• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Flight 93

femr2 said:
Of course I do, and there must be rules here to stop you making such statements.

The way it works is...don't ask awkward questions. The merry mob of rabbid JREF'ers will turn up, throw ridiculous insults and patent lies at the individual, and brush away the very simple and particularly polite question.

Shame on you.

There's no point citing specific places where the claims are made. I don't belive any of them to be definitive or based on complete fact. That's the whole point of the question. I don't know the answer. Asking if there is a definitive answer seems very reasonable to me.

You seem not to agree. Fine. Way to earn respect eh.
Click to expand...

I've got a question for you:

Where is your evidence to support what you claim?

You claim that an engine (which was found 300 yards away from impact) is "conflicting". However you might think, you have no clue as to why plane crashes aren't the same. Physics prove that Flight 93 wasn't "shot down"!
 
Last edited:
femr2 said:
I'm not asking about other parts of the plane, passengers, or whatever else.

There were reports that one of the engines was found (not in tiny pieces) far from the impact site.

Is there specific information which shows those reports to be untrue ?

If there's nothing definitive, no problem. Remains an open book until there is.
Click to expand...

What report? Citation? Source? Text? Hyperlink?
 
I suspect we're just supposed to take his word for it.

Well, two can play at that game. Hey, femr2. There are reports that there is a drunk purple unicorn in my garage. Is there specific information which shows those reports to be untrue? Well. Until such information presents itself, I'll go grab my unicorn another beer.
 
twinstead said:
I suspect we're just supposed to take his word for it.

Well, two can play at that game. Hey, femr2. There are reports that there is a drunk purple unicorn in my garage. Is there specific information which shows those reports to be untrue? Well. Until such information presents itself, I'll go grab my unicorn another beer.
Click to expand...

HEY! Don't ask awkward questions!

There should be a rule against that! ;)
 
femr2 is like a UK version of RedIbis. He thinks this forum is a social club were people can come and have a friendly chat about who murdered who and no one asks those awkward questions like, where is your evidence.
 
DavidJames said:
femr2 is like a UK version of RedIbis. He thinks this forum is a social club were people can come and have a friendly chat about who murdered who and no one asks those awkward questions like, where is your evidence.
Click to expand...

The youtube generation. Gotta love em. femr2 doesnt answer questions. He simply threatens to ban you if you dont tow his line. I have just browsed his video pile over at youtube. Boy has he been busy. I didnt realise that we had basements here in the UK.
 
twinstead said:
I suspect we're just supposed to take his word for it.

Well, two can play at that game. Hey, femr2. There are reports that there is a drunk purple unicorn in my garage. Is there specific information which shows those reports to be untrue? Well. Until such information presents itself, I'll go grab my unicorn another beer.
Click to expand...

An excellent idea. A hungover unicorn is a nasty beast.
 
Is femr2 looking for an exact measurement or something?

People found the engine about 300 yards away. There is nothing strange about that. If you really want to know the exact location to the nearest inch or what position it was or how much of it was left, you are going to be looking for a long time.
 
femr2 said:
One question that I don't have clear information about. Might be kicking around, but haven't stumbled across anything definitive...

One engine excavated. Okay.

The other one supposedly found a long way from the impact site.

Correct ?

If so, how far away was it ?
Click to expand...
No, a part of an engine, a fan section from the big first part of the engine, was found hundreds of feet away. But gee whiz according to crash physics at 600 mph impact parts could be 1000 feet away due to kinetic energy and impact dynamics. I have worked aircraft accidents and Flight 93 has no anomalies except for the conspiracy mined paranoid mungers who lack knowledge.

Only for a few fringe conspiracy theories who can't figure out much about 911 is a fan section being hundreds of feet away in the direction of the crash some great mystery and the grounds to forget logic and knowledge and jump on the stupid train of 911 truth delusions and fantasy hearsay tripe.

Like all your other work, you lack the knowledge to understand the simple part of 911 and can't define your own warped delusions.

How many aircraft accident investigators have you talked to with experience in jet aircraft impacts? How many agree with you that there is something to support doubt? Zero! Got anything to back up your doubt besides paranoid conspiracy theories?
 
Last edited:
femr2 said:
I'm not asking about other parts of the plane, passengers, or whatever else.

