911debunker ([info]911debunker) wrote,
@ 2007-02-06 01:14:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Flight 93 - Poking a hole in the no-plane theory
In my debate with Killtown, I discussed the possibility of setting up the entire Flight 93 crash scene on the day of 9/11. I realize that most people, even a number of conspiracy theorists, find the "no plane at Shanksville" theory preposterous. Nevertheless, the documentary Loose Change parrots this theory, pointing out a lack of plane debris at Shanksville and presenting a little evidence that it may have landed in Cleveland.

Now, if no plane did crash in Shanksville, you have to consider the fact that Barry Hoover lives in a house just 500 yards from the crash scene, and he can clearly see the scene from his home. So if people had started setting up the crash scene before 9/11, Barry Hoover would have known about it. The only way they could possibly set up a scene like this would be if they set it all up after Barry Hoover went to work and before the first group of people arrived at the scene. With this in mind, here is what I wrote at this debate:

First of all, it was reported that 95% of the plane debris was recovered. (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/24/inv.pennsylvania.site/index.html) Now, a Boeing 757-200 operating empty with engines attached is a little over 127,000 lbs. (http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=101). That means that if 95% of this plane was recovered, these folks managed to plant at least 120,000 lbs, or 60 tons, of evidence in that morning.

Think of how much debris that is. 60 tons! That's a lot!

Of course, it wasn't all just found in one spot. Workers had to dig 45 feet into the ground just to dig up all of the debris. (http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/emergency/pictures/091201f.htm) Picture the height of a 3 or 4-story building, and you'll get an idea of how deep that is.

60 tons of debris, some of which was buried through about 45 feet of dirt.

And, of course, the debris was very widespread. Again, look at your video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KulZQfEheyQ&NR

Take a look at the small pieces of debris that were EVERYWHERE, not just close to the crash scene. The debris was very widespread, and there were a number of reports of that, too. Remember Lyle Szupinka, one of the guys who saw an engine "a considerable distance from the crash site"?

Szupinka said most of the remaining debris, scattered over a perimeter that
stretches for several miles, are in pieces no bigger than a "briefcase."

Source: http://www.flight93crash.com/whole_engine.txt

Authorities also said another debris site had been cordoned off six to eight miles away from the original crash debris site. But [FBI spokesman Bill] Crowley said the debris was "very light material such as paper and thin nylon -- things that in the air with the wind would easily blow."
Source: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/inve...rism/index.html

Also, from that source:

Crowley said archaeologists have been brought in to search the impact crater, which has been covered by a layer of dust.

Wow, so they did such a good job of embedding tons and tons of debris into the crater that they even had to bring in archaeologists to help dig the stuff up? That's one hell of a job in just one day. It wasn't even a whole day anyway, was it?

I don't want to speculate on the amount of time you give them to set this up, but you said that the homeowner had already left for work, meaning they would have to wait until he left at the very least. Now two civilians said they ran to the scene immediately following the crash:

Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.
Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.
“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.

Source: http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

So if the guy left for work at, say, 7:00, and this plane crashed at 10:03 or so, I'd say that the crew had about 3 1/2 hours to plant 60 tons of debris more than 45 feet into a crater in the ground (that still had to be dug up, by the way) and over a perimeter of several miles.

Holy shit.



(Post a new comment)


(Anonymous)
2007-02-07 09:23 am UTC (link)
Amazing!

(Reply to this)

ua93
(Anonymous)
2007-02-07 07:40 pm UTC (link)
Hi,

you are doing a great job.

im not sure, if you already seen this interesting document, ist about an
737, which was crashed similar to ua93 into ground, nearly nothing remained outside of the crater:

http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2001/AAR0101.pdf

"The size of the impact crater measured approximately 39 feet by 24 feet =
and was about 15 feet deep."

