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.

 

Challenge: produce two photos from Shanksville scene showing plane wires

page: 7
3
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   

No bigger than her van......


"Small, not much bigger than my van" then it crashed.
edit on 14-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Thanks, but I still can't see a plane that big disintegrating from that video. One person brought up the recent airshow disaster but that plane came straight down and hit a solid rock hard surface. Sorry, I still can't see it. Aren't those engine parts made from titanium? I mean I can see if this plane nose dived from even a few thousand feet. But that wasn't the case.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 

That woman just strikes me as being very truthful. You can see the emotion in her words. Even if what she saw was a bit higher and it was 93...disintegration? Naaa. Then I still need to question if this was indeed 93 that crashed in that field.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by maddog99
 


Here, also in Pennsylvania, but different terrain, and slower speed:

www.iasa.com.au...

The impact nearly vertical, airplane was intact all the way in, just not the same airspeed as United 93, they were trying not to crash, there..^ ^ ^ .




Can't find the same type of cockpit view animation from NTSB, but from the accident report:


.....the aircraft impacted the ground in nearly 80° of dive, almost 60° of left bank, and at 261 knots indicated airspeed.


www.airdisaster.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by maddog99
 


RE: Susan McElwain:

From another ATS thread:


Hooper beat me to it- in her own words, McElwain grudgingly admitted she didn't see nor hear anything crash. She heard about the crash later and she's assuming on her own that the craft she had seen was what crashed. As you pointed out yourself, this ISN'T the plane that crashed since it was flying in the opposite direction, and since there was only one plane crash, you're only PROVING this wasn't flight 93 she saw. Therefore, it really doesn't matter what plane it was she had seen.

Thank you for proving me right- her testimony cannot be taken at face value becuase she's making errors of misjudgement. She's certainly not lying, she's simply mistaken.


www.abovetopsecret.com...


Whilst she may be convinced, at least at time of that video interview, of what she thinks she saw and experienced, her claim of the "50 feet" overhead isn't making sense. Anyone who flies will understand this, and just how low it is off the ground. Her perceptions, as a non-expert observer witness, are surely less than accurate.


Look, an Air Show low pass, perhaps (I'm judging) about 25 feet, at the aft tailcone. Here, the 757 is quite slow, compared to United 93. Looks to be 180 knots, maybe 200:




Here, a 100 feet or so (judging by the wingspan of 124 feet 10 inches). Medium speed, maybe ~250 kts:





F-18 fighter low pass, and near the speed of sound....Mach 1 at sea level (Dobbins AFB is 326 feet MSL) is about 760 MPH, or 660 kts.



A person who had never seen an Air Show, is not a pilot but an amateur, a layperson? Take it with a grain of salt....heck a whole salt lick.


edit on Fri 14 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
I would say give up. Your efforts to prove something here is falling to yawns and eye rolls.

Crater is too small remember. 30 foot wide 10 feet deep. Plane is 124 feet wide, 155 long.

edit on 14-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Yea, really...I live near 3 major airports and work less than 1/4 mile from a small one. I've also seen military jets fly-by low at full speed and had enough time to look up and see them. Even if she was mistaken, she couldn't be that off. You guys really make me start to believe the theories about dis-info trolls.
I just showed about 10 co-workers the crater and official story and guess what? None even realized the crater was that small. A few asked where all the debris went. A few said no way that's the crash site.
I got a dump truck full of salt...and more people with questions.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by maddog99
 




I just showed about 10 co-workers the crater and official story and guess what? None even realized the crater was that small.


Ever taken a holiday? Plenty of snaps (photos) too? Did you ever visit someplace that was awe-inspiring in its size and scope, but the photos just didn't turn out able to capture it the way you saw it, with own eyes?

Take that dump truck of salt along, when judging the scant few photos of the crash site, but be sure to review as many as you can, in order to gain perspective.

You will find the "no plane" proponents tend to only display a select few, even cropping them sometimes.

Also, as far as crash site photo documentation....I doubt that every image ever snapped there is posted on line.

What is troubling, coming from people like "Killtown", and others re: Shanksville is.....they can't even seem to agree amongst themselves.

It was "shot down". (No evidence, the FDR is clear there)

Then, the "debris" (back to "shot down"....)....but most debris found was either light weight, or could be accounted to have spread along the trajectory of the forward (Eastward, roughly) motion of the airplane, since the impact was not directly vertical...it had a lateral component of forces. Light stuff downwind of the crash site.

If the airplane was hit prior to impact with the ground, logic dictates that some sort of debris would have been found by back-tracking over the ground path.

Then, there are the "No United 93 at all" people. Yet, all that evidence is there, that came from the airplane;

Its structure, its occupants, their belongings, etc. (and the FDR and CVR, of course).

Self-contradictory, these conflicting *theories*...and mostly, the only way to shoe-horn them in to the narrative at all is be cherry-picking what they want, and ignoring vast quantities of other facts that are *inconvenient* to their pet notions.....

Just a small sample of photos, from the Moussaoui trial


As an experienced pilot, with many hours in the B-757/767, I can see too much evidence pointing to the intentional crash, by the hijackers. The Flight Recorders seal it, for me...since I know how they work, what they do, how they are used in other crash investigations to determine what happened.








edit on Fri 14 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by maddog99
 




I just showed about 10 co-workers the crater and official story and guess what? None even realized the crater was that small.


