox, 9/12/01)

[I]“Pittsburgh's WTAE-TV reporter Michelle Wright toured the crash scene and said that a crater of about 30 to 40 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide and 18 feet deep was created by the crash.”
www.newsnet5.com...



Ladies and gentlemen, the 3-4 resident debunkers here willfully ignore the facts and are hoping you people are stupid and will not believe eyewitnesses. They can only insult peoples intelligence, resort to name calling and hand waving when confronted with the facts.

Many people who were at the crash site said the crater was too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757 who's wing span is over 123 feet with a fuselage diameter of over 15 feet and tail height over 20 feet. The crater has been estimated to be no more than 15-30 feet which makes the conspiracy theory that a Boeing 757 (flight 93) caused that small crater when the eyewitnesses and common sense proves it not only absurd but impossible.





Ringing any bells GUY(s)? TY?WWHoop?
edit on 3-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
Schooling continued Hooper, pay attention and admit your reason for trolling and ignoring real evidence. Provide counter evidence and sources that your and your cohorts claim the crater was 124 feet wide which is not only lying but unfounded idiocy.


described the area where the plane crashed as a former strip mine that is now a grassy field edged by woods. The plane came down near the tree line, he said.

Reporters were taken to the top of a nearby hill, overlooking a V-shaped gouge in the field. The gouge is 8- to 10-feet deep and 15- to 20-feet long, said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Poli
post-gazette.com...

Just incase you said the link didnt work.
edit on 3-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 

OK, real quick:
Pittsburgh's WTAE-TV
The Dayton Daily News
AP
www.courier-journal.com...
Plain Dealer
Los Angeles Times
Cox
www.newsnet5.com

They're nice but none of them is a branch of any government. Thanks. Nothing official then, like I said. So go ahead, go cherry picking quotes - its been the status quo for ten years which is why this has gotten exactly nowhere. Do you need any other basic civics instruction? How a bill gets through Congress? Maybe where the President lives? Always be glad to help.



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Thats exactly what you said the last time you were shown to be clueless and willfully ignorant over the subject.

Btw, your two links are bunk( dont work) and show nothing... Nice try. Talk about poor cherry picking. Weak.


I know why you are in such disbelief. You tried so hard to make a Boeing 757 fit in a 30 foot hole so now you are calling people who were there liars because you failed to prove that the crater was caused by a boeing 757.

Dont troll.


edit on 3-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Shills are often employed by confidence artists. Plant and stooge more commonly refer to any person who is secretly in league with another person or organization while pretending to be neutral or actually a part of the organization he or she is planted in, such as a magician's audience, a political party, or an intelligence organization.

We are not blind.



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Thats exactly what you said the last time you were shown to be clueless and willfully ignorant over the subject.

I always say the same thing - its easy when its the truth, the truth doesn't change. There is no "official" published crash details or crater dimensions.

Btw, your two links are bunk( dont work) and show nothing... Nice try. Talk about poor cherry picking. Weak.

They weren't intended to be links.

I know why you are in such disbelief.

There's only one thing here that I don't believe.

You tried so hard to make a Boeing 757 fit in a 30 foot hole so now you are calling people who were there liars because you failed to prove that the crater was caused by a boeing 757.

Yeah, 30 foot hole. And I'm calling everyone liars, right.

No official record. That's all there is to it. Anything you post is speculation based on media records.




Dont troll.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Are you telling us there is no official documents or information pertaining to the crash site in Shanksville?

Flight 93 could of been a surrogate cruise missile or a one man trainer but it was not a Boeing 757 that was said to have 'crashed' near stoystown penn
edit on 5-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Are you telling us there is no official documents or information pertaining to the crash site in Shanksville?

Flight 93 could of been a surrogate cruise missile or a one man trainer but it was not a Boeing 757 that was said to have 'crashed' near stoystown penn


I guess so, they all ran away.....
edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Are you telling us there is no official documents or information pertaining to the crash site in Shanksville?

Flight 93 could of been a surrogate cruise missile or a one man trainer but it was not a Boeing 757 that was said to have 'crashed' near stoystown penn


I guess so, they all ran away.....
edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


Ran away? No, we're done here. You just keep repeating that the scars were there before, they were there before, they were there before, without any reference to reality so there really isn't much more to do. If you come up with something new or factual, I'll be back.



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
When I have the time I will pull up posts from you and your sock puppets, hooper, when you admitted that those trenches were not caused by wings. You went to go as far as to say the reason why there are no wing scars is because the plane turned to "confetti" when the nose hit the ground so the wings never hit the ground...... (stupid I know ) I am just waiting for you to contradict yourself and comprimise the official story further before I drop the HAMMER on you.... again....


This is not your field.
edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
When I have the time I will pull up posts from you and your sock puppets, hooper, when you admitted that those trenches were not caused by wings. You went to go as far as to say the reason why there are no wing scars is because the plane turned to "confetti" when the nose hit the ground so the wings never hit the ground...... (stupid I know ) I am just waiting for you to contradict yourself and comprimise the official story further before I drop the HAMMER on you.... again....


This is not your field.
edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


I don't think the entirety of the wings through the whole span hit the ground. I may be wrong. But its a moot point. So when are you going to give us a little science? A crater impact analysis that shows exactly what the crater should look like? Or are you just going to go on and on and on with argument from incredulity? Because look around you - no one is buying it.



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

I don't think the entirety of the wings through the whole span hit the ground. I may be wrong. But its a moot point.


HELLO??? That was the whole point. The other poster is convinced that the wings left nice, tidy, weathered trenches the exact size of the wings of a Boeing 757 like he lifted the dimensions from wikipedia and decided that a plane hitting the ground at 500+ mph would not disturb grass, ground and leave a nice tidy cartoon imprint of a plane. You should correct your peers.
edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



HELLO??? That was the whole point.

You have no point. You just keep repeating the same lame fantasy over and over and over again.

The other poster is convinced that the wings left nice, tidy, weathered trenches the exact size of the wings of a Boeing 757.....

He's probably right. He's dealing in reality.

...like he lifted the dimensions from wikipedia

Don't like his reference? Then find the wingspan dimensions elsewhere. They are available at the Boeing website. You'll find its the same.

....and decided that a plane hitting the ground at 500+ mph would not disturb grass, ground and leave a nice tidy cartoon imprint of a plane.

Yes it did disturb the grass, and it did leave an imprint of its shape. That's what happens in the real world.

You should correct your peers

No need. They're right and your wrong. In fact you're so far from right you're not even wrong.



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Wally Miller: "The explanation was... The right wing hit the ground right there were the impact area is and as that happened, it took the front end...[does cartwheel hand gesture].
The front 1/3 of the plane, including the cockpit, slammed into the ground off of the wing and the front 1/3 broke off and flew up into the trees and there was a fireball behind it and the remaining 2/3'rds went down in the ground."


One of the landowners working with the FBI during the excavation described that the 757 went in the ground so fast that it didn't have a chance to burn:

The location was eventually determined because of some disturbed ground in front of a grove of charred evergreens, explains Jamie. The ground had swallowed up much of the wreckage.

Because of their familiarity with the property, the Svonavecs were asked to work with the F.B.I. on recovery efforts. “We hired some extra people and worked one long shift, seven days a week,” says Jim, a former federal mining inspector.

Using a Kobelco excavator, the process was slow and meticulous because “every bucket of material that was excavated went through screens,” explains Sally. Screening helped locate many body fragments and debris from the plane.

The plane “went in the ground so fast it didn’t have a chance to burn,” says Jim.




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join