• 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.

Susan McElwein Interview

You know she is mistaken. God, what arrogance. Stop your nonsense and I'll stop mine.
It seems you missed this part of Gravy's statement (bolding added):

Other witnesses who were right there saw the airliner roll to its right, turn upside-down, and dive, followed by the explosion, all of which corresponds to the FDR data.


How much weight do you give these other witnesses and the FDR data, GU? Why does McElwain's account take precedence over what others have testified to seeing and the physical evidence?
 
I've never seen a missle that looked like that. It must be the latest secret weapon...

What is that thing? It looks kind of like a Gibson Explorer/Flying-V mutant except for the headstock. Is it a Washburn Green Munky?

not to jack the thread, but that is Washburn Dimebag Signature Model 333. Based off the Dean ML 14 model a yound Darrell Abott played in his teens, which was based off of, you guessed it, the Gibson Explorer and the Flying V guitars. I own 2 of them.
MVC-022S.jpg
 
1. Time of Crash
On September 12, 2001, the FAA turned over a radar record of Flight 93's flight path to the FBI. At that time, a reporter from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette was told that radar contact with the plane was lost at 10:06am.


The Maryland Geological Survey released a report entitled 'Seismic Observations during September 11, 2001, Terrorist AttacK on March 10, 2002. Using data recorded by the Seismographic Station in Standing Stone, PA (SSPA), the report's authors (Won-Young Kim of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and Gerald R. Baum of the MGS) concluded that United 93 crashed at around 10:06:05 (+/- 5sec).

This seismically deduced crash time for UA93 is contradicted by three sources: the 9/11 Commission, UA93's Flight Data Recorder (FDR), and UA93's Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR).

The 9/11 Commission's report, in particular, uses a series of unverifiable assertions to discount the accuracy of the MGS report, saying in a footnote (Chap. 1, note #168) that "the seismic data ... are far too weak ... and far too speculative...". The footnote refers to an unpublished email from Won-Young Kim to the Commission, and an unpublished (or unavailable) follow-up paper written by Mr. Kim, which allegedly contradicts his earlier report, still online @ the MGS website. While the seismic data for the recorded event at 10:06:05 may indeed be 'weak', it's interesting to note that there are even LESS seismic data to indicate that United 93, or for that matter anything else, crashed at 10:03am.

The same footnote goes on to say that the Commission established 10:03 as the time of impact by using "the very accurate combination of FDR, CVR, ATC, radar, and impact site data sets." Aside from the obvious question of how the impact site could give any indication whatsoever as to the exact time of the crash, there's also the fact that most of the ATC and radar data are unavailable to the public, and the only known media reports that reference these data all mention a crash time of 10:06am.

Which leaves the FDR and CVR, both of which apparently stopped recording at 10:03am, and one of which was allegedly found 25 feet underground.


2. FDR Data - NTSB DCA01MA065
United 93's Flight Data Recorder, an Allied Signal SSFDR, was allegedly recovered in the crater in Somerset County, and the data stored in its memory card was extracted by Honeywell. The contents of the Flight Data Recorder have been made available to the public, thanks to a FOIA request. Several interesting points are illuminated by this data.

a. The aircraft apparently crashed at a speed of over 500mph, inverted (upside-down), at an angle of ~40 degrees. This angle does not correspond with the actual crater in Shanksville, a crude outline of what one would expect to see from a jet that had crashed 'straight down' into the ground.

b. the Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS) aboard United 93 never activated, but neither did 'GPWC Failure', implying that the GPWS was operating, but failed to register any alerts in the moments leading up to the alleged crash.


SINK RATE - generally sounds when an aircraft's rate of descent is dangerously high (the threshold for a 'dangerously high' rate of descent is variable, and depends on the aircraft’s altitude, flap position, and landing gear position). According to the FDR, Flight 93 descended from 10000ft to impact in its final alleged minute. From 10:02am – 10:03am, UA93 supposedly descended at a rate of 10000ft/min, yet the ‘Sink Rate’ warning did not activate.