Ever taken a holiday? Plenty of snaps (photos) too? Did you ever visit someplace that was awe-inspiring in its size and scope, but the photos just didn't turn out able to capture it the way you saw it, with own eyes?.........



YAAAWWWWnnnnn..... ..... next post. Next time admit you are getting owned., lol jk bud. Keep trying.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by maddog99
Yea, really...I live near 3 major airports and work less than 1/4 mile from a small one. I've also seen military jets fly-by low at full speed and had enough time to look up and see them. Even if she was mistaken, she couldn't be that off. You guys really make me start to believe the theories about dis-info trolls.



I know eh. They are trolls. They fail daily on every thread and post. Ignore them.

30 foot wide and 10 foot deep crater. Not caused by boeing 757.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



30 foot wide and 10 foot deep crater.


So why do you think that reporter you quoted lied about it being almost 20 feet deep? Why are you calling her a liar?



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



30 foot wide and 10 foot deep crater.


Just as you can't keep the figures straight, from your post, to another post, to another post, when describing that crater *size*, others who related their off-the-cuff estimates of their impressions of its size were equally wrong.

You are relying on the hearsay of people who *eyeballed* and guessed at its dimensions. And, you see that in the many varied opinions from the few who wrote it in articles, or on taped interviews expressing it.

Yet, in all of this time --- not once have you provided a professionally done measurement. Actual (and accurate) measurements, done by investigators in order to document the entire scene.

Like all so-called "Truth Movement" believers, there is an abundant reliance on the hearsay and rumors and innuendos and misconceptions that fit your biased, pre-conceived need to find alleged *holes* in the account of events that day, in some way, any way, in order to fuel this "conspiracy" nonsense.

But, when shown evidence that clearly refutes the imaginative *I know better than everyone else* attitude, that evidence is ignored.

This is known as "cherry-picking". It is anti-intellectual, dishonest, and a bit on the delusional side of things.


Just as the personal guesses of the depression and disturbed area at Shanksville vary between individuals...who, I repeat, did NOT measure, but just estimated (incorrectly, no doubt)....the few so-called *eyewitnesses* on the ground, that keep being trotted out repeatedly, are most likely mistaken in their accounts, and distance estimations.


On the other hand, there are the ATC records (radar and audio), and the airplanes airborne in the vicinity that observed United 93. The business jet, and another private airplane, a Piper Cherokee.

The ATC info has absolutely no communications nor radar tracking of any military jet, just the known aircraft that have been mentioned for a decade, now.


(PS: Some while back, a claim was made about this member's immediate family having experience in airplane crash investigations. A challenge to that claim was made --- but no response was ever forthcoming).



edit on Sat 15 October 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   
challenge : demonstrate how the hoax was pulled off with names, dates, times, details, physical evidence and credible first hand eyewitnesses (not of the white plane, the actual hoaxers)

show me the guys who dug the ditches and planted the evidence

you've had 10 years, there must be some tangible physical evidence by now

please undertsand I am not asking for anamolies of the OS

I am asking for the hoax "OS" of how it was accomplished



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


Re read the thread brainiac it was all presented.. No one is going to give you anything because we all know you will not be able to comprehend or chose not to.
edit on 15-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


Re read the thread brainiac it was all presented.. No one is going to give you anything because we all know you will not be able to comprehend or chose not to.
edit on 15-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


That's not a very helpful post. I mean, seriously, how would you react if I told you that all the information to prove the OS as true was listed already? It would take forever to find, and you would probably not even try looking, especially through 7 pages of bickering.

Was it one of the videos? Those don't exactly count as evidence. Now, if you could type out who exactly is being implicated here (not just a blanket government), then we could make some progress. How many people are involved in the conspiracy, and how could they have possibly done what is necessary to make the conspiracy viable?



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
How about if we are seven pages into a discussion, thats 20 posts per page and someone jumps in and demands proof, names, places and times without any obvious knowledge of the information already presented. Thats just lazy.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


But there are dozens of witnesses who heard and saw a plane in distress before it went down in Somerset.

How do you account for all of these peoples testimonies? Were they delusional?

The crater had airplane parts in it.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


There were planes in the air. People did see planes. Some saw the plane fly over Indian lake others didnt. Some saw a small white plane some saw something no bigger than a van crash but all but one didnt see the plane actually crash but saw a plane then later heard a boom. Lee P. is the only guy who claims to actually see the plane crash .

The fact is there were more than 2 crafts in the air before and after. The crash scene is suspicious, there are witnesses that said the plane flew over indian lake while losing parts and scattering debris BEFORE it crashed. Some of them witnessed a smaller military type jet leave the area seconds after the BOOM.

Many conflicting stories.
edit on 15-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

there are witnesses that said the plane flew over indian lake while losing parts and scattering debris BEFORE it crashed.



Name them.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


The fact is there were more than 2 crafts in the air before and after. The crash scene is suspicious, there are witnesses that said the plane flew over indian lake while losing parts and scattering debris BEFORE it crashed. Some of them witnessed a smaller military type jet leave the area seconds after the BOOM.

Many conflicting stories.


Yes, and we know how reliable witnesses are during a traumatic event. That's why you gather the physical evidence with witness statements. Now, run along and read the FDR, witness statements, and the transcripts from the telephone calls (altitude during the calls).

Can you also point out the airplane debris in this crater?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join