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 Shadow Herder
Sorry dood. It has been proven for years now that what you are confusing for wings scars were not caused by wings and were present before the oblong crater was made.
Research this yourself before you make such false claims.
Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Here is an image looking down what was confused as a wing scar. As you can see it was not caused by wings and was present long before the crater was made.
Originally posted by Six Sigma
Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Here is an image looking down what was confused as a wing scar. As you can see it was not caused by wings and was present long before the crater was made.
Looking what? "Down?" Really? Down from where?
Show me the proof that the pictures I posted had the indentations previous to 911.
Originally posted by Shadow Herder
I dont have to show you anything for it has been proven time and time again.
I did not look at your links for they took too long.
Originally posted by benoni
hooper..It IS TRUE!!
your ignorance of the OS is quite apparent...
As ath stated, its part of the Official Story that the plane "self- buried" itself 45 ft down, then filled in the hole somehow so the plane was not visible...
So its rather telling that you happily state publicly that its not true....your lack of knowledge seems inversely proportionate to the amount of noise you make here at ATS...
Of course its not true....its insulting everybody's intelligence to argue such a ridiculously impossible position...yet thats the OFFICIAL STORY!!
Hooper...go read up some more on your govt sponsored OS sites ...you need to brush up on the OS 'cos you lookin' like a fool boy, considering your vocal support of all this OS !!!!
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by ATH911
You'd staged a 44-passenger plane crash without leaving any remains behind?!
No, actually, I wouldn't stage a plane crash *at all*. It'd be a complete waste of time, effort, personnel, and resources, it serves no mission critical purpose, it increases the danger of discovery, and it adds unnecessary layers of complexity to an already absurdly convoluted plot. Even if I did stage it, I wouldn't make it look suspicious by turning around and covering up the crash site I just staged.
Originally posted by LieBuster
Excuse me but anyone that stages something would indeed try to cover up the scene else the scientists would expose the lie.
9/11 stinks and i'm 50/50 on flight 93 crashing where they said it did because it would be easyer to crash the plane then not and it's not like they give a dam about the people on board the plane.
Unlike the towers, building 7, petagon we don't have much to go on from flight 93 apart from some of the funney phone calls made back home by the passengers.
Sky phones work but cell phone don't work even a 100ft from the ground in a plane and i have that information first had from a senior piolet and it must be something to do with the faraday cage the body of the plane creates.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by benoni
no visible signs of a plane wreck, because, according to the Official Story the plane buried itself 45 ft below the surface, then conveniently self- filled the very same hole the plane supposedly made when it impacted..further concealing itself??
Too bad none of this is true.
But cloth just can't catch on fire when it crashes or being shot down?
Originally posted by dragnet53
I am sorry but I am going with the guys here stating the official story was BS. You would also have scorch marks from the planes wings at going 1.2 mach speed from the impact. Critical thinking in America has gone down tremendously.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by dragnet53
I am sorry but I am going with the guys here stating the official story was BS. You would also have scorch marks from the planes wings at going 1.2 mach speed from the impact. Critical thinking in America has gone down tremendously.
May I ask what your background is in crash site forensics, or what your expertise is in aeronautical engineering? How many actual crash sites have you seen personally? I don't see how you can say "this should have happened" or "this couldn't have occurred" when you don't even have a shadow of an inkling of what should or shouldn't happen to begin with.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by dragnet53
But cloth just can't catch on fire when it crashes or being shot down?
Who said that cloth CAN'T catch fire? Of course cloth CAN catch fire, however, that does not mean it always will catch fire. What CAN happen and what DOES happen are two unrelated concepts. I CAN win the lottery, that does not mean that if I play the lottery I WILL win the lottery.
It will always catch fire. cloth is not a solid object.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Just what purpose WOULD it serve?
Ahem. We don't NEED to prove plane crash. Plane crashes aren't any rare and exotic events so we can irrefutably show that planes do in fact crash. You're the one who's attempting to show planes don't crash but are in fact staged by secret gov't conspiracies, despite the fact that you can't show a single instance of anyone trying to fake a crash site.
Or am I incorrect?
Would you mind terribly pointing out this supposed specific evidence that shows that no plane crashed in Shanksville?
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, the moment your conspiracies have to consistantly rely on hordes of secret agents
Originally posted by Six Sigma
I am impressed...so you agree that both planes were traveling at a high rate of speed and at pretty steep angles when they crashed.
Actually there are. Were you expecting perfect cut outs?
So, there were no reports of luggage. What does that prove?
The crash of flight 1771 shows that the results of the crash of flight 93 were indeed typical for a high speed crash.
So, tell me...was the debris field consistent with a high speed nose down crash?
I realize this thread is about the bandanna and the lack of blood and human remains.... But not one member of DMORT was concerned with the amount of human remains. Can you please tell me why DMORT wasn't concerned?
Originally posted by ATH911
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Just what purpose WOULD it serve?
"Let's Roll!"
Yes, very incorrect. You need to prove a plane crashed according to the official story. We also showed how they planted that engine being "unearthed" (hint: it fits in the backhoe)
When you say "hordes," about how many do you mean?