FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

reply to post by weedwhacker

IZ, a fire will not occur at avery aircraft accident site. Jet-A will ignite when it is atomized, and there is an ignition source. Throw a match on a bucket of Jet-A, and the match will go out, extinguished by the liquid.

Where did the fuel go if it did not burn?

And I still want to know how that engine found itself 2000 feet from that hole.

Engines are made of steel and titanium, not silly putty.

The whole plane 'vapourized' but this was found....


So when the terrorists crashed head first at 500+ mph into the ground, His head violently hit the cockpit instuments, glass, ground and knocked his red headband off.

Can you say the evidence from flight 93 is fraudulant?

[edit on 26-4-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by jackinthebox

Where did the fuel go if it did not burn?

Straw man Argument: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.

Where is your official source stating that all of the fuel burned?

Where is your official source stating that no jet fuel was found at the crash site?

reply to post by IvanZana

Can you say" The evidence from Shanksville is fraudulant and has been planted"?

No.

But I can say that people who post images and statements like this

This is what it should of looked like.

are suspect disinformation agents.


Would you care to explain why you think that a tail section from an aircraft that slid to a stop and burned should look the same as an aircraft that impacted the ground at 580 mph at a 41° angle?

Care to answer my question

These misinformed, ignorance has been trying to prove the flight 93 had the force of 1000000 joules or whatever but they cant explain how everything of the plane 'vapourized', that means nothing left, no seats, no air frames, no wings, no fuel, no luggage but yet........

the terrorists passport survives.....

So did these.


Congratulations! You just debunked yourself.

reply to post by gottago


Who said that it was 2000 feet away?

I read the source you posted yesterday and they gave three different distances. 2000 feet, 2000 yards, and 1/2 mile. Which one is it?

reply to post by gottago

And I still want to know how that engine found itself 2000 feet from that hole.

The one that they actually found you mean?

reply to post by Boone 870


Well, either the fuel burned or it was in the soil at the site. Feel free to show me either, or I will assume that you simply accept that the fuel vanished into another dimension.

reply to post by IvanZana


Ivan,

Still dodging questions? If you actually read other's posts you would have seen what happens during a plane crash. But.. i guess you only read truther sites.

typical.

[edit on 26-4-2008 by CaptainObvious]

reply to post by jackinthebox

Well, either the fuel burned or it was in the soil at the site. Feel free to show me either, or I will assume that you simply accept that the fuel vanished into another dimension.

Well, no need to dodge my questions.

You are the one using the "no fuel" was found argument.

Where is your official source stating that all of the fuel burned?

Where is your official source stating that no jet fuel was found at the crash site?

reply to post by Boone 870


Show me the fuel, or don't expect me to believe that it was ever there. Can you do that? I am not willing to see what is not there. Are you?

reply to post by jackinthebox



Show me the source stating that there was no fuel.

Or, shall we scratch another 9/11 myth out of the truther playbook?

reply to post by Boone 870


Tell me. How am I supposed to show you something that was not there? By the way, a UFO just landed in my front lawn too, and I expect you to believe that.

reply to post by jackinthebox

Tell me. How am I supposed to show you something that was not there? By the way, a UFO just landed in my front lawn too, and I expect you to believe that.

Tell me. Who said that there was no fuel at the crash site? You are the one that is setting up strawman arguments so that you can knock them down. Who claimed that there was no fuel at the crash site?

reply to post by Boone 870

Who claimed that there was no fuel at the crash site?

I claim there is no fuel at the crash site.


[edit on 4/26/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by Boone 870


Boone,

I have yet to see what was done for a clean up, but there was in fact a clean up.

Crash site cleanup cost $850,000

The state Department of Environmental Protection has approved the final cleanup report for the United Airlines Flight 93 crash site near Shanksville in Somerset County.
"Site samples indicate that the site meets Pennsylvania's Act 2 statewide health standards for soil and groundwater for the fuel known as jet "A" fuel. We consider cleanup work at the site completed."

www.pittsburghlive.com...

reply to post by CaptainObvious



Thanks for the link Captain.

Here is the press release from the Department of Environmental Protection. Link

reply to post by jackinthebox

I claim there is no fuel at the crash site.

What date did you arrive at the crash scene?

What methods did you use to test the soil?

Is it a habit for all 9/11 truthers to make up lies to fit their theory and then use those lies for strawman arguments?

reply to post by Boone 870


If the DEP didn't find any, why should I bother looking for it? No fuel, no crash.

EDIT to add: What date did you arrive at my house to investigate the UFO landing? Where are your soil samples to prove there was no radiation contamination from it?

[edit on 4/26/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by jackinthebox


Show in the report where they didn't find "ANY". The levels were acceptable. AFTER the clean up.