CptColumbo
Just One More Question
Is the basis for this theory about flight 93 the arche-typical character of the politician?
Flight 93
- Thread starter peteweaver
- Start date
-
- Tags
- flight 93
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
TC:
Why did the lights flicker at the marina?
Why did the lights flicker at the marina?
As soon as you can explain to me how Lee Purbaugh's own words being spoken directly out of his mouth are "hearsay" you might have a point. I think it might be time to put you on the ignore list with Bobert. 2 9/11 Deniers who constantly lie........
I don't know.
What I do know is that wasn't exclusive to just Indian Lake and that people closer to the crash site didn't have that experience.
The lights flickered before the "screaming" thing and/or the plane flew over Indian Lake.
Do you have any ideas why airborne planes would cause such a phenomena?
Source
Paul Muro was in his yard in Lambertsville when Flight 93 passed overhead. Muro, who lives a half-mile closer to the crash site than Saylor, said the plane was flying rightside up and normally, although it was very low.
Muro told AFP that he also saw a large silver plane approaching from the south, the opposite direction of Flight 93, above the crash site at the time of the explosion.
The silver plane then turned and headed back in the direction from which it had come, he said.
Paul Muro was in his yard in Lambertsville when Flight 93 passed overhead. Muro, who lives a half-mile closer to the crash site than Saylor, said the plane was flying rightside up and normally, although it was very low.
Muro told AFP that he also saw a large silver plane approaching from the south, the opposite direction of Flight 93, above the crash site at the time of the explosion.
The silver plane then turned and headed back in the direction from which it had come, he said.
Last edited:
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
It would be interesting to see how the electric grid is set up in that area (you could have interruptions down line with out effecting immediate areas). IIRC there are power lines near the crash site.
I think considering flight 93 was heading toward Indian lake the crash made the lights flicker than the sound of the plane (and crash) would follow later (given the distance). Fits logically.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Not visually though. Only by the sound which can be deceiving. If the plane did not in fact fly over head the scenario fits.
Last edited:
Yes but I listed all the witnesses at Indian Lake, plus the witness in between Indian Lake and the crash site, and the witness at the crash site who insists the plane was flying right side up.
When a low flying commercial airliner passes over the building your in you know it. If one did not do that none of these people inside the Marina would have heard it.
Jim Stop seen it flying over losing parts.
Chris Smith heard a "screaming" sound pass from over Indian Lake towards the crash site before the explosion.
An unidentified groundskeeper at the Golf Course saw a silver plane flying towards the crash site from over Indian Lake.
So did Paul Muro who also saw a large silver plane flying south from the crash site after the explosion.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
How many planes do you figure were there? The reason I ask is if you take the location of all your witnesses there had to be several. Agreed? How do you explain witnesses that say the plane was up side down?
Southwind17
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 5,154
Notwithstanding the huge inconsistencies between the many sound/eye witness accounts, even the scant factual information is grossly inaccurate. Val McClatchey's house is only 1.6 miles east of the crash site. Indian Lake Marina is some 2.3 miles from the crash site.
A plane passing over the golf course/marina, as described by the witnesses, would then have to do a sharp 90-degree right turn before proceeding on towards Val McClatchey's house, whereupon it would then need to do a further 90-degree left turn, pass over Val's house, as described by her, to head on towards the crash site. All the while not being clearly seen or identified by any named witnesses.
Is this starting to sound familiar? The "Magic Aeroplane Theory"!!!
Oh, and as I pointed out earlier, Flight 93's fate was sealed from 10,000ft, the altitude from which it suddenly began its fateful descent, at which time the residents of Shanksville and immediate surrounds were being treated to a veritable low-altitude air show featuring all manner of both military and civil aircraft. What a coincidence - an uninvolved civil aircraft crashing right into the heart of an airshow, then all of the planes on display disappear as quickly as they appeared, without a trace.
Is this also starting to sound familiar? "Shanksville Triangle"!!!
Southwind17
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 5,154
Don't you think it seems odd that so many people saw and heard all manner of aircraft before the crash, when they weren't expecting to see any, not to mention the effects of the crash itself, and all such people, being, presumably, in a high state of alertness, except one, fail to see a large silver plane flying away from the crash site, where just about everybody's attention was surely focused. Don't you think that seems odd?
Jonnyclueless
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 5,546
Still waiting for TC to tell us what happened.
Southwind17
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 5,154
... including describing the flight path, as determined from the FDR data plots!
You cannot figure out 9/11, you mess up witness statements. Your analysis of every witness statement, is flawed. Not a thing you have presented yet, supports your non conclusions. Is your problem figuring out 9/11 affect other areas of your life?
You are one of the reasons the 9/11 truth movement is dead. Everything you make up, is so far out, only Alex Jones and a few others are in your class.
