bias against science, 451 can't figure out 911
Okay, so back on topic. So far the true believers cannot explain why the crash site looks nothing like other crash sites. even with faster impacts.
You showed no other sites with faster impacts. You have no clue how fast other crashes were, you don't use empirical data. You make up lies.'
Your missiles were not in inventory before 2002. Busted
You never said how fast or the attitude Flight 93 crashed at.
The impact crater shows an impact made at 142 degrees of roll, -41.1 degrees in pitch, by a 757 at 487.5 knots. I doubt you know what a knot is, let alone pitch and roll.
Please show us an impact at these parameters. You can't.
The measurements of the crater are known, but they make no attempt to support their claims by explaining how the gash is consistent with a jet's measurements, even if they could explain the absence of debris seen outside of the crater. The official statements claim the deeper they went into the crater, the more of the jet they pulled out, which combined with the absence of jetsam around the crater would indicate the jet burrowed into the ground, so the gash measurements should match.
The crater is exactly the same width as a 757 wings, at 142 degrees of roll, and -41.1 degrees of pitch. But you don't do reality, you do fantasy.
There are tons of debris ejected at impact. You must be blind, the photos were presented, now you are willfully spreading lies.
Perfect match for a 757.
However the crater IS consistent with two projectiles crashing in crossfire at trajectories of less than ten degrees, so until the class can move past explaining how the physical evidence fits their theories, I guess I win by default.
No, the crater is not close to a fantasy missile not in production on 911.
You lost due to ignorance, and ignoring the evidence. Empirical evidence, proves your claim nuts.
Tons of debris ignored. Like a kid in 1st grade, with your eyes closed.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris11e.jpg
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris11c.jpg
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris12.jpg
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris18sm.jpg
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris8sm.jpg
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris21sm.jpg
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris22sm.jpg
I was sent to aircraft accident investigation school when USC had a course at March AFB. I was working the safety office at my base for a while. It is like they put the accident prone in the safety office, at least in my case. After my job in safety I moved on, during transition into a new job, a U-2 crashed on the base. I was asked to help. I ended up owning the crash site after fire finished making the site safe. I ended up directing the crash scene investigating. The U-2 had stalled, and impacted in a downward trajectory in the first turn of a stalled spin condition from 1000 feet. Unlike Flt 93, the U-2 hit at Slow Speed, Flt 93 hit hat high speed. Energy of impact has a V
2 term which you can't comprehend due to some bias against science. For the U-2 most the debris was in a shallow crater. Some debris was ejected hundreds of feet from the crash site. An instrument from the cockpit, ejected 200 to 300 feet. We marked and photographed the debris field, and later collected all the debris found.
Flight 93 is what you get with a crash at the speed and attitude Flt 93 had. It is nonsense to deny it is flight 93. You lie about 911 and don't care.
Yes, you are the winner.
You won the bias against science award.
You win the I can't see tons of debris at Flt 93 crash site.
You win the Ignorance is Bliss award.
You win the badge of excellence for the best impression of a 911 truth physics expert.
You win the Award for Dumbest Claim on 911.
You win the Award for Google stupid stuff, picking the only missile that was not in production on 911 as your imaginary fantasy maker of craters.
The list of win for you goes on...