summary:
http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-ua585.shtml

Simulation
http://www.eurosafetyinternational.com/library/videos/585_chase%5B1%5D.rm=



greetings
michael

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: ua93
[info]911debunker
2007-02-08 07:38 am UTC (link)
I've heard a little bit about this but haven't looked into it very much...thank you for presenting it! I may review it and dedicate a post to it if it's as good as I think it is.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Anonymous)
2007-02-08 03:46 am UTC (link)
You can't fight with these idiots. Not amount of reason and scientific proof can sway them once they have their mind made up. Fortunately though, your work, along with the combined efforts of Mark Iradian, Mark Roberts, and those at the screw loose change blog, have efficiently converted me from a truther. Thanks for opening my eyes. Hope you don't mind if i use your page as a reference for when I argue with these morons online.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]911debunker
2007-02-08 07:34 am UTC (link)
I don't mind at all! I'm glad I could help you come to a new conclusion!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Kidala123
(Anonymous)
2007-02-23 02:10 am UTC (link)
NSU - 4efer, 5210 - rulez
[url=http://bk-magazin.com][/url]

(Reply to this)

Great fall in Nice
(Anonymous)
2007-03-14 09:42 am UTC (link)
Baraboomi:
http://megoporn.com/2007/march-13/bri/

(Reply to this)

Hi, Chippy!
[info]col_jennysparks
2007-03-14 07:19 pm UTC (link)
Well, decided to take you up on your invite to your site. ;-)

So, ever find the link where I supposedly told you I wa a man?

Ta!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Hi, Chippy!
[info]911debunker
2007-03-15 05:24 pm UTC (link)
So, ever find the link where I supposedly told you I wa a man?

I'll answer that question if you can relate it to 9/11. After talking with truthers for a number of months, I finally came to the conclusion that it does no good to talk about anything other than the 9/11 facts. This is a perfect example of pointlessness.

You haven't seen much of me anywhere lately, right? That's because I refuse to let you waste my time anymore. So I made a bad guess on whether you were a man or a woman; what are you going to do, destroy my credibility with that?

Take this into consideration, folks. Col. Jenny Sparks accused me for several months of being a troll on 911blogger, which I was not. After repeatedly telling her that I was not who she accused me of being and after answering every question she had, she still wasn't convinced. And what do you know, another individual came forward and confessed to being the troll who was invading the site, driving the nail in the coffin that it was not me.

So what does Jenny Sparks do after discovering that she falsely accused me of trolling for months?

NOTHING.

That's the kind of integrity you can expect out of this person.

So like I've said before, I would stick to the 9/11 facts if I were you. I'm done with playing these games of yours. You WILL be ignored if you say nothing that has any direct pertinence to the post you are responding to.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Fresh m-service
(Anonymous)
2007-03-25 11:22 am UTC (link)
http://music17.info/db/?track=6043
nice!

(Reply to this)

Andrew breakdown...
(Anonymous)
2007-04-03 08:57 am UTC (link)
Shield meter :))
http://eshield.info/andrew

(Reply to this)


[info]99catsaway
2007-04-12 06:13 pm UTC (link)
Question: any recommendations on what to say to this guy? http://community.livejournal.com/conspiracy101/269321.html?thread=1709321#t1709321

Are there photographs anywhere of the building being consumed by fire on more than one side? I just started Googling, but it's hard to wade through all the conspiracy junk when you search on 9/11. Thanks. :)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]911debunker
2007-04-13 02:54 am UTC (link)
Of course! I'm always happy to help out those who defend the real truth.

The best source I can give you is at this link. It's the paper on the very top, and although it's long, you should be able to find what you're looking for. It has an excellent table of contents and appendix.

http://www.jod911.com/

Most of the fires were present on the south side of the building, which is the side that was adjacent to the twin towers. This video here clearly shows smoke pouring out of nearly every single level of the building:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

Another good source of general information can be found here:

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm

Be sure to refer him to an actual controlled demolition, too. Here's a great example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ

Take note of how loud the actual explosions are and how visible they are in the windows!

Best of luck to you in debating with this guy!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]99catsaway
2007-04-16 01:51 am UTC (link)
Thanks! I sat and read most of the building seven write up this afternoon. Very illuminating. I feel like I have a better understanding. Thanks again.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Jimmi song(and dance)
(Anonymous)
2007-04-23 09:06 am UTC (link)
:)
http://bmains.info/youtube/movie.php?movie_id=40762

(Reply to this)

Usama Bin Laden new video
(Anonymous)
2007-05-10 07:05 pm UTC (link)
http://xfind.info/news/list.php?id=112078&t=html
"The United States Government is offering a reward of up to $5 million
for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Usama Bin Laden.""
Today somebody get rich! :)

(Reply to this)

Pentagon site was hacked.
(Anonymous)
2007-05-14 05:17 pm UTC (link)
Hack-group called "H0PL" just published video-log :)
http://xblock.info/rss_feed.php?day=05+14+2007&item=3
Cool work!

