The Final Nail In The Coffin: Irrefutable Proof the Flight 93 Crash Scene Is a Lie

reply to post by IvanZana


Okies I'm not a techie but that illustration doesn't prove anything....and I'm pretty open on this whole issue....whether or not the plane crashed in Shanksville will not alter my opinion of our governments complicity....I am convinced they were not only complicit but ....well thats another thread....however that said, the case of the OP has not been made....so far the only thing I have been able to find on faking cell phone calls and such like is in the 9/11 loose change video which is also not "proof" of anything - makes for interesting speculation but wouldn't be admissable in a court of law...

The opposing arguments on this thread have provided good comparison photos of high speed crashes - which I requested - and have cited their arguments with data....so I'm somewhat inclined to give them the nod on this one....which isn't to say that you are not onto something - just needs to be fleshed out in more detail and more convincingly...if you could convince pro pilots then we might have an ace in that shanksville hole in the ground - keep at it sir....you may yet uncover the smoking gun
j

You dont need to be a techie and this doesnt have to be solved right here right now. This is a process of spreading information to the right people. A seeding process of information.


Your either see it or your blind to it.

Most people dont see a plane.



The best example of a crash like flight 93 is this next picture.


Its just to bad it just a Bomb crater. Do you see the similarites?

Now in this next picture from the last page. Do you see how the crash scene is clean and free of fire and there is not enough displacement of dirt that is consitant with angle , speed, and size of plane. The fuselage, tail and wings did not hit where the official story states as they state the plane was inverted and diving at a 57+ degree angle. The official trajecotry of the plane is not consistant with the crater dimensions and dirt ejecta. Not to mention the utter lack of any fuel, or fire or evidence that the plane had wings, stabilzer and even a fuselage.


To summarize, the physical evidence does not show that a Boeing 757-200 crashed at Shanksville:

� Amount of debris not consistent with a +120,000 lb aircraft
� Crash imprint could only be caused by a vertical, or near vertical crash, which was not possible
� Circular crater indicative of a below ground explosion
� Grass and weeds are growing in the crater which clearly indicates the crater was made before 9/11
� Lack of fire damage
� Mushroom cloud not consistent with 9,000 gallons of fuel exploding and burning
� The three minute discrepancy
� Flight 93: of the 45 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 6 are listed in the SSDI (13%)Of these 45 people, none are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list: None.

[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
There is debris from flight 93. Plenty of photographs. CT'ers just want more of it.

Please show me thses photographs WITH sources and information on the parts shown in the photos.

I show sources with my photos so you should be able to also.

[edit on 2-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1Please show me thses photographs WITH sources and information on the parts shown in the photos.

You must have a very short memory Ultima, Alzheimers?

WITH sources and information on the parts shown

Just have a look at some of the previous threads that you have contributed in and you shall find.

I find it amusing that the homemade engineering graphs and charts the conspiracy people do (usually without benefit of professional training) always prove the conspiracy theorist was right all along.

Unfortunately, the conspiracy theorist down the street can draw up cool-looking diagrams and charts proving that he/she was right all along!

If the conspiracy people can't agree with one another, why should the rest of us listen to them? That's my position.

[edit on 2-7-2008 by BarryLogan]

reply to post by IvanZana


Ivan,

have you looked at this?

Looks pretty close to me...





Ivan, can you also explain how the VAST majority of the witnesses stories coincide with that of the FDR?

this picture below is the most unscientific malarky i've ever seen anyone try to pass off as "evidence" that no plane dove into the ground.

reply to post by fastfingersfunk


My favorite part of Ivan's post:

The picture of the airplane was photo-shopped NOT to have wings! LMFAO

The wings would have fit pretty snug in his photo.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by IvanZana

 

Ivan,

have you looked at this?

Looks pretty close to me...

In the above picture you provided as proof that flight 93 crashed actually proves the impossiblility and errors in that image.

1 The verticle stabilizer is huge and if that were than where is the evidence that the plance had a tail for there is no evidence that anything disturbed the ground where you show.

2 The verticle stabilizer in your picture is 20 feet off from where the official story claims the tail struck and the "tail imprint" in the dry grass with no wreakage or evidence the plane even had a tail.

3 If the wings hit where you discribe in the image, then where did they go since they did not dent the grass or dirt and left no wing parts, fuel, or fire.



[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

In these next photos you can see that even at some depth, no evidence of plance can be found. Most interesting is the small hole that looks like a bomb crater but still no plane.







To summarize, the physical evidence does not show that a Boeing 757-200 crashed at Shanksville:

� Amount of debris not consistent with a +120,000 lb aircraft
� Crash imprint could only be caused by a vertical, or near vertical crash, which was not possible
� Circular crater indicative of a below ground explosion
� Grass and weeds are growing in the crater which clearly indicates the crater was made before 9/11
� Lack of fire damage
� Mushroom cloud not consistent with 9,000 gallons of fuel exploding and burning
� The three minute discrepancy
� Flight 93: of the 45 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 6 are listed in the SSDI (13%)Of these 45 people, none are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list: None.

Try to debunk some of those. That will keep you busy.

[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by IvanZana


Oh dear....now you're advocating a 'below ground explosion'!!!!!

Guess you've dropped the 'missile theory', eh???

Or the 'UAV' theory.....the 'cruise missile'.....whatever. Just keep moving the goalposts, that's OK, we know the game you're plaing has no rules.