TERRAIN - Did not activate

TOO LOW TERRAIN - Did not activate

TERRAIN AHEAD PULL UP - Did not activate

GROUND PROX WARNING - Did not activate

GPWC FAILURE - Did not activate. Again, this seems to indicate that the GPWC onboard UA93 was functioning throughout the flight.


3. CVR Data
The Cockpit Voice Recorder was also allegedly recovered in the crater, at a depth of 25 feet. The recorder was described as being in 'fairly good condition', and a transcript of the CVR data was admitted into evidence during the trial of Zacharias Moussaoui. The CVR transcript, like the FDR data, shows that NONE of the typical GPWS warnings which should have activated (esp. 'Sink Rate') did, in fact, activate. It has been suggested that this could be a result of the alleged hijackers pulling the aural warning breakers, but this suggestion overlooks the fact that there is nothing in the FDR data to indicate that the warning(s) would have activated, as no trigger conditions were encountered by the GPWC or recorded by the FDR.

4. Crash Site
The spot where United 93 is said to have crashed is an open field near Shanksville, PA - the former site of a stripmine which had since been covered over with soil. One engine was allegedly recovered from the 'crater', as were both black boxes. Those black boxes are installed in the tail of an aircraft, which seems to indicate that the entire plane from nose to tail crumpled into the soft ground. Also allegedly discovered in that crater, however, was a pristine red bandana (another piece of 'evidence' featured at the Moussaoui trial). The government asserts that the alleged hijackers of UAL93 were all wearing red bandanas on their heads, and to think one of these bandanas survived in such mint condition, while the head around which it was supposedly wrapped was 'vaporized' by the crash, strains credulity.

5. Debris Field
The debris field is perhaps the most puzzling of all, with initial reports claiming that 'nothing larger than a phone book' had been seen, followed by reports of debris falling like confetti from the sky, nearly six miles from the alleged crash site. Debris was found at Indian Lake, and also at businesses outside Shanksville proper, which is itself miles away from the alleged crash site. It has been alleged that the wind on 9/11 (9mph) was sufficient to blow light pieces of paper and fabric over these great distances, but the on-the-scene reports from local media indicate that the items found included "clothing, books, ...and what appeared to be human remains." - common sense suggests that a 9mph wind is not powerful enough to blow anything much heavier than a feather across a distance of a few hundred feet, let alone a few miles. And yet enough substantial debris was recovered at these distant locations that local residents were turning in bags full of it. Additionally, one of the two engines (or rather a one-ton piece of one of the engines) was allegedly discovered hundreds of yards from the crater, though Popular Mechanics and its cadre of experts have asserted that the 2000 lb. engine-piece likely 'bounced' that distance...

It can be interesting stuff. http://skeptosis.blogspot.com/2007/02/united-93.html
How much is real?
 
1. Time of Crash
On September 12, 2001, the FAA turned over a radar record of Flight 93's flight path to the FBI. At that time, a reporter from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette was told that radar contact with the plane was lost at 10:06am.


The Maryland Geological Survey released a report entitled 'Seismic Observations during September 11, 2001, Terrorist AttacK on March 10, 2002. Using data recorded by the Seismographic Station in Standing Stone, PA (SSPA), the report's authors (Won-Young Kim of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and Gerald R. Baum of the MGS) concluded that United 93 crashed at around 10:06:05 (+/- 5sec).

This seismically deduced crash time for UA93 is contradicted by three sources: the 9/11 Commission, UA93's Flight Data Recorder (FDR), and UA93's Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR).

The 9/11 Commission's report, in particular, uses a series of unverifiable assertions to discount the accuracy of the MGS report, saying in a footnote (Chap. 1, note #168) that "the seismic data ... are far too weak ... and far too speculative...". The footnote refers to an unpublished email from Won-Young Kim to the Commission, and an unpublished (or unavailable) follow-up paper written by Mr. Kim, which allegedly contradicts his earlier report, still online @ the MGS website. While the seismic data for the recorded event at 10:06:05 may indeed be 'weak', it's interesting to note that there are even LESS seismic data to indicate that United 93, or for that matter anything else, crashed at 10:03am.

