Warring No planer factions- Shansksville and Pentagon no-planers vs WTC no planers

By any chance, were you expecting a photo that looked like this?

76_planeIntoCrater0.jpg


If so, you are beyond redemption and I officially give up attempting to convince you otherwise.
 
What happened to al lthe passengers and crew if they didn't die in the crash? Where did they go and where are they now?
 
RedIbis said:
Why would you expect anyone to be able to answer that? Determining that Flight 93 did not end up in that ditch is not contingent upon locating the plane in another location.

Your logic suggests something like finding a child missing. The child is not in his bed, so unless we find the child somewhere else, he is actually in the bed.

What's truly inconsistent is assuming Flight 93 is in the ditch even if there is zero photographic record of it having crashed there.
Click to expand...


Let me guess....you cite as proof Truther videos on Youtube
 
1337m4n said:
Color me delusional, because I'm sure not blind.

[qimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Flight93Engine.jpg[/qimg]

Oops, did I already post that image? Twice? It must be a hallucination because Truthers can't seem to see it.

Have you responded to WTC Dust yet? He seems to disagree with you about planes hitting the towers; why don't you act as the voice of reason for once?
Click to expand...

Didn't Jammy once claim that image was a hubcap?
 
WTC Dust said:
Actually, I've interviewed so many people who claim they saw the plane with their own eyes (and not on TV) to dismiss them.

They saw something that looked like a plane to them. I know people who say they saw it from Brooklyn and from New Jersey. I've met people who say they saw it right on the streets of downtown NYC, and talked to one on the internet who saw it from a boat.

I'm just saying it wasn't a real airplane.
Click to expand...


Since you dismiss the accounts of people who saw the planes, then what could you possibly concider to be evidence for your position (or for anything)?


I could picture you arguing a case in a court of law ("sure , the defendent was seen and filmed stabbing someone, and the knife and fingerprints were left on the scene- but clearly there is no evidence the murder took place. The person accused and the knife were holograms!")

You admit that people saw the planes. So why do you reject their accounts? What proof do you have that nullifies their eye witness acounts? And wild nutcase theories pulled out of your ass doesn't count as evidence.

People heard and saw all 4 planes crash ion 9/11, and plane wreckage and body parts were recovered from all 4 crash sites.
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
An actual skeptic would notice that every photo of the ditch on the day of the attacks shows no plane debris. The only plane debris photos are released many years after the fact and these are few and specious. The impeccable red bandana is a curious piece of "evidence."

If you can look at any picture taken on 9/11 and see evidence of Flight 93 you are delusional, choosing to believe simply as a matter of faith. No such pictures exist.
Click to expand...

I'm actually sort of intrigued by your, or any twoofer's, lack of interest in the whereabouts of UA93.

I mean, finding an intact plane that could be definitively shown to be an airplane that was supposed to be completely destroyed on 9/11 would absolutely blow open the fact that there was a huge conspiracy. The trail of how it was concealed would probably reveal some of the key players in that conspiracy.

Why, it's almost like you don't actually believe what you're saying.
 
JackDaniels said:
There is no video of jets crashing near Shanksville and into the Pentagon, while there's tons of it for jets crashing into the wtc's.
Click to expand...

I was in a chat room with a couple on Sept. 11, 2001 who said they witnessed the crash in Shanksville. They saw the plane and the crash!
 
RedIbis said:
An actual skeptic would notice that every photo of the ditch on the day of the attacks shows no plane debris. The only plane debris photos are released many years after the fact and these are few and specious. The impeccable red bandana is a curious piece of "evidence."

If you can look at any picture taken on 9/11 and see evidence of Flight 93 you are delusional, choosing to believe simply as a matter of faith. No such pictures exist.
Click to expand...

I was in a chat room with a couple on Sept. 11, 2001 who said they witnessed the crash in Shanksville. They saw the plane and the crash!
 
WTC Dust said:
Actually, I've interviewed so many people who claim they saw the plane with their own eyes (and not on TV) to dismiss them.

They saw something that looked like a plane to them. I know people who say they saw it from Brooklyn and from New Jersey. I've met people who say they saw it right on the streets of downtown NYC, and talked to one on the internet who saw it from a boat.

I'm just saying it wasn't a real airplane.
Click to expand...

I was in a chat room with a couple on Sept. 11, 2001 who said they witnessed the crash in Shanksville. They saw the plane and the crash!
 
RedIbis said:
You might have to repeat this a few times, they don't catch on that quickly, seeing as how obvious this should have been for them.
Click to expand...

