Shanksville pics..?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
the apparent amount of fuel causing the fireball is all wrong

a child can see the difference from T V reports footage....

shoulda filled the sky for 2 hours

Are you saying the sky shpuld have been on fire for 2 hours. Why?

You rant, provide no facts, provide no sources, base everything on speculation and innuendo, and make no sense.

no he is saying that jet fuel burns for sometime leaving a heavy trail of black smoke none were witnessed in shanksville on 911 because flight 93 did not crash there.

THE fact is that the dry long grass did not even burn inches from the small crater. The only smoke there is coming out of debunkers butts.


If you try to go against common intelligence I think that these serious discussions may not be for you.

a reply to: GBP/JPY

spotted a turbine from a drone in the debris at the pentagon......one goes by apparent diameter....twas a small turbine

Drone...??

You know what an APU (Auxiliary power unit) is...?? Its a small turbine mounted in tail Used to power generator
to provide electricity on the ground to run A/c and instruments and radio

Trutherism Where ignorance is bliss.......

a reply to: AsherLewin11

THE fact is that the dry long grass did not even burn inches from the small crater. The only smoke there is coming out of debunkers butts.

So how many plane crashes you been too....??

Had one come down in my neighborhood When we rolled up to scene would have thought was freaking end of world
from burning fuel.

We knocked it down in few minutes. No secondary fires . Fuel is atomized and disbursed, burns very quickly

originally posted by: AsherLewin11
a reply to: wmd_2008

Hmm pentagon distractions in a shanksville thread. SO 2005

Maybe YOU should start to read ALL posts in a thread your truther buddy brought it up first

a reply to: AsherLewin11

Whatever....

Might what to use some credible sources....

Do you even know what pictures are used and the actual date taken as proof? Conspiraciest never use an out of context photo. Sarcasm by the way....

www.nps.gov/flni/learn/historyculture/upload/FAQs_longform_formatted_5-2013.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjj2--YtJDQAhVh54MKHQVPAho4ChAWCCIwAw&usg=AFQjCNHHcS6nwERvcW kuvdlEnLT7HrI2hw

Flight 93 National Memorial, Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs)

21.Why do those trees look like they were burned?
When the plane crashed in the field adjacent to the woods, the trees on the outer edge of
a dense stand of hemlock were burned. About 100 damaged trees had to be removed
following the crash. The evergreen trees that you now see just beyond the crash site are
the trees that were once in the middle of this dense hemlock grove. Because they were
originally closely surrounded by other trees, they didn’t grow limbs on the lower part of
their trunks.

www.history.com...

The fireball from the plane, which was carrying 7,000 gallons of fuel, scorched hundreds of acres of earth and set the surrounding trees ablaze for hours. The crash site near Shansksville was littered with the wreckage from the fragmented plane, with a debris field scattered nearly eight miles away from the initial point of impact. Despite the devastation, investigators were able to recover both the plane’s flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder, or black box, which was found burrowed more than 25 feet below ground.

edit on 4-11-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)

a reply to: AsherLewin11

Eever going to answer what the actual dimensions of the crater was. Or the depth of digging to recover wreckage?

How would something other than a passenger jet leave the right amount of engines and correct engines types / engine parts at the crash site.

originally posted by: Phage
www.google.com...

earch?q=shanksville&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjX8ZnuvvfOAhVBx2MKHVKaA50Q_AUICigD&biw=1478&b ih=921

Thank you for the link Phage. This image is the image I believe the most .

The crater in shanksville was too small for flight 93 and there were no wing or vertical stabilizer impacts. The lack of fuel, fire, burned grass, wing parts, vertical stabilizer and that terrorist box cutter, headband and passport survived quite well.

a reply to: AsherLewin11

You mean like this?

www.bing.com...

It's funny to see people who think flight 93 crashed in that little crater come up with fantastical theories.

Wally miller will tell ya that the front of the plane bounced in to the forest and the crater was about 15 feet wide. So did it atomized lol? THE fuel atomized so fast that it did not catch fire or even burn the grade? NO wing impacts? WOW last I heard those suckers have big long wings that carried the fuel yet they never hit the ground nor did the fuel. Funny stuff guys.

Flight 93 was a poorly thought out scenario that the shoot down theory was created by non other than the missile pod people disinformation campaign

a reply to: AsherLewin11

Please tell us where you get the crater was only 15 feet wide?

If the plan hit nose / right wing first, why would there be separate marks for wings?

How deep were the terrorist items buried under the ground. The terrorists were probably in the front of the plane that cratered first. Hard to burn if buried and cannot get oxygen. Note: I now shred my personal documents. Big stacks of paper do not completely burn with out being constantly raked back and forth.