The same footnote goes on to say that the Commission established 10:03 as the time of impact by using "the very accurate combination of FDR, CVR, ATC, radar, and impact site data sets." Aside from the obvious question of how the impact site could give any indication whatsoever as to the exact time of the crash, there's also the fact that most of the ATC and radar data are unavailable to the public, and the only known media reports that reference these data all mention a crash time of 10:06am.

Which leaves the FDR and CVR, both of which apparently stopped recording at 10:03am, and one of which was allegedly found 25 feet underground.


2. FDR Data - NTSB DCA01MA065
United 93's Flight Data Recorder, an Allied Signal SSFDR, was allegedly recovered in the crater in Somerset County, and the data stored in its memory card was extracted by Honeywell. The contents of the Flight Data Recorder have been made available to the public, thanks to a FOIA request. Several interesting points are illuminated by this data.

a. The aircraft apparently crashed at a speed of over 500mph, inverted (upside-down), at an angle of ~40 degrees. This angle does not correspond with the actual crater in Shanksville, a crude outline of what one would expect to see from a jet that had crashed 'straight down' into the ground.

b. the Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS) aboard United 93 never activated, but neither did 'GPWC Failure', implying that the GPWS was operating, but failed to register any alerts in the moments leading up to the alleged crash.


SINK RATE - generally sounds when an aircraft's rate of descent is dangerously high (the threshold for a 'dangerously high' rate of descent is variable, and depends on the aircraft’s altitude, flap position, and landing gear position). According to the FDR, Flight 93 descended from 10000ft to impact in its final alleged minute. From 10:02am – 10:03am, UA93 supposedly descended at a rate of 10000ft/min, yet the ‘Sink Rate’ warning did not activate.

TERRAIN - Did not activate

TOO LOW TERRAIN - Did not activate

TERRAIN AHEAD PULL UP - Did not activate

GROUND PROX WARNING - Did not activate

GPWC FAILURE - Did not activate. Again, this seems to indicate that the GPWC onboard UA93 was functioning throughout the flight.


3. CVR Data
The Cockpit Voice Recorder was also allegedly recovered in the crater, at a depth of 25 feet. The recorder was described as being in 'fairly good condition', and a transcript of the CVR data was admitted into evidence during the trial of Zacharias Moussaoui. The CVR transcript, like the FDR data, shows that NONE of the typical GPWS warnings which should have activated (esp. 'Sink Rate') did, in fact, activate. It has been suggested that this could be a result of the alleged hijackers pulling the aural warning breakers, but this suggestion overlooks the fact that there is nothing in the FDR data to indicate that the warning(s) would have activated, as no trigger conditions were encountered by the GPWC or recorded by the FDR.

4. Crash Site
The spot where United 93 is said to have crashed is an open field near Shanksville, PA - the former site of a stripmine which had since been covered over with soil. One engine was allegedly recovered from the 'crater', as were both black boxes. Those black boxes are installed in the tail of an aircraft, which seems to indicate that the entire plane from nose to tail crumpled into the soft ground. Also allegedly discovered in that crater, however, was a pristine red bandana (another piece of 'evidence' featured at the Moussaoui trial). The government asserts that the alleged hijackers of UAL93 were all wearing red bandanas on their heads, and to think one of these bandanas survived in such mint condition, while the head around which it was supposedly wrapped was 'vaporized' by the crash, strains credulity.