I was in a chat room with a couple on Sept. 11, 2001 who said they witnessed the crash in Shanksville. They saw the plane and the crash! How many times should I repeat myself???
 
WTC Dust said:
Actually, I've interviewed so many people who claim they saw the plane with their own eyes (and not on TV) to dismiss them.

They saw something that looked like a plane to them. I know people who say they saw it from Brooklyn and from New Jersey. I've met people who say they saw it right on the streets of downtown NYC, and talked to one on the internet who saw it from a boat.

I'm just saying it wasn't a real airplane.
Click to expand...

Wow, you know, I own a couple of aircraft, and I'm pretty sure they are quite real. I mean, you can sit in them, and that whirlygig thing up on the nose spins and makes lots of noise. However, if I was to fly one of them over NYC, would it no longer be a real plane? Does this effect begin/end at the city limits? Was it only in effect on 11 Sep 01?

Are my questions ridiculous? Probably, but they are no more ridiculous than the above statements made by you. Methinks thou art pulling our collective leg.

Rolls
 
RedIbis said:
An actual skeptic would notice that every photo of the ditch on the day of the attacks shows no plane debris.
Click to expand...
None of them taken by the news media show any wreckage because they were taken from ground level from over a hundred yards away. There are photos of fire fighters in the crater with smoke still rising from it and identifiable aircraft parts in the crater. Shots from a helicopter taken as the first rteports were coming in show appropriately-sized debris downrange where it shoud have been. You are just plain wrong on this one.

The impeccable red bandana is a curious piece of "evidence."
Click to expand...

Why?

If you can look at any picture taken on 9/11 and see evidence of Flight 93 you are delusional, choosing to believe simply as a matter of faith. No such pictures exist.
Click to expand...

You're stepping over imto my AFSC here and telling me what I should expect to see. That is to say, you are talking through your trousers again. If you see anything other than an impact crater dug by something the size and shape of an inverted 757, you are either delusional or ignorant.

It is not an explosive blast crater. It has none of the characteristics of a bomb crater.

It was not dug out with excavating machines. There are no machines that can do that without leaving tire tracks in the vegetation.

ONLY by inserting a foereign object into the ground can you get a raised berm like that on the downrange side of the crater.

So, that leaves you either ignorant or delusional. Take your pick.
 
JackDaniels said:
There is no video of jets crashing near Shanksville and into the Pentagon, while there's tons of it for jets crashing into the wtc's.
Click to expand...

Actually... There is just as many videos of the North tower impact as there is for the Pentagon crash. (2 I believe of each). After the first tower was hit (in Manhattan, you know that tiny city on the east coast where no-one lives and TV pays no attention to...:rolleyes:), is it really that surprising hundreds of cameras were trained on the Towers to capture the second crash?

Use your brain.
 
Last edited:
WTC dust exactly what DO you expect to see at that crash site? What do you think would have happened to a plane hitting the ground at over 450mph? It's happened before, you know, and for the most part ALL the crash sites look the same as flight 93.

You can't admit there was a plane at Shanksville, you can't even entertain the idea, because by doing so you would be putting your delightfully loony idea that there were no planes at the WTC at risk. So, you are going to ignore and hand wave away every single piece of evidence shown to you, no matter WHAT. It just makes you look irrational, and you know that, but you can't do anything about it.

You're stuck.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Yes, it's a clear indication of how the people who don't believe planes crashed at the Pentagon or Shanksville have lives that are ruled by TV. If they didn't see it on video, in their world it didn't happen.
Click to expand...

You give them too much credit. Some truthers are also Apollo hoax believers. No amount of photos or video of the landings will make them believe men walked on the moon. There are no videos of The Bush administration planning the events of 9/11, but they believe Bush planned it anyway. It is all about prejudice and what they want to believe in. If there was no video, there is no evidence to prove their version of events is wrong. If there is video that shows their version of events is wrong, then it was faked.

Can't win with a bigot, does not matter what the argument is.

Ranb
 
RedIbis said:
An actual skeptic would notice that every photo of the ditch on the day of the attacks shows no plane debris. The only plane debris photos are released many years after the fact and these are few and specious. The impeccable red bandana is a curious piece of "evidence."

If you can look at any picture taken on 9/11 and see evidence of Flight 93 you are delusional, choosing to believe simply as a matter of faith. No such pictures exist.
Click to expand...

What about the witness who saw the plane crash there?

How did the passengers body parts get there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom