Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Facts About The Shanksville Crater. Put Some Bad Theories To Rest.
Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum > Location > Shanksville, PA
Godspeed2012
These "wing scars" are not caused by wings. They are caused by water. The crater in shanksville that is claimed to be caused by a Boeing 757 was not caused by one at all but by something much smaller. If it was caused by it was caused by a cruise missile or small craft, the weathered scar was used as a target.

The fact that the crash site was meters away from Rollock Scrap yard which you can find connections there but thats another story.

Here is an image of a scar I found not too far from the crater site. Its not a rare feature.

Here is another. These scars were not caused by missiles or planes.

Here is an image of was is usually confused for a vertical stabilizer but I have yet to find a official account stating that the wing and tail scars were actually caused by a plane on 911.



This image shows you the crater that was most likely caused on 911. Too small for a Boeing 757, obviously.
I Hilighted the drainage into the "wing scar"

We can speculate about what caused the small 10 foot wide crater but whatever it was it crashed or targeted the old gash in the ground and WAS NOT A BOEING 757.
Godspeed2012
Here is another image showing the drainage. Never accept the assumption that the wings or tail left any imprint on ground.

If I would to estimate I would say what caused the crater could of been quite small, no where near the size of a commercial airliner.
Obwon
If I recall correctly, the plane was supposed to have hit the ground intact and buried itself several feet underground. While another 2 planes, the ones that hit the towers, supposedly either vaporized on impact, which was calculated to require a speed of 5 miles per second, or they completely entered the buildings also without breaking apart. All we have been told is extremely unlikely to say the least. But hey, who knows, eh? (wink)
amillionto1
QUOTE (Obwon @ Feb 14 2014, 07:30 AM) *
If I recall correctly, the plane was supposed to have hit the ground intact and buried itself several feet underground. While another 2 planes, the ones that hit the towers, supposedly either vaporized on impact, which was calculated to require a speed of 5 miles per second, or they completely entered the buildings also without breaking apart. All we have been told is extremely unlikely to say the least. But hey, who knows, eh? (wink)

My USA today from September 12th quoted Carl Ray Landis, a 'contractor' from Somerset, PA, and his Nephew Carl Young, who were driving their pickup and saw the plane come straight down into the ground totally intact. Obvious BS. Paid shills. They still had an address in Somerset as of a couple years ago. Doubt that it is real.
Godspeed2012
QUOTE (amillionto1 @ Feb 14 2014, 08:16 AM) *
My USA today from September 12th quoted Carl Ray Landis, a 'contractor' from Somerset, PA, and his Nephew Carl Young, who were driving their pickup and saw the plane come straight down into the ground totally intact. Obvious BS. Paid shills. They still had an address in Somerset as of a couple years ago. Doubt that it is real.



They all saw a "plane". but what kind, what size? They said they saw something small then the fbi would say it wasnt small it was a Boeing 757, then people were like.... oooooh..... ok..

But as you can see I proved that the crater was not caused by a boeing 757.

To those people, you know who you are, how do you like this info coming out again. This information has no counter argument. Shills fear me.
NP1Mike
Never mind the crater.

What I find much more intriguing is the number of members here who mysteriously surface out of nowhere after hibernating for years.

What prompted you to make this post yesterday Godspeed2012?
You joined in Sept 09 and now have a total of 8 posts!

And how about you amillionto1?
You joined in March 08.
Why did you wait six years before making your second post?
What was so special about this topic that you just HAD to come back and say something?


Godspeed2012
QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 15 2014, 01:38 AM) *
Never mind the crater.



The crater in Shanksville has professionally been proven NOT to have been caused by a Boeing 757 as the images above obviously and crudely show.

Thank you for your interest into proving the tale of what happened in Shanksville is not true as all the eyewitnesses and images show. Flight 93, the Boeing 757 did not cause the crater is Shanksville.



Godspeed2012
NP1Mike
QUOTE (Godspeed2012 @ Feb 16 2014, 10:53 PM) *
The crater in Shanksville has professionally been proven NOT to have been caused by a Boeing 757 as the images above obviously and crudely show.

Thank you for your interest into proving the tale of what happened in Shanksville is not true as all the eyewitnesses and images show. Flight 93, the Boeing 757 did not cause the crater is Shanksville.


I am not disputing anything said about the crater.

I was addressing your return to this site after more than four years of absence.
In the last couple of days you have doubled your total output at this site, which now stands at 10 posts.

I hope you stick around this time a little longer and give us an opportunity to get to know more about your thoughts on 9/11.
Godspeed2012
QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 16 2014, 11:31 PM) *


Thats great. Glad to be back. If you would like to know more then address me privately or start another thread which there I could address your issues, but please keep it on topic.

What do you think of this picture

This scar is just yards away from the crash site.

So if the scar was not caused by wings then all that's left is a small oblong circular crater. What could of caused that? What happened to the Boeing 757 theory?
Godspeed2012



The missile pod/killtown wash was weak. This site doesnt get many views I see. Great thread tho.

Oh well, thats the good thing about google.
Godspeed2012
QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 16 2014, 11:31 PM) *
I am not disputing anything ....


So what you think about this undebunkable material presented? Enquiring minds want to know. Cheers.

noplane mike?
Obwon
QUOTE (Godspeed2012 @ Feb 19 2014, 09:27 AM) *
So what you think about this undebunkable material presented? Enquiring minds want to know. Cheers.

noplane mike?


Any NPT starts with the fact that there were, in fact, people looking at the north tower before the first plane is supposed to have struck. This is why the first reports we have of any plane, is the possibility that it was a small aircraft that hit. Any person looking at the towers at that moment in time, would obviously have seen an aircraft of such size, that it could not possibly have been confused with a heavy commercial airliner. That, plus the size of the explosion is a terrible mismatch for a small twin engine air craft. So then, how could the first witnesses have possibly have gotten things so terribly wrong? The answer is that only later did the story morph into what they wanted us to officially know and believe. The easy chain says> no plane at the north tower > no need for one on the south tower either> certainly no need for a plane at Shanksville and none at the Pentagon either.

Later, when the "evidence" of planes is given and analyzed, it makes sense that this evidence doesn't make any sense. Then take it from there.
NP1Mike
QUOTE (Godspeed2012 @ Feb 19 2014, 09:27 AM) *
So what you think about this undebunkable material presented? Enquiring minds want to know. Cheers.

noplane mike?



If you spend a little more time on this site, you will learn I am not a no-planer.

When I asked you to stay a little longer this time (on your return to the site) I was hoping for
some in-depth, intellectual analysis.

I hope you can deliver on this.
WhisperingWnd
QUOTE (amillionto1 @ Feb 14 2014, 08:16 AM) *
My USA today from September 12th quoted Carl Ray Landis, a 'contractor' from Somerset, PA, and his Nephew Carl Young, who were driving their pickup and saw the plane come straight down into the ground totally intact. Obvious BS. Paid shills. They still had an address in Somerset as of a couple years ago. Doubt that it is real.



here is a great link to the coverage at Post-Gazette



NP1Mike
I still maintain what I said earlier in this post until proven wrong.

We now have three posters in this thread alone who have surfaced out of no where, averaging two or three posts a year, or less in the case of amillionto1.

amillionto1 (Mar '08) 2 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
Godspeed2012 (Sep '09) 14 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
WhisperingWnd (Jan '10) 8 posts total on Feb 26, 2014

What compelled them/him/her to post to this thread?

I said it before and I'll say it again.
Please stick around folks, I'm looking forward to more of your intellectual contributions to this forum!

Please prove me wrong; that you aren't shills/socks.

WhisperingWnd
QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 26 2014, 06:31 PM) *
I still maintain what I said earlier in this post until proven wrong.

We now have three posters in this thread alone who have surfaced out of no where, averaging two or three posts a year, or less in the case of amillionto1.

amillionto1 (Mar '08) 2 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
Godspeed2012 (Sep '09) 14 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
WhisperingWnd (Jan '10) 8 posts total on Feb 26, 2014

What compelled them/him/her to post to this thread?

I said it before and I'll say it again.
Please stick around folks, I'm looking forward to more of your intellectual contributions to this forum!

Please prove me wrong; that you aren't shills/socks.




this was the perfect opportunity to share the great link I have had for several years now. usually you have to go to the wayback machine for older accounts of the attacks.
I am however not out of nowhere.

I am not a pilot or a "truther", nor am I someone who has lots of knowledge about any of the events or the "aftermath".

I am an average American who to this day, remember.

on a much more personal level, Flight 93 is of great interest to me. on September 11, 2001 I was living in Toledo Ohio approximately 10 miles from the 180th Wing of ANG.

I happened to be watching ABC that morning, which is something I want to get into a bit. the manager of my apt. building coincidentally was a Sargent in the ANG. sometime around 9am he got into his van and took off out of here practically sideways.

as I watched and listened to peter Jennings a long shot toward the wtc showed something coming from the right hand side of the screen very fast. I said outloud to nobody else, what the Fuck is that, OMG its another .. and it crashed.

I wonder a lot about the coverage that morning. I know lots and lots of people believe the TV achieves on the web have been manipulated or the coverage was staged.

what I remember was the feeling of chaos, suddenly so many events of monumental significance were taking place and the newscast portrayed this.

so peter Jennings continued to report the "other planes" out there, this was before we heard anything about the pentagon or Pennsylvania. in my area, Toledo, there was no sound of any planes whatsoever even though the order to land at the nearest airport had gone out. by now the pentagon was on fire and and nobody knows what is going on, no sign of a plane having crashed... next thing I knew was I saw the tower melting in the background of the shot on tv.

watching the 9/11 TV archives if I remember correctly, Jennings is conversing with john somebody or other and there is not the urgency, the chaotic reporting of planes being reported as missing, crashed, reported as hijacked etc. I am curious if others remember what they saw and heard that day and if it seems the TV archives are different in that respect.

by the time I got some bearings about me I heard a plane out my window. the time was 10:40 am, long long after the order to land came. I am surrounded by airports in that area, Cleveland Chicago, Detroit.. any plane in the sky surely would have landed somewhere by now. living so close to the airport I knew it was too high to land by the sound.

I was familiar with woody who is a member here from a different forum so I discussed with him this plane and we wondered then if it was the delta 1989 or maybe delta 89, (I get them confused) flight because at the time I did not recall what time I heard this plane only that it shouldn't have been near Toledo. the reports of flight 93 and the delta flight at the similar times .. I wondered all kinds of theories about who I heard.

just for the record, I do not buy the o.c.t. one iota, I did though at one time.. long long long ago.

another thing I did not hear is the ANG. I didn't hear any fighter jets. unless they took off and flew straight up like a rocket I don't believe the 180th was tailing flight 93.

in the years that followed the attacks not knowing if the plane I heard was flight 93 and wondering why the delta flight 1989 didn't just land in Toledo .. Air Force One had landed many times so I knew this flight could have plus the ANG was right there.. I was reading something on woodys blog and found this
ashcroft refusing to land in Toledo
so you see, I am NOT out of Nowhere. and not a shill or sock.


on that note mike you probably wont hear from me for another 2 years because mostly I browse here and have nothing of actual significance to contribute among these people with more knowledge more skill, more pertinent life histories. I hope to live long enough to know the truth behind this event.







Godspeed2012
QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 26 2014, 06:31 PM) *
I still maintain what I said earlier in this post until proven wrong.

We now have three posters in this thread alone who have surfaced out of no where, averaging two or three posts a year, or less in the case of amillionto1.

amillionto1 (Mar '08) 2 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
Godspeed2012 (Sep '09) 14 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
WhisperingWnd (Jan '10) 8 posts total on Feb 26, 2014

What compelled them/him/her to post to this thread?

I said it before and I'll say it again.
Please stick around folks, I'm looking forward to more of your intellectual contributions to this forum!

Please prove me wrong; that you aren't shills/socks.



You are the shill tard you keeps on changing the subject. I told you more than once that if you would like to do ad hominen attacks then send me a personal message.

You are deliberately changing the subject and calling people shills for revealing the Flight 93 that allegedly crashed in Shanksville did not crash there at all as the evidence shows.

So in short the Flight 93 story in Shanksville is a lie. No boeing 757 crashed in Shankville on 911.

Godspeed2012


As you can see the crater was not caused by a Boeing 757 and that the conspiracy theory that the wings left imprints on the ground has been disproved by professionals as the image above clearly shows. The conclusion is that the crater WAS NOT CAUSED BY A BOEING 757.

What caused that little 10 foot crater?
tumetuestumefaisdubien
QUOTE (WhisperingWnd @ Feb 27 2014, 08:42 AM) *
by the time I got some bearings about me I heard a plane out my window. the time was 10:40 am, long long after the order to land came. I am surrounded by airports in that area, Cleveland Chicago, Detroit.. any plane in the sky surely would have landed somewhere by now. living so close to the airport I knew it was too high to land by the sound.

Interesting. What I see on the radar ~10:35-10:45EDT is this:

There are several aircrafts in the sky around western Erie shore.
Closest to the Toledo at higher altitude - about 10nmi SW at 10:45 is a plane coming from northwest at 31700ft.
Then there is a plane flying NWW -about 20nmi North at ~10:39 at 12200ft:

Could one of them be your plane?
WhisperingWnd
QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 2 2014, 04:31 PM) *
Interesting. What I see on the radar ~10:35-10:45EDT is this:

There are several planes in the sky around western Erie shore.
Closest to the Toledo at higher altitude - about 10nmi SW at 10:45 is a plane coming from northwest at 31700ft.
Then there is a plane flying NWW -about 20nmi North at ~10:39 at 12200ft:

Could one of them be your plane?



well that really throws a wrench into what I thought was a resolved issue. it seems neither of them could be the plane I heard. one is 31000 feet and the other is 12000 feet. is 12000 feet a distance where one could still hear the flyover - if it wasn't a fighter jet? I thought I remember somewhere reading Ashcroft flew in a Lear jet from where he was in Minnesota that morning, wasn't he also at a school? I really should have checked for this info before replying to your question..

I watch jets sometimes coming in for landings now and at times from where i'm located wheels are down and they appear to be in slow motion approaching the airport. they seem very low
and quite loud. I try to imagine what the sound was like on the ground in NYC and if this even comes close to that. there are cargo planes that come in at night and they too are very low
and loud. I kid you not, sometimes the passenger planes I see coming in you would swear you can see in the windows of the passenger compartment.

these radar images could be fighter jets although at 12000 feet i'm sure I would recognize that sound. 10:40am is approximately 1 hour after the ground stop if i'm correct. I heard 1 plane that morning and the skies were crystal blue here as well. I saw no contrails from flights moving through the area either, and yes I was keeping my eyes out for planes and thought it strange that none seemed to be landing at Toledo express.

hearing that plane and knowing it was too high to land here and Jennings continuing to say they were worried because there were still flights out there unaccounted for finally provoked me into calling the Secret Service and reporting this flight. I told the agent I had heard this plane/jet and was only calling to report because Peter Jennings kept saying that there were planes out they couldn't account for. The Agent said "maybe it landed" and I told him exactly what I've said here, it sounded too high to land.
He thanked me and hung up.