5. Debris Field
The debris field is perhaps the most puzzling of all, with initial reports claiming that 'nothing larger than a phone book' had been seen, followed by reports of debris falling like confetti from the sky, nearly six miles from the alleged crash site. Debris was found at Indian Lake, and also at businesses outside Shanksville proper, which is itself miles away from the alleged crash site. It has been alleged that the wind on 9/11 (9mph) was sufficient to blow light pieces of paper and fabric over these great distances, but the on-the-scene reports from local media indicate that the items found included "clothing, books, ...and what appeared to be human remains." - common sense suggests that a 9mph wind is not powerful enough to blow anything much heavier than a feather across a distance of a few hundred feet, let alone a few miles. And yet enough substantial debris was recovered at these distant locations that local residents were turning in bags full of it. Additionally, one of the two engines (or rather a one-ton piece of one of the engines) was allegedly discovered hundreds of yards from the crater, though Popular Mechanics and its cadre of experts have asserted that the 2000 lb. engine-piece likely 'bounced' that distance...

It can be interesting stuff. http://skeptosis.blogspot.com/2007/02/united-93.html
How much is real?

Bravo. Now, go do something useful with your "evidence".

Or, if you hate the government so much, move to a different country. Enjoy!

Lastly, and I say this to all of the truthers who post videos and theories, if you were on trial and the prosecutors used the same type of evidence and logic in prosecuting you, you would cry foul and call the evidence ridiculous, as it would be. However, in your corner, suddenly, that same type of evidence is valid. Funny.
 
Bravo. Now, go do something useful with your "evidence".

Or, if you hate the government so much, move to a different country. Enjoy!

Lastly, and I say this to all of the truthers who post videos and theories, if you were on trial and the prosecutors used the same type of evidence and logic in prosecuting you, you would cry foul and call the evidence ridiculous, as it would be. However, in your corner, suddenly, that same type of evidence is valid. Funny.

So, you read the post (or maybe not), make an assumption of who I am and what I am about, then get pissy like a spoiled child and expect me to follow your advice on what I should do about anything?
Why don't you do a little background on someone before you get on your flimsy little soap box. Ok, little one?
 
Time of Crash...
I'm not sure how much weight should be attached to discrepancies of a few minutes, since it depends on how accurate the clocks are that are being used to determine the time of an event. I've got four clocks in my home right now (my watch, the clock on my computer, the clock on the VCR, and the clock in my bedroom), and they all show slightly different times (I'm too lazy to synchronize them).

The aircraft apparently crashed at a speed of over 500mph, inverted (upside-down), at an angle of ~40 degrees. This angle does not correspond with the actual crater in Shanksville, a crude outline of what one would expect to see from a jet that had crashed 'straight down' into the ground.
What's the basis for that expectation?

The government asserts that the alleged hijackers of UAL93 were all wearing red bandanas on their heads, and to think one of these bandanas survived in such mint condition, while the head around which it was supposedly wrapped was 'vaporized' by the crash, strains credulity.
What's the basis for saying finding a piece of intact clothing "strains credulity"? The nature of some of the debris found after the breakup of the space shuttle Columbia during re-entry would indicate that some things can indeed survive extreme conditions in relatively good shape.
 
So, you read the post (or maybe not), make an assumption of who I am and what I am about, then get pissy like a spoiled child and expect me to follow your advice on what I should do about anything?
Why don't you do a little background on someone before you get on your flimsy little soap box. Ok, little one?

While I have been following your posts enough to know that you try to post as per your username sake, others may not. On a busy forum, where CTers posting such shaite to infuriate is common, I think it is a little much to expect someone to "background check" each poster who posts such things. As I suggested earlier, you need some form of posting entry line to identify your role as D.A., or else be prepared for much more of this...but you know that.

TAM;)
 
While I have been following your posts enough to know that you try to post as per your username sake, others may not. On a busy forum, where CTers posting such shaite to infuriate is common, I think it is a little much to expect someone to "background check" each poster who posts such things. As I suggested earlier, you need some form of posting entry line to identify your role as D.A., or else be prepared for much more of this...but you know that.

TAM;)

You love me, don't you T.A.M ?...you want to give me some blue blob sugars.
:blush:
 
D.A.

My affection for you, as a guy to another guy (I assume), and myself being heterosexual, is purely plutonic, and is put forth solely for the purpose of fair play.

I am not sure what blue blob sugars are, but I am sure they are delicious.

TAM:) (The Artistic Macrophage)
 
What's the basis for that expectation?

Their stipulation is the angle of crash is inconsistent with the ground evidence.
http://bp1.blogger.com/_aJeegFsC3nY/RczDTJPfJvI/AAAAAAAAAGI/5TTqDaJt2xo/s1600-h/Slide2.1.jpg
Compare with ground damage.
http://bp1.blogger.com/_aJeegFsC3nY/RcoShy_6WFI/AAAAAAAAAEM/VGBj5-BpDJc/s1600-h/aerial_msnbc.jpg

What's the basis for saying finding a piece of intact clothing "strains credulity"? The nature of some of the debris found after the breakup of the space shuttle Columbia during re-entry would indicate that some things can indeed survive extreme conditions in relatively good shape.

I think their point was the bandana was found in the crater were there was a fire. I do not have enough info on the bandana so it is not really that important to me.
 
Last edited:
Their stipulation is the angle of crash is inconsistent with the ground evidence.
Yes, but what's the basis for them making that assessment? Why are they so sure the inconsistencies they claim exist are definitive proof and are not explainable by other reasons?

I think their point was the bandana was found in the crater were there was a fire.
That requires a presumption on their part that the bandana was there in the crater when a fire was taking place. It is possible it was blown out in the impact and explosion and only came to rest in the crater later.
 
You are arguing with an utterly hopeless case, who has repeatedly refused to answer my questions or contact the witnesses whose contact information I gave him. Oh, and remember that this is the plane that TC329 (AKA Terrorcell) believes crashed in Somerset:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/8790469acc3121adc.jpg


That's an unfair biased diagram which I asked you repeatedly to correct. The reason the fuselage appeared to be so wide was because the engines were mounted on the tail of the plane instead of the wings. You push things you know to be bogus because you're a fraud Mark.
 
Yes, but what's the basis for them making that assessment? Why are they so sure the inconsistencies they claim exist are definitive proof and are not explainable by other reasons?

I have not gone over their site fully so I am not sure if they are giving opinions on the data or not. As far as I can tell, it seems they have put up issues they have with the data, and it's conflict with ground evidence.
(I edited in another pic in the last reply, check it out if you missed it because it was edited in a few mintes after the reply.)

That requires a presumption on their part that the bandana was there in the crater when a fire was taking place. It is possible it was blown out in the impact and explosion and only came to rest in the crater later.
I agree. I was going to snip it out, but I do not like doing that with source information. It could be viewed as trying to 'hide' something.
 
That's an unfair biased diagram which I asked you repeatedly to correct. The reason the fuselage appeared to be so wide was because the engines were mounted on the tail of the plane instead of the wings. You push things you know to be bogus because you're a fraud Mark.

notice how you sidestep the issue.

please explain how someone in a car, reported to seeing rivets and that plane was less than 100 feet above her when reports from other eye witnesses claimed it was higher?
 
99% of the truth movements theories are bogus, so, infact, almost everytime a truther opens their mouth, they are pushing things that are bogus...so I guess the entire truth movement is a fraud...yep.

or, a shorter version...

Pot meet kettle.

TAM:)
 
D.A.

My affection for you, as a guy to another guy (I assume), and myself being heterosexual, is purely plutonic, and is put forth solely for the purpose of fair play.

I am not sure what blue blob sugars are, but I am sure they are delicious.

TAM:) (The Artistic Macrophage)

Yes, I am a guy. That pic is me. Yes, I am not ashamed. I'm not a pretty man, I know. :(
But I have a huge jaw and can crush ice cubes!
:D
 
This mistaking me for a female has happened a few times now. I guess my posting style and comments are gender neutral. Perhaps I need to throw in a few belches, a fart or two, and the occasional crotch grab or scratch...lol

TAM:)
 

Back
Top Bottom