Challenge: produce two photos from Shanksville scene showing plane wires

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


Here is an example of the absurdity that the 30-40 foot wide 10 foot deep crater was caused by a 124 foot wide Boeing 757.

Impossible.

One eyewitness describes the craft being no bigger than her van.

Your scale seems to be a little off. You should use the 124' 10" wing scars as a scale reference.

Where are you getting this moronic , opinionated number of 124 foot "wing scar" as you put it?

Would you like me to show you the posts where you got schooled and shut up for looking ignorant over the subject? Get over it. This isnt the vile snake pit of the RANDI forums. Go there and slither.


Ignore the trolls who come and claim there are scars from wings when officially there were no such thing.
See photo of photographer standing in what is sometimes confused as wing scars.

If someone was to say the small 30 foot by 10 foot deep crater was caused by a jet engine alone I would not argue. I would say it was something no bigger than a van caused the crater.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


.Where are you getting this moronic , opinionated number of 124 foot "wing scar" as you put it?

Google Earth using the ruler :124.85 feet. You should try it.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Would you like me to show you the posts where you got schooled and shut up for looking ignorant over the subject?

Sounds like fun. Lets do it.

reply to post by waypastvne


You dont have the basic knowledge of physics taught at elementary level and discussing this with you is pointless for you are a nobody with no knowledge of anything.



You--> I use google earth and wikipedia said plane is 124 feet at the wings so i mneasured on google earth 124 feet see... stupid toofers.......

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Shadow Herder


.Where are you getting this moronic , opinionated number of 124 foot "wing scar" as you put it?

Google Earth using the ruler :124.85 feet. You should try it.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Would you like me to show you the posts where you got schooled and shut up for looking ignorant over the subject?

Sounds like fun. Lets do it.

I just have to quote how moronic your last post was.


According to wiki the wingspan of a Boeing is 124 ft 10 in and you googled that in google earth on some photo from 2009 that shows no crash site. It makes no sense and you seem to have lost your grasp on reality.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

You dont have the basic knowledge of physics taught at elementary level and discussing this with you is pointless for you are a nobody with no knowledge of anything.

I have 38 years of flying experience. I'm an aerobatic pilot. I fly for fun, and it's also my job. Would you like to discuss the aerodynamic forces on an inverted aircraft and how they compare to an aircraft flying right side up ? That will give you a chance to show off your Truther Aeronautical Knowledge.

reply to post by waypastvne


me too, but my father and brother have been air crash investigators for a combination of 40 years.

Youre over 50? wow you sure dont act like it. I can see where the irritability comes from.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
reply to post by waypastvne

 

me too, but my father and brother have been air crash investigators for a combination of 40 years.

Cool. The final vertical g read out was + .64 g and the aircraft was inverted. The weight of the aircraft at the time of impact was around 95 tons but we can average it out to 100 tons to make the percentages easer if you want. Can you give me a description of the forces acting on the plane and what they were acting against ?

Here's a drawing to help you out. Just tell us what the arrows represent.

reply to post by Shadow Herder




Really?

....but my father and brother have been air crash investigators for a combination of 40 years.

But, you haven't asked them about the FDR and CVR from United 93? Found at the crash scene? And, all the DNA, human remains, personal items and effects (papers, credit cards, IDs, etc)....all the sorts of things any "air crash investigator" would realize are found at the crash sites.....

Not to mention all of the other physical evidence.....like, the airframe, engine parts, interior components, all there, fragmented, as if they underwent a very high velocity impact (because, well....they did....).


Gee, whiz....... :shk:

I remember when this happened and my first thought was we shot it down.
After seeing pics of the crater and hearing the report I said, "No Way!"
I am by far no expert but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there are too many inconsistencies with the eyewitness accounts and the crash site.
It's perfectly fine if people like the OP seek the truth in a case like this. That's what this place is for.
I never believe anything unless I see it for myself, see hard evidence, or enough eyewitness testimony.
There's actually more evidence that somethings not right with this...IMO.
Am I convinced? Not 100% but enough to question. And why people are so unwilling or afraid to question our govt. or believe there are people here evil enough to kill innocents for a percentage is beyond me. If a group of sociopaths from the hood can kill people for money why is it so hard to believe a group of educated sociopaths from Washington can do the same?

