| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Shanksville 757 challenge for duhbunkers | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Mar 22 2009, 11:12 PM (5,134 Views) | |
| KenyonG | Jul 9 2009, 12:01 PM Post #226 |
|
OK, I watched. What does that video prove? Nothing. If a witness says 'something flew over the house, I don't know what it was', how do you get to decide it was UA93? Have you ever been in a courtroom? That's like saying three guys are standing next to a body and two of them claim they are innocent. You will assume the third guy is guilty? End of story , no other evidence needed. Do you know how dangerous your methods of finding fact could be if we used them to determine guilt or innocence? That video reminded me of those UFO documentaries. Could be, could be not. 99.9999% of the times it's not. Even with the fact that the body parts , black boxes, engines, fuselage with UA livery, and on and on were found there, you still feel that those extremely weak witnesses prove that 93 never crashed there? Did 'they' crash AA11 and UA175 into the WTC? Yes Was AA77 and UA93 reported to be hijacked, by passengers, just like the two other planes? Yes Did UA93 takeoff 40min late and hinder the plot to crash it like the others? Yes Did this give the passengers time to know what was really happening? Yes Did numerous people on board 93 report that they were going to try and take the plane back? Yes Did Todd Beamer talk to Lisa Jefferson and tell her that they were getting ready to take the plane back? Yes Was she still on the line to hear the struggle and then silence after the crash? Yes Was Jeremy Glick's wife on the phone when he told her they were getting ready to do it? Yes Did she give the phone to her father, because she couldn't stand to hear it? Yes Did he hear the struggle to take the plane back then silence? Yes Just moments later, reports of a plane down over Shanksville Pa? Yes This all happended in sequence and is verified by ATC, witnesses on the ground, the black boxes, seismic data, radar data, and the calls that the passengers made. This is real evidence that the plane crashed when and where it did. Some random person saying it looked like or sounded like or I thought I heard, will not trump any of that. One passenger even said they would wait till they were over rural land before attempting the take back. These passengers were heroic. There is no way you can dispute the fact that they tried desperately to save their lives and at the same time didn't want to hurt anyone on the ground. It is really a slap in the face to the victims as well their surviving family to use what you are trying to use as evidence. |
 |
 
|
| JFK | Jul 9 2009, 01:13 PM Post #227 |
|
http://aal77.com/rades/rades.htm 
|
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 9 2009, 03:17 PM Post #228 |
|
So, what are you saying? What does this data prove? Is radar data 100% accurate? Is is 100% accurate at any altitude and speed? |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 9 2009, 03:33 PM Post #229 |
|
I couldn't view the data, does it show the plane was actually in Philly or does it show a mile or two to the left or right discrepancy? Do you dispute that the passengers tried to take this plane back? Do you dispute that flight 93 was tracked from takeoff to crash? Do you dispute that these passengers actually boarded flight 93 in Newark? They said they were taking it back. It was life or death, they knew that. It crashed right after they began to take it back. Was all of this faked? Was the cockpit takeover heard by other pilots as well as ATC faked. Was the ATC tape faked? You can hear the hijacker on the tape, you know the one who wrote the good bye letter to his girlfriend in Germany. Is she in onit also? Were the UA 757 plane parts planted in this field in Pa? Did they create the hole beforehand? How soon did the first non conspirator get to the scene? They had already set all the debris out by this time, right? The one or ones who collected the body parts never collected body parts? These locals were recruited to lie about everything beforehand? They faked the DNA because? Remeber this is the local coroner. He lied and sleeps well at night, because? |
|
|
|
| noeffects | Jul 9 2009, 03:53 PM Post #230 |
|
18 questions lol... |
|
|
|
| JFK | Jul 9 2009, 04:14 PM Post #231 |
|
It is what you skeptics rely on... And it is plenty accurate enough for viewing aircraft other than 93 in the Shanksville area. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Jul 9 2009, 04:17 PM Post #232 |
|
Very good questions... Perhaps it is time for an open and independent investigation where all cards can be layed on the table so those questions may be adressed properly ? |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jul 9 2009, 11:16 PM Post #233 |
|
ohhhhh this is going to be fun....lol
barry lichty said a plane flying so fast it sounded like a missile flew over his house coming from the direction of the crash site prior to the explosion in the field. john fleegle says they heard the engines 'roar overhead' and joked that maybe 'they were coming for us' before he, jim brandt, carol delasko, & tom spinelli hear the explosion. indian lake golf course groundskeeper chris smith said he heard the plane fly overhead prior to the explosion too. val mcclatchey told the pittsburgh tribune review she heard the engines roar over indian lake prior to the explosion. the trib even states that indian lake is 3 miles east of the crash site. then theres the tribune review's report about jim stop fishing in indian lake and seeing "the doomed airliner pass overhead". oh. oh yeah and the mention about indian lake residents making 911 calls about a low flying plane said to have been "falling apart on their homes". so what plane coming out of the northwest and traveling from the direction of the crash site towards indian lake is in the air when the explosion in shanksville occurs if it is not united 93?
i see multiple corroborated accounts. i think there is enough to warrant an examination of the indian lake 911 calls from that morning. i think when added to the other body of evidence that this is way different than the insanity your proposing as an analogy.
no. did you only watch 10 seconds of it?
i believe the eyewitness accounts taking into consideration with the small crater and lack of recognizable plane debris and a claim that 95% of a 757 was removed from that 10 foot deep hole when there are also eyewitness accounts stating the plane continued on southeast over indian lake and confirmed in atc records make a real good argument that the shanksville site is at minimum a distraction and most likely a deception.
irrelevant.
irrelevant.
irrelevant.
irrelevant.
irrelevant.
all of this is irrelevant to whether or not these events proves the plane impacted in shanksville. everything you allege is 100% undisputable fact doesn't mean the plane has to crash where we were told.
the 911 commission says the plane crashed at 10:03. the official story is the plane crashed at 10:03. the seismic data you reference states the event occured at 10:06. there is only one person who is alleged to have witness an actual impact. the rest lot it behind treelines due to the topography of the area. if you have ever been there you would see how easy this can happen.
these aren't random people. these are real people. these are the people of "shanksville" the witnesses of 9/11. barry lichty is the mayor of indian lake. the mayor. jim brandt owned the marina. he was the owner. fleegle was a manager there. these are credible and respectable citizens who you an anonymous internet troll have no right bringing their character into question.
good thing for him they just happened to fly over one, huh?
it doesn't matter. my research is irrelevant to who was on that plane or which plane it was or what ultimately happened to it. thats what you failed to see. my research covers a tiny little 10 minute period of 9/11. 9:58-10:08. it conclusively proves the plane that approached out of the northwest did not crash in that field and that another small white plane which approached within a minute of the large one's passing is the ultimate cause of the explosion in the field although it was not the white plane itself.
did you really watch the video? because the first guy was patrick welsh. his wife was deborah welsh. come back to me when you know who they are. i cant wait to see someone type "so one of the flight 93 widows thinks the government is covering up what happened to flight 93. big deal." i can't wait to see one of you bozos say that. please be the first. |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 10 2009, 11:33 AM Post #234 |
|
So, they got on UA93, they reported it hijacked and said they would try to take it back. It was tracked to the location of the crash. The takeover syncs with the crash. The ATC data syncs with the crash. The rades data puts the plane at this location as it crashed. The seismic data syncs with the crash. The 10:03, 10:06 thing has already been explained. Why did it disappear from radar? ATC was tracking it. If it didn't crash what could it have done? Other commercial pilots were asked to tell ATC if they could see UA93 out their windows and more than one reported that they could. UA93 was where it was supposed to be at the time according to all available data. The problem with your witnesses is that they could be talking about military aircraft which arrived very shortly after the crash. The C-130 from Washington also flew over this location shortly after. The corporate white jet also flew by at this time. Other commercial aircraft also reported seeing the smoke and was in the area. What time did the witnesses see what they said? Is it accurate? Witnesses are notorious for mistaking the time, as well as many other things. The pilot in the white private jet reported the plane rocking its wings and raising and lowering the nose. It is theorized that the hijackers were trying to knock the passengers off balance as they tried to get into the cockpit. The screams and noise of these motions were heard by people on the ground and on the CVR. Was the pilot lying? Did 'they' fake the CVR to give these rollercoaster type screams of the passengers? How could someone on the phone hear these same noises? One lady said she saw a white jet. She seems to be implying that it was a UFO. She talks about it being silent and having no rivets or seams. I should give her more credit than the passengers, the ATC, the other pilots on other flights, witnesses who support UA93 crashing there, why? Is she credible? What kind of background does she have? How good is her vision? Does she want attention, etc, etc.? Witnesses have to bee scrutinized to show if they are credible or not. Investigators don't take a witness to court just because he may support their case. They know they have to make sure this is a good credible witness. Watching someone give a sound bite saying they saw/heard something or some plane just doesn't prove anything. I can't see how you give them so much credit with all of the other evidence there is. |
|
|
|
| ToS | Jul 10 2009, 12:05 PM Post #235 |
|
What time did it arrive at the scene?