There were reports that one of the engines was found (not in tiny pieces) far from the impact site.

Is there specific information which shows those reports to be untrue ?

If there's nothing definitive, no problem. Remains an open book until there is.
Click to expand...

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/United_Airlines_Flight_93_-_Indian_Lake

If you refer to debris found at Indian lake then according to this article it did not include an engine, just light debris.
Indian Lake is also not that far from the impact site. The drive between the two is apparently 6 miles but debris was not constrained to following the roadway. By straight line it is 1.5 miles between the two.

If the reports you refer to does not mean Indian Lake then its up to you to specify what report you are refering to.

If there is no report about where the other engine was found it by no means backs up any other story about the fate of the plane.
 
femr2 said:
And so it begins.

I'll happily go away and have a look back here once in a while to see if anyone refutes the very commonly bounced-around claim.

I guess there is no definitive *debunk*. Fine.

Open book then.
Click to expand...

There is nothing that contradicts the report that a section of the engine was found 10800 inches from the impact point, ergo it is true.

Happy now?
 
We need to pay attention to what Beechnut is saying: They didn't find an intact engine, they found engine parts splayed out from the impact point. Some parts flew farther than others, and distributed themselves in a manner entirely consistent with impact on the ground. So no, they didn't find one engine in one spot and the other in a different spot and therefore no "single" measurement for where the port engine landed and a different one for where the starboard one ended up. The responders found parts distributed away from where the jet hit. The engines were not intact. The distribution pattern is completely expected. And there is no single measurement to where the engines ended up because they ended up spread out over an area.
 
Last edited:
ElMondoHummus said:
We need to pay attention to what Beechnut is saying: They didn't find an intact engine, they found engine parts splayed out from the impact point. Some parts flew farther than others, and distributed themselves in a manner entirely consistent with impact on the ground. So no, they didn't find one engine in one spot and the other in a different spot and therefore no "single" measurement for where the port engine landed and a different one for where the starboard one ended up. The responders found parts distributed away from where the jet hit. The engines were not intact. The distribution pattern is completely expected. And there is no single measurement to where the engines ended up because they ended up spread out over an area.
Click to expand...

Ergo, all plane crashes aren't the same. Thank's Beechnut & EMH!
 
ElMondoHummus said:
We need to pay attention to what Beechnut is saying: They didn't find an intact engine, they found engine parts splayed out from the impact point. Some parts flew farther than others, and distributed themselves in a manner entirely consistent with impact on the ground. So no, they didn't find one engine in one spot and the other in a different spot and therefore no "single" measurement for where the port engine landed and a different one for where the starboard one ended up. The responders found parts distributed away from where the jet hit. The engines were not intact. The distribution pattern is completely expected. And there is no single measurement to where the engines ended up because they ended up spread out over an area.
Click to expand...

If you where inclined to do so you would probably still find some fragments up their today, despite what happens to aircraft parts and human remains when exposed to the elements.

Would you believe that femr2 has previously been labelled as 'the most intelligent man on youtube'. Its true. I cant remember exactley where on youtube i read it but he appears to have a cult following. The youtube generation rocks ;)
 
Would you believe that femr2 has previously been labelled as 'the most intelligent man on youtube'.
Click to expand...

Considering his "fanbase" consists of teenagers who can barely spell, let alone understand physics, this is no surprise.
The fraud femr2 cant cope with grown ups and their questions though.
Noticeably, he has scooted from here, again.
 
femr2 said:
I'm not asking about other parts of the plane, passengers, or whatever else.

There were reports that one of the engines was found (not in tiny pieces) far from the impact site.

Is there specific information which shows those reports to be untrue ?

If there's nothing definitive, no problem. Remains an open book until there is.
Click to expand...

A W Smith said:
What report? Citation? Source? Text? Hyperlink?
Click to expand...
scissorhands said:
Considering his "fanbase" consists of teenagers who can barely spell, let alone understand physics, this is no surprise.
The fraud femr2 cant cope with grown ups and their questions though.
Noticeably, he has scooted from here, again.
Click to expand...

He cannot support his assertions, Which is why like a child he has fled. It is no wonder he blocks debunking comments of his YouTube videos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom