Challenge: produce two photos from Shanksville scene showing plane wires

The evidence is as real as the image above.Those images of flight 93 evidence were released in 2006.


So far in this thread our opponents are using these tactics

Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


911research.wtc7.net...

When were those images released? When were they taken? Where were they taken?

The date is stamped on the photos. Didn't you look ?

When were they released?

Where were they taken?

How do you know?


If the whole plane including fuel, wings that never hit the ground and the massive tail all 'turned to confetti' how did these pieces in the images survive? Where is that big piece seen by the white garage?

Sorry to retort.

Nobody believes a Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksvillle on 911. The evidence proves this. But answer my quesions first. Thanx.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

The evidence is as real as the image above.Those images of flight 93 evidence were released in 2006.

That is such a typical Noplaner tactic, just call it fake.

Here are some photos from a recent display at the Smithsonian. You can call them fake too, That is what Noplane Truthers do, Is it not ?

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

If the whole plane including fuel, wings that never hit the ground and the massive tail all 'turned to confetti' how did these pieces in the images survive?

The tail is made of carbon fiber. What did you expect it to turn in to ?

Thats the point the images you provide were released many years after the event.

So did you give up on you fictional wing scar claim yet?

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


Thats the point the images you provide were released many years after the event.

So did you give up on you fictional wing scar claim yet?

They were not just pictures they were solid objects on display for the whole world to see.

Are you talking about the 124' 10" wing scars that you were unable to prove existed before 911.




I didn't give up, I won, you lost, it's over, lets move on to the inverted force vectors.

You ready truther ?

Btw your image is bogus. Your measurment is not including the 10+ feet on the right and prbably another 30 feet on the left as you can see in the grass the scar extends much beyond your delusional, unofficial amateur made line.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


Thats the point the images you provide were released many years after the event.

So did you give up on you fictional wing scar claim yet?

Still waiting......

Dont get so sour because you have been defeated in this debate and other debates.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

When were they released?
Where were they taken?
How do you know?

They were submitted into evidence in a Federal court of law without challenge. Do a little research.

If the whole plane including fuel, wings that never hit the ground and the massive tail all 'turned to confetti' how did these pieces in the images survive? Where is that big piece seen by the white garage?

Sorry, another baseless argument from incredulity.

Sorry to retort.

So where's the retort? Or is "I don't believe it" the sum total of your argument?

Nobody believes a Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksvillle on 911.

Well, except for the population of the planet Earth.

The evidence proves this.

Well, maybe to you, but no one else.

But answer my quesions first. Thanx

Try asking a question. Based in reality.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

Sorry if I'm missing something, but is this not EXACTLY what you are doing right now?

You are denying that all proof presented is real. You say it's a cover-up and that it's all made up. Then, you avoid the issue of discussing force vectors by sticking to your denial of the plane and all sources proving the pane to be valid. You even deny the statements of all the witnesses that saw the airliner and were sure they did, denying every single government authority as well.

I'm honestly considering that literally nothing can persuade your opinion. You are quantum locked in your own psychosis.

reply to post by Varemia


actually you are throwing so called "facts" at people .. laughing ... then trying to drag the discussion into another direction... attempting to avoid being proven wrong.... how is this a discussion ? to me it looks like an ego stroking competition.

Originally posted by Tower7WTF
reply to post by Varemia

 

actually you are throwing so called "facts" at people .. laughing ... then trying to drag the discussion into another direction... attempting to avoid being proven wrong.... how is this a discussion ? to me it looks like an ego stroking competition.

I believe you have diagnosed the poster correctly, even though he would pretend to straddle the fence. They can't be sleeping well.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Nobody believes a Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksvillle on 911. The evidence proves this. But answer my quesions first. Thanx.

You are lying. When will you show just ONE and I mean just ONE person that was at the crime scene in Shanksville that believes what you just stated above?

You cry about questions being answered yet for countless pages you have been dodging many points by many members here that show just how clueless you are about the facts surrounding Flight 93.

You have been caught lying and therefor have no credibility when discussing 9/11. Your lies show the truthers and the skeptics in here that you are not serious about researching 9/11 and appears you are only interested in trolling. This is common amongst No-Planers.

reply to post by Six Sigma


There actually was one lady who talked about a different plane, but her account perfectly matches the identity of a business class jet which was asked to take a closer look at what happened to flight 93.

Link< br />
It's towards the bottom of the page, but it explains what the lady saw and why it was there. Odd that there's nothing intrinsically strange or conspiratorial about this, isn't it?

Hijack plane surrogate on 911

reply to post by Six Sigma
You attempt to label us liars, and expect us to believe that seven people 'starred' your post and Varemias. It's obvious who the liars are here at ats. You're losing.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by jeichelberg

 

I think the idea is that the passengers were trying to get control of the airplane, so the hijackers thrust it into the ground. That's a fairly good intent.

And it was not deliberately DROVE nose down into the ground...there are many conflicting reports about what impacted there and how it impacted...

This is what susan really saw on 911. A hijack plane surrogate. (see next vid)
or a Dassault Falcon 20

reply to post by jeichelberg

And it was not deliberately DROVE nose down into the ground...

Technically, no.....not "drove". "Flown". Airplanes are flown; cars and trucks and motorcycles are driven.

Watch very carefully, and ask any questions about flying, aviation, the Boeing 757 or any other details need answering, after watching and absorbing:

reply to post by ProudBird
You are confusing fiction, which is fantasy, and fact which is reality. You would have to be a complete moron to believe that an airplane is in that hole, in Shanksville. If you've been brought aboard to help with the Shanksville 'lie', then good luck, you'll need it. This one smells really bad.