The fact is, 93 was not shot down, and everything you say about 9/11 is messed up. Please draw a simple diagram of where 93 flew and prove you are the single best 9/11 truth guru. Can you produces a path? Even a non-path?
Oh, you have no path, you have no facts you have not a single clue to help anyone, yet alone yourself, understand 9/11.
Southwind17
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 5,154
I've never read such utter drivel. Maybe Lee Purbaugh believes he saw what he describes, but I can assure you he certainly did not.
Look, this plane was descending at close to 500mph. That's around 730 feet per second. Allow me to repeat that - it's important: That's around 730 FEET PER SECOND. If Lee Purbaugh did first notice the plane at around 50ft above him he most certainly did not "see the last seconds of Flight 93". To be precise, he saw the last 0.07 seconds, if he saw anything. He wouldn't have had time to even recognize what he saw as an aeroplane, let alone observe it's angle of descent, "rock side to side" then "suddenly dip". Gee, what I'd give to see a Boeing 757 "rock side to side" and dip its nose all in the space of 0.07 seconds. What a highly reactive plane that would be! But let's give Mr Purbaugh a degree of latitude. Let's say he misjudged the height of the plane. Let's allow him, say, a margin of error of ... oh, I don't know ... let's say ... well ... 1000%. No, tell you what, let's say 1,400%! Let's put the plane at 750 feet. Mr Purbaugh now has a full ONE SECOND to observe and assimilate the plane's angle of descent, "rock from side to side" and "dip its nose". It just took you around FOUR SECONDS to read that last short sentence. Four times longer than Mr Purbaugh had to observe the plane!
So, when Mr Purbaugh goes on to say:
well, on what reasonable basis should we accept it as anything close to reliable? He apparently observes a plane "circle the area twice then fly over the horizon", which must have taken how long, minutes, but he "didn't get a good look at it", but he's capable of observing and recalling the intricate manoeuvres of a 100 tonne jet airliner over the space of 0.07 seconds. Absolutely laughable!
What this account does, as convincingly as can be, is demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt, that people's accounts of what they see often bears very little, and in this case absolutely no, I would suggest, resemblance to what actually happened. Anybody who seeks to rely on Lee Purbaugh's account of what he claims he saw is living in the most unreaslistic of places, and should be utterly embarrassed by their naivety and complete detachment from reality. Are you still with us, TC?!
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
Since he's ignored this thread for the better part of a day and a half now, I'd say no.
Dom, I don't claim any special psychic powers, but I foresee another humiliation in your future if you persist with these fantasies. First the Pentagon, now this.
I was banned at LCF for suggesting you should ask your doctor whether Paxil is right for you. I stand by that suggestion.
In all fairness Southwind17, Lee Purbaugh had something like 3 seconds to look at Flight 93, if he looked up at the moment it passed the scrapyard on a line perpendicular to the direction of flight.
The center of the scrapyard is about 650 meters away from the crash site measured in Google Earth, and about 30 meters higher.
Flight 93 hit the ground with an airspeed of about 490 knots at a 40 degree nose down inverted attitude according to the NTSB flight path study for Flight 93.
Some simple calculations tells us that the aircraft was nearly 1700 feet (about 515 m) above the scrapyard before impact, with a flying time of 3.4 seconds left before impact. A look at the actual flight recorder data gives us figures in the same area.
In the telephone conversation with the Canadian no-planer, that I linked earlier in this thread, Lee Purbaugh says the the aircraft was 500 - 300 feet above his head when he looked up, but then he claims that it was no higher than the treetops when it went over his head. That he underestimates the distance is no surprise at all. Distance measurements by eyeballing needs a lot practice to get you in the ballpark. Otherwise the figures will be wildly wrong.
But three seconds is a very short time to take in what's going on. Note that drivers are advised to keep a 3 second distance to the car in front of them when driving. That is order to give the driver enough time to observe, decide and act in time if the car ahead suddenly brakes or something else happens. And why do they have slow motion replays on the television of goals in football, basketball, ice hockey and so on. That's of course in order for us to see the details we missed when it happened.
So your point is still more than valid Southwind17.
So even though Lee Purbaugh claims that he got a good look at the bottom of the aircraft it would not be obvious from his position that the aircraft was inverted. Viewed from his position the profile of the aircraft would look the same as if the aircraft was flying in a non inverted attitude, since it would not be obvious that the tail fin was pointing down. But as I have pointed out earlier he got the color right, Flight 93 was painted grey on the upper half of the body. So when Flight 93 passed above his head the bottom up the aircraft would be grey since it was flying in an inverted attitude. A point that TC329 are unwilling to accept in order to keep his fantasy alive.
And as pointed out before in this thread several other witnesses noticed that Flight 93 was flying upside down before the impact.
