flight 93 crash site was there in 1994

Hello i found this picture on the web like 6 years ago i totaly forgot to share it. Ok so i have a question
i try really hard to find what flight did crash there before this picture is from 1994. can anyone help me plz


Special thx and credit for the picture: www.davidicke.com...

Government Evidence Photo:





Simply a-friggin'-mazing how all four planes simply...............vanished on that Tuesday, Sept 11th, back in 2001!


OP. I am not arguing at all but where is the proof that that photo is from 1994? Surely there's more than just that typed out sentence on the photo, right?
Next question, why was this taken in 1994? Whose photo was it? What was the purpose?


Oh so many questions.............so few answers

reply to post by Human_Alien


i really dont know thats why i ask if anybody know if there is a plane that crash there before Sep-11-2001 so that will make that picture genuine thx for all of your help guys.

reply to post by knowneedtoknow
My question would be... What is it on the "1994" picture that makes it look like a crash site?

I see the corner of a farmer's field, looks like a ditch is within the square marked as crash site. I don't see any airplane parts or burned vegetation.

Interesting.. I did some digging and here is what I found.

100 km SE of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States 4/20/1994 -- Image courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey

Originally posted by rogerstigers
Interesting.. I did some digging and here is what I found.

100 km SE of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States 4/20/1994 -- Image courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey

With this post, I see more evidence of earthmoving and a construction site, but I don't see any airplane crash in 1994 evident here.

Thanks for the find and posting it.

reply to post by butcherguy


You are welcome. I did a relook at it. The OP photo has a little black arrow that apparently points to a small round hole in the ground that, I am guessing matches the location of the crash. It's probably nothing, but was an interesting find to say the least.

i recall seeing this before. from what i heard it was from a satellite. except i also heard its fake... so i dont know what to believe.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by rogerstigers
Interesting.. I did some digging and here is what I found.

100 km SE of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States 4/20/1994 -- Image courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey

With this post, I see more evidence of earthmoving and a construction site, but I don't see any airplane crash in 1994 evident here.

Thanks for the find and posting it.

I don't think the caption was referring to a crash having taken place there in 1994, but rather that that was how the United 93 crash site looked like in 1994.

reply to post by roboe
The statement from the OP....

i try really hard to find what flight did crash there before this picture is from 1994.

Then this...

eally dont know thats why i ask if anybody know if there is a plane that crash there before Sep-11-2001 so that will make that picture genuine thx for all of your help guys.

Leads me to believe that they think that the site was a place where an airplane crash had occurred in or prior to 1994.

Originally posted by Myendica
i recall seeing this before. from what i heard it was from a satellite. except i also heard its fake... so i dont know what to believe.

If you look at rogerstigers first post, the photo is not fake.

He found what looks like the source of the photo, the USGS.

I do not believe it has anything to do with an earlier plane crash though.

has anyone checked the coordinates? is it the same exact location? if so, chalk it up to new evidence countering the OS to the point where the OS is now SOL.

reply to post by butcherguy


it has nothing to do with a plane crash, thats the point.
there never was a plane crash there, not in 94, not in 01. they used an existing scar to mimic a plane crash.

Hey, even more strange... Go to Google Earth and look up Flight 93 crash site. Then once you are there, use the "select date" feature and notice that the same image at present date and at April 9, 2005. Why is that? When there is an updated date of Sept 20, 2005 and Oct. 16th 2008???? Something smells fishy here... any ideas?

reply to post by JohnnyFever

Looks like the older image has a higher resolution, which is why it is chosen per default. It's not like the immediate surroundings have changed dramatically.

reply to post by rogerstigers


thx dude i was looking for this for a long time thx agin

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by butcherguy

 

it has nothing to do with a plane crash, thats the point.
there never was a plane crash there, not in 94, not in 01. they used an existing scar to mimic a plane crash.

edit on 14-9-2010 by Myendica because: (no reason given)

That, and they also used fires, plane parts and bodies to mimic a plane crash.

A lot of talk on here about plane crashes if it has nothing to do with them!

I was waiting for this. You didn't notice my post referring to the OP? Asking what plane crashed there before?

I'm not making things up.

ok so the first picture is the suppose crash of flight 93

image credit:www.unitedflight93.com...

ok and then you have the picture from 1994 do you see the small crator like a black dot ok its there where they use that site for to fake flight 93 crash

image credit:msrmaps.com...

ok now you can see there was a crator before flight 93 crash how much chance there is for a plane to hit the same crator none
compare both site the dot or crator are at the same place then the crash site open both picture at the same time and compare then you will see its a the same place as the crash

The '94 scar in not at the same location as the 9/11 scar, but what a coincidence that they both look similar and only a few yards apart.

But it's really no coincidence that they look alike, because they are BOTH drainage ditches that were man-made by the strip-mining company to control water runoff.

I laugh that OCTs believe the 9/11 scar are "wing scars." Have you ever scene a plane crash leave such pronounced "wing scars" before? Neither have I.

But of course, the 9/11 "wing scars" is just a man-made drainage ditch. You can see inside them that the dirt hasn't even been disturbed as if they were made be plane wings going through the ground and you can also see the dirt is still sun-dried from being exposed from the sun for who knows how long.

The news reports about 9/11 even describe the scars as a man-made drainage ditch:

"Other photos taken at the scene by Miller show a small furrow, like a hand-dug drainage ditch, running back from the crater. This was the mark left by a wing." - theage.com.au

And describes this drainage ditch at where they are supposed to be, at the base of a slope to catch the runoff water:

"The apparent point of impact was a dark gash, not more than 30 feet wide, at the base of a gentle slope just before a line of trees." - post-gazette.com

reply to post by Human_Alien


Dude that is hilarious...Can you imagine with just that one statement and picture you just decimated many scholarly professional entities and turned them into something less intelligent than a mosquito.