How the Shanksville Crater Was Made

[Slowvehicle]

No, the lunar craters caught my eye and made me realize that two projectiles striking at 10 degrees from horizontal from opposite directions could cause it.

Of course, this is all irrelevant, because how I got to the missile hypothesis doen't have anything to do with the evidence of the existing, fully operational JASSM missiles and how the gashes at shanksville fit their capabilities.

Evidence?

(and you still have no idea what the directional information in the pictures you provided, and you used to fake up your "evidence")

 

[notheist]

Detroit Metro Airport 1987. And this jet liner was moving rather slow when it hit.

 

[beachnut]

More BS JASSM not operational till 2009

No, the lunar craters caught my eye and made me realize that two projectiles striking at degrees from horizontal from opposite directions could cause it.

Of course, this is all irrelevant, because how I got to the missile hypothesis doen't have anything to do with the evidence of the existing, fully operational JASSM missiles and how the gashes at shanksville fit their capabilities.

What angle did your fantasy missile hit at, exactly?

Funny, no one saw two missiles. The guy on the scene saw one plane. RADAR has one plane. FDR found in crater, the crater your JASSM ricochet out and hit some barn or farm a few miles away. LOL
Your claim is BS nonsense.

JASSM were not operational until 2009.

NOT in service until 2009.

You can't get anything right.

Here is the NASA stuff.
Pyrex craters? lol
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/...GH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf


You are saying Pyrex balls are like JASSM, not in service due to problems until 2009? lol, you can't get your own BS right.
Can your JASSM not in service on 911, go 3800 mph?

 

[The Big Dog]

So he uses photoshop, fake pictures, brags about trolling 911 boards, and is a Vicsim proponent.

Why is anyone spending time with this grifter?

 

[dafydd]

So he uses photoshop, fake pictures, brags about trolling 911 boards, and is a Vicsim proponent.

Why is anyone spending time with this grifter?

Not much on TV nowadays, this is more entertaining.

 

[yankee451]

So he uses photoshop, fake pictures, brags about trolling 911 boards, and is a Vicsim proponent.

Why is anyone spending time with this grifter?

Because the argument is compelling.

 

[Trojan]

No, the lunar craters caught my eye and made me realize that two projectiles striking at 10 degrees from horizontal from opposite directions could cause it.

Of course, this is all irrelevant, because how I got to the missile hypothesis doen't have anything to do with the evidence of the existing, fully operational JASSM missiles and how the gashes at shanksville fit their capabilities.

But you ignored the fact that trees obstruct one of the paths! Your standard of proof is now reduced to "could" -- how does that rate with "beyond reasonable doubt" or even "preponderance" of evidence

 

[phunk]

Fortunately I'm only using it to gauge trajectory.

But we're not on the moon, at least some of us anyway.

Well then your agrument is easily dismissed. The part of the crater that you're focusing on in the nasa simulation cannot possibly be created with two impacts from opposite directions.

 

[yankee451]

[qimg]http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/02/07/zuqavy6y.jpg[/qimg]

Detroit Metro Airport 1987. And this jet liner was moving rather slow when it hit.

and debris and body parts visible all around the crash site, unlike Shanksville, the crater of which can be better explaned by two cruise missiles striking at ten degree trajectories in opposite directions.

 

[phunk]

No, the lunar craters caught my eye and made me realize that two projectiles striking at 10 degrees from horizontal from opposite directions could cause it.

No, with two coming from opposite directions, they would prevent each other from forming the same pattern seen with one. And with missiles, even one would not do it.

 

[dafydd]

Because the argument is compelling.

No. the chuckles are compelling. Although watching you digging a hole and going round in circles at the same time is beginning to pall. Goodbye.

 

[yankee451]

Well then your agrument is easily dismissed. The part of the crater that you're focusing on in the nasa simulation cannot possibly be created with two impacts from opposite directions.

Which directions did you think I was referring to in the NASA images you said didn't prove anything anyway because the mssiles don't exist?

 

[yankee451]

No, with two coming from opposite directions, they would prevent each other from forming the same pattern seen with one. And with missiles, even one would not do it.

It was the inspiration for the missile hypothesis.

The proof will be in the math, remember?

 

[JimBenArm]

Will it be 80-proof proof or 100-proof proof?

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Fortunately I'm only using it to gauge trajectory.

But we're not on the moon, at least some of us anyway.

Does this mean you concede that some human beings have been to the Moon?

 

[dafydd]

Does this mean you concede that some human beings have been to the Moon?

They said that there wasn't much atmosphere there.

 

[The Big Dog]

Because the argument is compelling.

No it is not, it is silly, and posting easily discovered lies is even sillier.

Man, even starved for truth is mocking you, that should have been a real wake up call.

Whatever, you like being the ball of yarn as people bat you around? No big deal to me.

Good luck with that.

 

[phunk]

Which directions did you think I was referring to in the NASA images you said didn't prove anything anyway because the mssiles don't exist?

I never said "the nasa images don't prove anything because the missiles don't exist". My argument was never based on the existance of missiles.

The directions you were referring to would be along the direction of the trench extending out from the crater. In the nasa simulation, the trench was formed after the main crater. The rediculous part of your argument is that you think the results of a double impact can be visualized by mirroring a single impact.

If two came in from opposite directions at the same time, they would meet in the middle and destroy each other, resulting in a very different shape than the one you created by mirroring the single impact image.

If they didn't hit simultaneously, then one would hit undisturbed ground first and create the crater seen in the nasa study, then the second one would hit the already existing crater and give different results. It would not be symmetrical.

 

[Trojan]

and debris and body parts visible all around the crash site, unlike Shanksville, the crater of which can be better explaned by two cruise missiles striking at ten degree trajectories in opposite directions.

Its kinda cute how, when faced with arguments assailing every possible angle, he just keeps trying and trying ...

 

[yankee451]

I never said "the nasa images don't prove anything because the missiles don't exist". My argument was never based on the existance of missiles.

The directions you were referring to would be along the direction of the trench extending out from the crater. In the nasa simulation, the trench was formed after the main crater. The rediculous part of your argument is that you think the results of a double impact can be visualized by mirroring a single impact.

If two came in from opposite directions at the same time, they would meet in the middle and destroy each other, resulting in a very different shape than the one you created by mirroring the single impact image.

If they didn't hit simultaneously, then one would hit undisturbed ground first and create the crater seen in the nasa study, then the second one would hit the already existing crater and give different results. It would not be symmetrical.

Who said anything about at the same time? The video demonstration of the missiles was just that - a demonstration of the concept. I have collected circumstantial, photographic and eye witness support for the hypothesis, now all I need is the math and the model.