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.
Originally posted by IvanZana
Originally posted by sir_chancealot
I grew up about 500 yards from.......
[SNIP]
Everything you claimed is a lie.
How come everytime a debunker gets burned on this thread they have to call in a " I was there" forum member to clarify it.
I call bs.... nice try.... I have seen all the evidence and your full of it.
Mod Edit: Profanity and Censor circumvention
[edit on 13-6-2008 by Gemwolf]
Originally posted by im_being_censored
Can any skeptic explain how that faint tail-like impression in the grass connected to the Shanks crater occurred and why there is no trace of a 757 tail section?
Originally posted by IvanZana
Originally posted by im_being_censored
What caused this faint "vert tail-like" impression in the grass skeptics?
1. What caused that "vert tail-like" impression in the grass that's shaped like a 757's tail?
2. Where is the marks Flight 93's tail section left if it hit that soft patch of ground so hard that it was essentially obliterated by the soft ground?
The verticle tail scar is not even that, it too was present pre911.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Originally posted by im_being_censored
Can any skeptic explain how that faint tail-like impression in the grass connected to the Shanks crater occurred and why there is no trace of a 757 tail section?
You've asked this already, and Ivan, a troofer, answered correctly.
Originally posted by IvanZana
The verticle tail scar is not even that, it too was present pre911.
Originally posted by im_being_censored
Skeptics, did Flight 93's tail section leave a mark anywhere in the soft ground?
Originally posted by IvanZana
There was no tail imprint or wing imprints.
Originally posted by im_being_censored
Skeptics, did Flight 93's tail section leave a mark anywhere in the soft ground?
Originally posted by im_being_censored
What caused this faint "vert tail-like" impression in the grass skeptics?
Seems like you guys agree that there is no way it could have been caused by Flight 93's tail section slamming down on it at 580mph and shattering into millions of pieces so small you can't see them.
So that leaves you with quite a dilemma:
1. What caused that "vert tail-like" impression in the grass that's shaped like a 757's tail?
2. Where is the marks Flight 93's tail section left if it hit that soft patch of ground so hard that it was essentially obliterated by the soft ground?
Originally posted by IvanZana
Originally posted by im_being_censored
Skeptics, did Flight 93's tail section leave a mark anywhere in the soft ground?
There was no tail imprint or wing imprints. There is unroken unburnt grass not to mention not enough dirt was displaces.
The crater is consistant with something the size of a small van crashing or exploding in the small 10x30ft crater in Shanksville.
But the main point is that Flight 93 as the Boeing 757 did not crash in the Shanksville field in 2001. All the evidence and images do not support a fully fueled comercial airliner.
Originally posted by Boone 870
"I looked up and it was Flight 93, barely 50ft above me. It was coming down in a 45 degree and rocking from side to side. Then the nose suddenly dipped and it just crashed into the ground. There was this big fireball and then a huge cloud of smoke." Source
Originally posted by Rewey
But HERE'S WHAT I CAN'T BUY...
I can't buy that the ground was 'soft enough that it swallowed an entire plane', but right next to it the ground was so hard that it 'disintegrated the entire tail fin into tiny pieces' (my paraphrasing here, not direct quotes).
It seems you can't have it both ways - either the ground was hard enough to disintegrate the plane, or it was soft enough to swallow it whole. Surely it's that simple?
Shanksville VFD firefighter Keith Curtis: "I walked up to where the tire was on fire, probably a hundred feet past the crater. It was a big tire. I was thinking that this is a big jet. I hit it good with the hose and put it out. I stopped and 'poof,' it just started on fire again."
Firefighter Mike Sube: "We made our way to a small pond. That's where I observed the largest piece of wreckage that I saw, a portion of the landing gear and fuselage. One of the tires was still intact with the bracket, and probably about three to five windows of the fuselage were actually in one piece lying there. ...There were enough fires that our brush truck was down there numerous times. ...I saw small pieces of human remains and occasionally some larger pieces. That was disturbing, but what was most disturbing was seeing personal effects."
Lieutenant Roger Bailey, Somerset Volunteer Fire Department: "We started down through the debris field. I saw pieces of fiberglass, pieces of airplane, pop rivets, and mail...Mail was scattered everywhere. ...the one guy who was with us almost stepped on a piece of human remains. I grabbed him, and he got about half woozy over it."
Bill Baker, Somerset County Emergency Management Agency: "There was debris everywhere. You couldn't step without walking on a piece of plane part, fabric, or some kind of debris. When they said it was a 757, I looked out across the debris field. I said, "There is no way there is a 757 scattered here. At that time, we didn't know that it was in the hole. The jet fuel smell was really strong...There were plane parts hanging in the trees."
Fox stepped over a seat back. He saw a wiring harness, and a piston. None of the other pieces was bigger than a TV remote.