Check out what some idiot thinks is "evidence" in re Flt 93

[leftysergeant]

So I was over on another forum, and some drooling moron offered these pictures of a nose in crash and claimed that because it looked so different, Flt 93 could not have crashed in Shanksville.

Are these people chewing Jimpson weed?

 

[cjnewson88]

Which flight are these supposed to be taken from?

 

[Oystein]

What in those images that looks different is significant in that person's opinion? The helicopter? The agaves? The weather?

 

[leftysergeant]

Which flight are these supposed to be taken from?

Jenni Rivera's Learjet 25, December 2012.

 

[leftysergeant]

What in those images that looks different is significant in that person's opinion? The helicopter? The agaves? The weather?

No crater.

The twoofs expect there to be the same kind of mark in the ground for every controlled flight into terrain.

 

[Oystein]

No crater.

The twoofs expect there to be the same kind of mark in the ground for every controlled flight into terrain.

Well, one could point them to the ROCKS in those images, which may suggest that that ground is ROCKY, with just a thin layer of top soil, while the gound in Shanksville was meters deep re-filled loose soil, mostly probably some kind of loam. Perhaps that makes a difference? Askl them to dig a grave (9/11 Truth needs one!) in a field near Shanksville, and another on a mountain side near Iturbide, Nuevo León, and report on the relative ease of creating holes in the ground by same methods.

Oh, and to make the comparison more useful: As Boeing 757-200 is about 15-20 times heavier than a Leearjet 25, make them dig the hole in the field with a heavy duty shovel, and the one the mountain with a trowel.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

So I was over on another forum, and some drooling moron offered these pictures of a nose in crash and claimed that because it looked so different, Flt 93 could not have crashed in Shanksville.

Are these people chewing Jimpson weed?

I think it's a lot more that their ingrained bias is leading them to accept some pattern recognition while rejecting or outright ignoring others for poor or no reason. Clear hallmark of noncritical thinking. If you reject a piece of evidence, there had better be a reason that stands up to scrutiny.

 

[njslim]

Having seen first hand a Lear 35A impact into rocky ground (one creashed just down the
street) - did body recovery search

Can say the Rivera crash scene looks just like what I saw.......

 

[njslim]

What forum was the mental midget in....?

 

[njslim]

According to Wallace Miller, the Somerset County (PA) coroner, the forward section of
Flight 93 broke away on impact. The debris was projected forward into the woods

This debris field yielded some of the larger pieces including 6 x 7 ft section of fuselage, other section of fuselage (including part of United color livery ) and aircraft tires

Check Gravy's site for some of the pictures

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page3

 

[smartcooky]

According to Wallace Miller, the Somerset County (PA) coroner, the forward section of Flight 93 broke away on impact. The debris was projected forward into the woods

That ties up nicely with what we saw in Discovery's "Plane Crash" documentary, where they flew an airliner into the ground in a high speed controlled crash.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYmaP5OKWBQ&NR=1

 

[beachnut]

The jet dropped 28,000 feet in 30 seconds, there would not be much of the plane left if it hit at a steep angle. The pilot was 78. Idiot truthers claim there should be big aircraft parts in high energy impacts. They show parts from slow speed impacts, and expect the same at high speed.

911 truth nuts can't figure out Flight 93 crash site is normal for the impact attitude and speed.

 

[jaydeehess]

I have witnessed open pit reclamation and can attest to the fact that it means dozens of feet of loose rubble topped with a few inches of loamy soil whereas a crash in mountainous terrain would be encountering perhaps a few feet of loose rocky soil over solid rock. In almost any collission into solid rock, the rock wins.
Also , Oystein mentions, the ke of a Boeing will be much greater for any given velocity, than that of a Learjet.
Then there are the smaller details of attitude and angle not to mention any difference in speed.

 

[leftysergeant]

I have witnessed open pit reclamation and can attest to the fact that it means dozens of feet of loose rubble topped with a few inches of loamy soil whereas a crash in mountainous terrain would be encountering perhaps a few feet of loose rocky soil over solid rock. In almost any collission into solid rock, the rock wins.

In the Rivera crash scene, we are clearly talking about inches of soil. We can still see the strata in the rocks. They are pretty solid.

Ironicly, the only thing the twoofs have proven is that identification documents are expected to survive a crash even if it reduces bodies to shark chum.

 

[leftysergeant]

What forum was the mental midget in....?

http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/279638-so-what-real-nose-plane-crash-looks-like.html

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

According to Wallace Miller, the Somerset County (PA) coroner, the forward section of
Flight 93 broke away on impact. The debris was projected forward into the woods

This debris field yielded some of the larger pieces including 6 x 7 ft section of fuselage, other section of fuselage (including part of United color livery ) and aircraft tires

Check Gravy's site for some of the pictures

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page3

Don't the Truthers claim that any wreckage found was planted or were holograms?