The two FBI agents who immediately went over to her house to try to convince her it was a 757 that she saw instead seemed to think she wasn't making it up as you seem to be implying. We can provide you with Mrs. McElwain's phone number where you can ring her up on the phone and call her a liar if you want. Edited by ToS, Jul 10 2009, 12:05 PM.
|
|
|
|
| ToS | Jul 10 2009, 12:07 PM Post #236 |
|
KenyonG, are you ever going to show us evidence that most of Flight 93 buried itself? |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 10 2009, 12:31 PM Post #237 |
|
Are you ever going to show anything that proves it didn't crash there? I don't have any video, photos, or ground penetrating radar images to prove this to you. It is possible the way the plane crashed. Why is it impossible for you to believe this could happen? Is your disbelief fueling you to conclude that everything else was faked? |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 10 2009, 12:33 PM Post #238 |
|
She came across to me as someone who is a little out there. That is just my opinion. She seemed to be suggesting that this plane was not normal or super in some way. I don't think they had to convince her it was a 757 since we know a 757 was at the location when the crash occurred. Whatever she has to say will not change that fact. |
|
|
|
| Stundie | Jul 10 2009, 01:38 PM Post #239 |
|
Errr!! How about a picture of the crash site with no plane in sight which proves a plane didn't crash there.  Unless you can see a plane?  Now back to ToS question... KenyonG, are you ever going to show us evidence that most of Flight 93 buried itself? |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 11 2009, 10:50 AM Post #240 |
|
Please explain how that photo is proof no plane crashed there. The fact that you expect to see a plane shows you have no business questioning anything concerning this crash. |
|
|
|
| Lin Kuei | Jul 11 2009, 11:14 AM Post #241 |
|
This forum is a place for people to discuss their questions - questions which exist for obvious reasons. Please don't assume to tell users here they have "no business" questioning anything regarding this alleged crash. |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 11 2009, 11:58 AM Post #242 |
|
Well maybe there should be a folder explaining that planes tend to shatter into many pieces when they crash into the ground at a high rate of speed. This has been shown in many many many crashes. Why would anyone think this crash would leave a recognizable plane? That is the problem with most of these guys, they don't have a basic level of knowledge about plane crashes. They just think it should look a certain way. |
|
|
|
| ToS | Jul 11 2009, 12:28 PM Post #243 |
|
Soooo, what makes you believe most of Flight 93 was buried if you have NO evidence to support it?
Why do you keep insisting that I think it's impossible?
What can I say, if a scene looks staged, if ALL the evidence could have been realistically staged, why wouldn't I think the event was staged? Edited by ToS, Jul 11 2009, 12:29 PM.
|
|
|
|
| ToS | Jul 11 2009, 12:36 PM Post #244 |
|
You think she is crazy because she described an aircraft she's never encountered before, no less flying about 20-40FT OVER HER CAR coming from behind BEFORE the "crash" -- feel free to explain that (or is your explanation is that she's crazy and a liar?).
They rushed over there to try to convince her it was a 757, they were even being condescending to her saying "oh you don't know what a 757 looks like." Why would FBI agents rush over to someones house to try to convince them of what they saw if there was no conspiracy and she was just a crazy person? It absolutely makes NO SENSE for the FBI to do that UNLESS she saw something the FBI didn't want her to see.
Please show me ONE person who described a 757 at the scene. Edited by ToS, Jul 11 2009, 12:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
| ToS | Jul 11 2009, 12:41 PM Post #245 |
|
Maybe you should show us where the bulk of all these shattered pieces went when we are told 95% of the plane was recovered, but the pics of the scene right after hardly shows no more than about 5% of a plane. Edited by ToS, Jul 11 2009, 12:42 PM.
|
|
|
|
| ULTIMA1 | Jul 11 2009, 02:49 PM Post #246 |
|
A C-130 does not look anything like a 757 or a 767. A C-130 has 4 prop engines. A 757 and 767 have 2 jet engines. Edited by ULTIMA1, Jul 11 2009, 02:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
| ULTIMA1 | Jul 11 2009, 02:52 PM Post #247 |
|
What you need to look at is that Payne Stewarts small, little Learjet left almost as big as crater as the crater at Shankesville that was supposed to have been casued by a much, much larger 757. Also the small Learjet did leave recognizable parts where the much larger 757 did not at Shanksville. Edited by ULTIMA1, Jul 11 2009, 02:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
| noeffects | Jul 12 2009, 07:27 AM Post #248 |
|
weird...what is this again? my instinct tells me someone did a terrible job pretending to leave a recognizable plane... |
|
|
|
| KenyonG | Jul 12 2009, 12:15 PM Post #249 |
|
Its a picture of a hole in the ground. Why would someone post a picture obviously taken at a later date with snow covering the ground? What does this picture prove about the crash? Do you believe that the passengers boarded flight 93 and knew they were hijacked and tried to take the plane back? Do you believe that flight 93 was over shanksville when this happened? Do you know flight 93 was lost from radar over shanksville? If it didn't crash, do you have any ideas as to how this all happened? Continuing to say you can't believe the plane crashed, because you have an idea of what crashes look like in your head, does not prove anthing about this incident. Do you understand that. Showing evidence of something happening besides a plane crash is your first step to try and prove your point. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Jul 12 2009, 12:34 PM Post #250 |
|
Ummm KenyonG, that pic is pre excavation. Or did they have some mysterious apparatus to extract the nearly 100 tons of alleged boeing in that hole out without disturbing the ground ?  ( click to enlarge ) Post excavation  Post excavation  Pre excavation  Edited by JFK, Jul 12 2009, 12:42 PM.
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic » |
7:30 AM Nov 28