Eye witnesses accounts give testimony of fire ball and fires at site.

Two sources referenced with accounts of the extensive fires at the crash.

If it was not a passenger jet, how did the right type of engines in the correct amount end up in the wreckage?

a reply to: firerescue

We knocked it down in few minutes. No secondary fires .
Fuel is atomized and disbursed, burns very quickly

Well theres that, then there are the times when it travels 80 floors down an elevator shafts and blows up a lobby...

--

a reply to: AsherLewin11

I didn't see recognizable air plane parts after this P51 crash. Was the Leeward / Galloping Ghost crash a conspiracy too?

youtu.be...

www.telegraph.co.uk...

originally posted by: AsherLewin11
The crater in shanksville was too small for flight 93 and there were no wing or vertical stabilizer impacts. The lack of fuel, fire, burned grass, wing parts, vertical stabilizer and that terrorist box cutter, headband and passport survived quite well.

Still there's all that pesky evidence that is hard to explain: 1,500 pieces of human remains totaling about 600 pounds, the DNA of every passenger on Flight 93, the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder from Flight 93, the eyewitnesses who saw a full sized jet airliner.

originally posted by: AsherLewin11
It's funny to see people who think flight 93 crashed in that little crater come up with fantastical theories.

Wally miller will tell ya that the front of the plane bounced in to the forest and the crater was about 15 feet wide. So did it atomized lol? THE fuel atomized so fast that it did not catch fire or even burn the grade? NO wing impacts? WOW last I heard those suckers have big long wings that carried the fuel yet they never hit the ground nor did the fuel. Funny stuff guys.

Flight 93 was a poorly thought out scenario that the shoot down theory was created by non other than the missile pod people disinformation campaign

No. Wally Miller didn't say that.

a reply to: ShadowChatter

Except it DIDN'T blow up the lobby

It's funny to see people who think flight 93 crashed in that little crater come up with fantastical theories.

a reply to: AsherLewin11


NY Times May 25 1988

An investigator for the board, Chauncey Twine, said the airplane crashed at an 80-degree angle, clipping trees and landing amid rocks and boulders at 3:15. An explosion followed, sending flames higher than treetops, residents said.

''If the angle of descent was not as great,'' Mr. Twine said, ''the fire would have spread. By impacting at that angle, it was fairly contained.''

''We're dealing with body parts, not bodies,'' Chief Joseph Ranney said. ''Identification will be very difficult.'' Airplane parts were scattered in small pieces throughout the site on Garrett Mountain.

Flames higher than tree tops..... Fire not spread....... Airplane parts scattered in small parts

Geez NY Times seems to agree with everything I've said......

Flight 93 was rolled on back at 40 degree angle when crashed at speed of 575 mph



Trutherism Where intelligence goes to die.......

The wing span of a boeing 757 is a 124 feet yet the crater is only around 15 feet and 6-10 feet deep. A plane with those dimensions coming in at a 40 degree angle would of spooned out a massive crater like was seen in a recent Iranian plane crash.


124 feet wide plane leave a very small crater 6-10 feet deep and around 25 feet wide. You can add another 25 feet to the crater and will still be toI small.

Eyewitnesses claimed to have seen a small craft no bigger than a vehicle flying low, rolled onto it's back then dived at a 40 degree angle.

Debunkers say that the drainage ditch with the missile or surrogate or whatever were actually wing scars but with careful planning I've destroyed that ability now debunkers are squirming at the futility of trying to convince people that a 130 foot wide plane travelling at over 500mph at a 40 degree angle leave a small crater at best 20-30 feet wide yet still to small to have been flight.


You see the fact is a boeing 757 did not crash in shanksville as the facts show. Agencies lied to you and you don't want to believe youre gullible so you promote lies that no one buys.

But even though Flight 93 supposedly disappeared into the earth, the crater allegedly made when it hit the ground seems to have been too small for this to have been the case. Frank Monaco told reporters that the "V-shaped gouge" created by the plane was "eight to 10 feet deep and 15 to 20 feet long." [27] Roger Bailey, of the Somerset Volunteer Fire Department, recalled that the crater "wasn't deep. Ten to 12 feet deep." Bailey said he "thought it was a hole that they had dug to burn garbage." [28]

a reply to: Phage

can you give me an example aside from the Shanksville crater?

You conveniently left this unanswered, why is that?. One would think it has occurred before in aerial accidents, and yet you quote the formula for kinetic energy. What kinetic energy was involved in disintegrating the bodies down to a few scraps of DNA. I'll be interested to. Feel free to post your calculations.