AND Ivan....glad you changed the avatar, it was creepy....but the new one is creepier. AND then, your sig....well, it all tends to fairly well SPEAK OUT about your opinions....which happen to be based on selective research, only anything....anything to help promote your pet theory, and your refusal to see anything that contradicts it.

Your own paranoid posts are contradictory.....but, of course, you can't see that, can you? You have been asked, tasked to look at the Flight Recorder data....you just shrug that off as 'faked', yet you have no basis to make that claim.

ONE of your made up photos as 'evidence' had the scale so far off, it was just laughable. You super-imposed a B757 over the Shanksville impact area, but of course you used a front-on image (truly laughable) and you intentionally distorted the relative sizes. It is a joke to believe this kind of nonsense.

But, as the saying goes, a lie can get half-way 'round the World before the truth can get its boots on......

reply to post by IvanZana


Ivan,

Put the wings back on the plane. You know...on the picture where you show how the plane could not have fit?

You conveniently photo shopped the wings off. Why ?

The fact that you shifted your irritability and imaturity in not being able to handle the facts and the fact the you and boone are failing continuously in trying to lie, derail and obsefucate truth and information on this 911 conspiracy forum. is a good sign that the information I provide in my threads can't be debunked... atleast not by the likes of the lack of experience and maturity you two truth deniers have expressed in these forums as of late.

You have failed to offer any evidence that contradicts this thread but instead you resorted to calling me an anti-semetic , 'bush-basher.

And mentioning my Avatar during a discussion about how evidence could be fraudulant and that thousands of people possibly died beause of these lies only show not only your ignorance for truth and justice but the poor people who lost their lives and their families that suffer.



Trying to reason with Harcore Debunker kooks is impossible - One thing I do find is that often we get new people coming in. Many of them are not ignorant truth deniers or debunkers, but well meaning, often naive and confused who having heard all the conspiracy stuff are still trying to sort it out. I Find if you give focused counter arguments and information you can divert them away from going to the dark side of ignorance and lies.





[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 2-7-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by IvanZana


I mention your avatar only because YOU, IvanZana, have continuously denigrated the lives lost in this event. YOU, IvanZana do not answer direct questions to find out the truth, you just parrot what you find on the Internet to 'sustain' your pre-conceived ideas.

many times, I have said....if you just provide good evidence, I could take that and look at it, and draw a new conclusion.

instead, you just show up the same false photo 'evidence'....and refuse to look at other facts....as I've repeatedly asked you to.

I take your 'no comment' as an admission that you simply do not wish to look at facts, but wish to stay in your fantasy.

So be it.

Like i said to you earlier.

Truth is like a weed. It grows and grows.

images.google.ca...

Where's the official story?

reply to post by IvanZana


I have to quibble there. A weed is not truth....truth is not a weed.

A weed is a lie....it is something that wants to infect the garden, to kill all of the beautiful plants. It is an arrogant, domineering organism, the weed.

Truth requires a thorough display of knowledge. ALL ideas, brought to the forefront, to be displayed, and discussed. And truth will be buried by weeds, if it allows.......and thus, the garden is over-run.

EDIT to add last sentence, after elipses....

[edit on 7/2/0808 by weedwhacker]

Imagine if you was kept in a bubble for the last 7 years and you had no contact with anyone or the outside world...
Then, after all that time you were shown only the pictures of this "crash", without any hype or propaganda, wouldn't your first thought be;
What plane? or Where is it?

Please, listen to your intuition, be smart. The government isnt providing the right answers, instead their taking everyone for idiots.

America is jut another name for hollywood...

reply to post by IvanZana


Ivan....

Why did you photo shop the wings off your picture? Why do I have to always repeat myself?

thank you.

:TY:

The only conspiracy involving Flt. 93 is that the shoot down has been covered up.

Why do you guys insist on these whacked-out theories of "no-airplanes" ...."missle impacts"....."bomb craters". You harm your credibility and the credibility of every serious truth seeker.

There were irregularities on 9-11, but they did not include holograms, controlled demolitions, planted evidence, remote controlled airplanes, ALCMs, shadow aircraft, etc.

You're wasting your time, and ATS bandwidth with this crap. Real airplanes with real passengers, and real arab/muslim hi-jackers were commandeered on 9/11, with the intent of crashing into high value targets.

There was some degree of US government complicity, tacit approval, or willingness to let it happen.

IMO the shoot down of Flt 93 is the best evidence of this. Someone in the US Govt knew what the intended target of Flt. 93 was....The Capitol, or the White House. That's why that particular flight was not allowed to reach it's target.

Stop the no-airplanes nonsense.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by IvanZana

 

Ivan....

Why did you photo shop the wings off your picture? Why do I have to always repeat myself?

thank you.

:TY:

The original picture didnt have wings and your not that smart at all.

Actually your darn right ignorant and annoying. We can all agree on that.

You have failed again to prove a plane crashed in Shanksville when we all know one didnt. Your the one that looks stupid and thoughtless for you have ignored all the evidence and replaced it with your sad twisted interpetation of reality.

Do you think ABovetopsecret users and Lurkers to the site are stupid enough to be swayed by your lack if understanding basic physiscs and methods that most like has iirritated everyone you encounter.

You can convince anyone that a plane crashed in Shanksville on 911, so why do you bother looking so foolish.


Again you failed to adreess any issues but the Atta passport surving the wtc collapse fliying out of the hijacked plane pont, but you corrected it and said that the miracle passport found blocks away that flew out of the hijackers pocket belongs to another terrorist who too wasnt on the flight manifest.

ok ... koo koo