(Reply to this)

Wll your so wrong
(Anonymous)
2008-07-04 12:56 pm UTC (link)
You say that plane parts were found 45 feet deep but all the excavation pictures show nothing at all at any depth.

I recommend you research before trying to lie to good people.

There were no parts found.

Now about the whole red herring argument that the crash site was set up on the morning of 911 is one that you just made up and is not embraced by anyone but poor skeptics.

The crater is old and weathered,. The wing scar is a natural or mandmade scar. Its is a reclaimed coal surface mine. To set up the crash site wouldnt have taken long and it didnt have to be done on the morning of 911. They had months to prepare.

You said "First of all, it was reported that 95% of the plane debris was recovered"

That is a fabricated tale for there has never been any evidence of a plane crashing at all.


As far as eyewitnesses, some saw a small fast' thing' fly over indian lake and crash, antoher witness saw a 'van sized' cruise missile at tree top level crash. Some saw the plane wobble at low speed some say it was upside down. Which one is it?

You debunkers are so poorly educated and reserached that I wouldnt give you the credit of being a 'debunker' but just plain ignorant.

Research kids, research. No plane crashed in Shanksville 911. experts all agree.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Wll your so wrong
(Anonymous)
2008-07-05 04:24 am UTC (link)
You say that plane parts were found 45 feet deep but all the excavation pictures show nothing at all at any depth.

That's completely false. There's plenty of plane debris all over the place, see it for yourself!

http://911debunker.livejournal.com/7467.html

Also, I do not say that debris was found 45 feet deep. My source does. Check the link.

I recommend you research before trying to lie to good people.

That really means a lot coming from someone who didn't include any research whatsoever in his response.

Now about the whole red herring argument that the crash site was set up on the morning of 911 is one that you just made up and is not embraced by anyone but poor skeptics.

The crater is old and weathered,. The wing scar is a natural or mandmade scar. Its is a reclaimed coal surface mine. To set up the crash site wouldnt have taken long and it didnt have to be done on the morning of 911. They had months to prepare.


Well you see, this is why I'm bringing this up. You say they had months to prepare, but there's no plane debris to be found. Doesn't that make you scratch your head at all? If you say that there's no plane debris there, other than a few big obvious things shown in the photographs I linked to you, then the ONLY reasonable explanation is that they quickly set it all up on the morning of 9/11. One very good reason for doing that is that someone lives right next to the damn crash site.

On the other hand, if, like you say, this "red herring" is a bunch of baloney, then you'd be saying that the conspirators spent MONTHS planning this, and they didn't even plant any debris there or make it look like a reasonable plane crash. What a great theory you have there.

You said "First of all, it was reported that 95% of the plane debris was recovered"

That is a fabricated tale for there has never been any evidence of a plane crashing at all.


I guess I already proved you wrong on that one, eh?

As far as eyewitnesses, some saw a small fast' thing' fly over indian lake and crash, antoher witness saw a 'van sized' cruise missile at tree top level crash. Some saw the plane wobble at low speed some say it was upside down. Which one is it?

Well for heaven's sake, why not try and figure that out yourself? Do you guys ever think these things through?

If it's all of them, then you have a hard time justifying that NOTHING crashed there.

If it's none of them, and the witnesses were all lying, then major props to the conspirators for coaching their witnesses to tell completely contradictory stories. Makes no sense.

If it's none of them, and the witnesses were telling what they believed to be the truth, then you'd remember that we're all human and that nobody ever sees everything the exact same way. This is, in fact, the ONLY reasonable explanation for what these witnesses said. And if you'd use your brain for a few moments, you'd figure that out too.

You debunkers are so poorly educated and reserached that I wouldnt give you the credit of being a 'debunker' but just plain ignorant.

Uh, ok.

Research kids, research. No plane crashed in Shanksville 911. experts all agree.

It's kind of ironic that you'd say something like that and not do any research to say who these "experts" are or what they said.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…