• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Flight 93 Never Crashed In The Empty Shanksville Field

J

jamesrwright3

Guest
http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html


 
Upvote 0

MachZer0

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place
Mar 9, 2005
61,058
2,302
✟94,109.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Wow this dude is on serious drugs
He is trying to compare crashes where the pilot ACTUALLY TRIED TO LAND THE PLANE to Flight 93 where the Pilot INTENTIONALLY crashed the plane into the ground at a steep angle and at a high speed.
And he's using planted evidence and doctored photos to do it
 
Upvote 0

Morcova

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2006
7,493
523
49
✟10,470.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Libertarian
Wow this dude is on serious drugs
He is trying to compare crashes where the pilot ACTUALLY TRIED TO LAND THE PLANE to Flight 93 where the Pilot INTENTIONALLY crashed the plane into the ground at a steep angle and at a high speed.

Pretty much.

Honestly guys, I admire all of you who are taking the time to actually debate this person.. you have infinitely more patience than I do.

But you cannot convince a conspiracy theorist that they are wrong. In their eyes all of the evidence you provide is further evidence of a coverup by "THEM".

Not asking yall to stop as it's entertaining to watch, just making sure nobody expects to actually convince this person using logic and evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Btodd

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2003
3,677
294
✟27,874.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
This is old hat for him, believe me. He's been banned from multiple forums, both Twoofer and Government Shill. When even the Loose Change forums think you're a paranoid idiot, that's saying a LOT.

I'm still giddy, hoping I'll get arrested for being a co-conspirator for posting pics of 'planted evidence'. That made my day, and this whole debate worth it! Satan totally made me do it, too.


Btodd
 
Upvote 0

Maren

Veteran
Oct 20, 2007
8,709
1,659
✟72,368.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private

Which helps explain why I read this thread for the entertainment value.
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Terral, earlier you posted an unsubstantiated speculation that 'Senor Bush obviously planted it.' In the context of a government complicity theory, that speculation makes sense. But even then, however, it is pure speculation, and unless you can substantiate it with some evidence, it will remain as thus and you are not likely to persuade many. It is advisable, therefore, to avoid such speculations and to simply go with the evidence. If there is reasonable evidence to suggest that agents of the government did plant evidence at the crash site, then present it. If there is not, then speculate, but do not think that many will find it believable without substance.

In other news, I'm currently going away on a retreat and will be back Thursday afternoon EST. I will, therefore, be unable to contribute any further to these discussions until then. Remember guys to keep an open mind and continue searching for the truth, in the auspices of reason. Adios.
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
A thread about nothing of substance deserves no other response.

"Nothing of substance" is merely your opinion and demonstrates poor judgment. I will persist until the proper kind of inquiry into the 9/11 attacks is attained, and whatever cheap ridicule I receive on the way I will take... knowing that it is all for a good cause. As for you, if cheap ridicule is all you have to offer, then don't even bother posting. Ridicule is so easy and cheap to generate, but no reason there is behind it. So if there is no reason behind your posts, why post?
 
Upvote 0

kathaksung

Regular Member
Jan 30, 2002
473
20
San Jose, Ca.
Visit site
✟23,266.00
Faith
Atheist

1. It's a part picture which could be taken from anywhere.

2. The piece of fuselage is big. How couldn't we never spot it in whole scene picture?

3. The piece of fuselage is clean, more for demonstration but not from reality.

4. The background field seems clean and full of life, no trace of impact.

You could find the other similar picture all having the similar charactristic.
 
Upvote 0

lemmings

Veteran
Nov 5, 2006
2,587
132
California
✟25,969.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Have you ever seen a bullet fired at a steel plate? The plate will receive a small dent and there will essentialy be no trace of the bullet.

In a normal plane crash, the plane is nearing the ground near it's landing speed of 100-150 mph. This is only two or three times the kinetic energy that a car crash would see so you would expect damage comparable. In this plane crash, the plane was traveling at close to 600 mph at the time of impact. 4 times the normal speed means that the total kinetic energy is 16 times greater than other pictures that you have seen.

At this speed, the impact looks more like that of a bullet than anything else. This plane impacted at the same speed at the average bullet from a handgun. Aluminum has roughly the same physical properties of strength and melting point as lead. The key difference is that the bullet is solid but a plane is engineered to have the largest possible volume, this makes a plane a lot weaker than a bullet.


The 3.2 gigajoules of kinetic energy released during this crash where mostly used making that nice hole in the ground you see and ripping the plane to shreds. You wouldn't expect much of anything to actually be recognizable at the crash site. As a result, the two crash site photos you see there are not actually from the impact site itself but hundreds of feet away from it where that landed. The vegetation here would be relatively unharmed since the fireball was elsewhere and the debris were only moving at a fraction of the speed that the plane was originally.
 
Upvote 0

kathaksung

Regular Member
Jan 30, 2002
473
20
San Jose, Ca.
Visit site
✟23,266.00
Faith
Atheist

The wreckage doesn't seem to experience the speed you declared. They are bright and clean and rest on a planted ground. It's speed to land was likely near zero.

http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_5.html

http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_4.html
 
Upvote 0

lemmings

Veteran
Nov 5, 2006
2,587
132
California
✟25,969.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The wreckage doesn't seem to experience the speed you declared. They are bright and clean and rest on a planted ground. It's speed to land was likely near zero.

Flight 93

Flight 93

You should re-read the last paragraph that you quoted from me.


I mentioned both of the pictures that you mentioned including as to why they are next to vegetation as well as not even smaller bits of shrapnel.

To say that the pieces are clean is absurd. The second picture (4) clearly shows extensive burn damage which would make since if an explosion blew the 'shell' off the plane.

The second picture is clean, but that is because we are looking at the outside of the plane. Any fiery explosion would have been the result of the fuel tanks which are located inside, therefore, the explosion would have come from the interior and not burn the exterior as substantially.
 
Upvote 0

TheNewWorldMan

phased plasma rifle in 40-watt range
Jan 2, 2007
9,362
849
✟36,275.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others

I don't know about that...depends on where the HAARP Death Ray impacted the airplane at.
 
Upvote 0