Originally posted by maddog99
I remember when this happened and my first thought was we shot it down.
After seeing pics of the crater and hearing the report I said, "No Way!"
I am by far no expert but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there are too many inconsistencies with the eyewitness accounts and the crash site.
It's perfectly fine if people like the OP seek the truth in a case like this. That's what this place is for.
I never believe anything unless I see it for myself, see hard evidence, or enough eyewitness testimony.
There's actually more evidence that somethings not right with this...IMO.
Am I convinced? Not 100% but enough to question. And why people are so unwilling or afraid to question our govt. or believe there are people here evil enough to kill innocents for a percentage is beyond me. If a group of sociopaths from the hood can kill people for money why is it so hard to believe a group of educated sociopaths from Washington can do the same?

You are not alone and the majority of readers, lurkers and members feel the same way you do.

Originally posted by maddog99
I remember when this happened and my first thought was we shot it down.
After seeing pics of the crater and hearing the report I said, "No Way!"
I am by far no expert but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there are too many inconsistencies with the eyewitness accounts and the crash site.
It's perfectly fine if people like the OP seek the truth in a case like this. That's what this place is for.
I never believe anything unless I see it for myself, see hard evidence, or enough eyewitness testimony.
There's actually more evidence that somethings not right with this...IMO.
Am I convinced? Not 100% but enough to question. And why people are so unwilling or afraid to question our govt. or believe there are people here evil enough to kill innocents for a percentage is beyond me. If a group of sociopaths from the hood can kill people for money why is it so hard to believe a group of educated sociopaths from Washington can do the same?

The problem is that the people who are so hell bent on believing our government was behind the design and execution of this terrorist act are completely unable to come up with proof of such.

You know how you can tell? Because they start threads like this one asking for a picture of airplane wires to prove an airplane crashed. Stop and think about that for a second.

They are quick to say it was cruise missiles and controlled demolition without ever considering the logic or logistics of using such devices.

A question of logistics: How many pounds of explosives would be needed to wire up and bring down one twin tower? Let alone a second one AND a WTC7? Think about how huge those structures were.

Not only that, how long would it take to wire these 3 huge buildings completely with demolition explosives? And how is it that not one person, NOT ONE, out of the thousands who worked in those buildings on a daily basis reported seeing anyone planting and wiring the buildings with explosives. Nothing strange. HA! So people were going to work for weeks and weeks with explosives all around them and didn't even know it!

Can you start to see how absolutely absurd that theory is just by asking some logistical questions?

How about a question of logic: If the sole intent was to bring down the towers using controlled demo then why even bother using airplanes in the first place? Why not just say it was a truck bomb in the basement? Or why not just use a truck bomb in conjunction with the controlled demo? Wouldn't that be much easier than having to stage a hijacking of airliners and crashing them into the towers?

It doesn't make any sense.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

You are not alone and the majority of readers, lurkers and members feel the same way you do.

Challenge.

Originally posted by PhotonEffect

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

You are not alone and the majority of readers, lurkers and members feel the same way you do.

Challenge.

I'll accept that challenge...
ATS 911 Survey

I find it strange that Pan Am flight 103 was blown out of the sky at 31,000 ft and yet there were large chunks of the plane that were found.
The nose section containing the cabin landed in a field with the flight-crew still in their cockpit.

reply to post by lambros56


PanAM 103 was blown up, as you stated.

It then fell, reaching terminal velocity, in the atmosphere.

It was not intentionally flown at very high speeds, intact, into the ground.

The mere fact that the bodies (as you pointed out) were intact shows that the forces at impact were far, far less than United 93.

FLIGHT 1771 -

Can you find two pictures that show wires?

WHAT??? You CAN'T?

INSIDE JOB!!!!!!!!!!!


Poor Killtown

reply to post by ProudBird


Ok, so in order for 93 to disintegrate on impact, it would've needed to pretty much fly nose first at an incredible rate of speed. Is this a logical assumption?

reply to post by maddog99



Yes, as has been documented. It was inverted, not quite vertical....approximately a 45 degree angle. (To clarify, this is the longitudinal axis....length of the fuselage, nose-to-tail..... measured compared to the approximate ground mean level).

Speed in excess of 480 knots.

NTSB video from the FDR information, this is only the last several minutes:




There is a version showing the entire flight, from start of the take-off roll at Newark all the way to impact. Unless YouTube took it down.

It's on Google Video, here's the link:

video.google.com...

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by maddog99

 

Yes, as has been documented. It was inverted, not quite vertical....approximately a 45 degree angle.

Speed in excess of 480 knots.

Yup and then it left a little 30 foot wide 10 foot deep crater.... cuz it was going soo fast fuhduh!