Immediately after I hung up Jennings said "there's a plane down near Cleveland". I know the TV archives do not have Jennings saying that.

I'm beginning to feel sick to my stomach, again. It really appears that 10:40am is not the time when I heard that plane.





tumetuestumefaisdubien
QUOTE (WhisperingWnd @ Mar 2 2014, 11:36 AM) *
is 12000 feet a distance where one could still hear the flyover - if it wasn't a fighter jet?

It is if overhead, but I'm quite not sure with it if the plane is 20nmi far away.

QUOTE
these radar images could be fighter jets although at 12000 feet i'm sure I would recognize that sound.

No, fighter jets would have military identification. Which the two planes I've shown last time haven't. There are fighterjets at the pictures - the two planes around Cleveland colored green.

QUOTE
10:40am is approximately 1 hour after the ground stop if i'm correct. I heard 1 plane that morning and the skies were crystal blue here as well. I saw no contrails from flights moving through the area either, and yes I was keeping my eyes out for planes and thought it strange that none seemed to be landing at Toledo express.


There actually is also this plane:

From what I see in the radar data I can't confirm it for sure, because it doesn't see planes at lower altitudes than that 1800ft there, but well could have done U-turn over Toledo after disappearing from the long range radar and land at the Toledo Express around 10:40-45.

QUOTE
Immediately after I hung up Jennings said "there's a plane down near Cleveland". I know the TV archives do not have Jennings saying that.

That's quite sure the archives are manipulated. For example now the CBS live picture of WTC2 strike is already replaced by something else and I'm sure the "dive shot" was still there just two or three years ago.

QUOTE
I'm beginning to feel sick to my stomach, again. It really appears that 10:40am is not the time when I heard that plane.

An so when you've heard it? blink.gif dunno.gif
WhisperingWnd
QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 2 2014, 06:16 PM) *
It is if overhead, but I'm quite not sure with it if the plane is 20nmi far away.


No, fighter jets would have military identification. Which the two planes I've shown last time haven't. There are fighterjets at the pictures - the two planes around Cleveland colored green.



There actually is also this plane:

From what I see in the radar data I can't confirm it for sure, because it doesn't see planes at lower altitudes than that 1800ft there, but well could have done U-turn over Toledo after disappearing from the long range radar and land at the Toledo Express around 10:40-45.


That's quite sure the archives are manipulated. For example now the CBS live picture of WTC2 strike is already replaced by something else and I'm sure the "dive shot" was still there just two or three years ago.


An so when you've heard it? blink.gif dunno.gif


ok this is a possibility, I live east of the airport and this is wnw of the airport. not sure what you're saying here at the end, "An so when you've heard it"?
if it's regarding the time that I heard the plane I stated up thread I didn't know what time I heard it only that it was long after the ground stop was initiated.

it wasn't until I found that link from Woody Box with Ashcroft refusing to land in Toledo
was I able to connect a time to a plane.
Godspeed2012
thats great.

What do you think of the wings scars that are found all over the area?
WhisperingWnd
QUOTE (Godspeed2012 @ Feb 13 2014, 11:35 PM) *
These "wing scars" are not caused by wings. They are caused by water. The crater in shanksville that is claimed to be caused by a Boeing 757 was not caused by one at all but by something much smaller. If it was caused by it was caused by a cruise missile or small craft, the weathered scar was used as a target.

The fact that the crash site was meters away from Rollock Scrap yard which you can find connections there but thats another story.

Here is an image of a scar I found not too far from the crater site. Its not a rare feature.

Here is another. These scars were not caused by missiles or planes.

Here is an image of was is usually confused for a vertical stabilizer but I have yet to find a official account stating that the wing and tail scars were actually caused by a plane on 911.



This image shows you the crater that was most likely caused on 911. Too small for a Boeing 757, obviously.
I Hilighted the drainage into the "wing scar"

We can speculate about what caused the small 10 foot wide crater but whatever it was it crashed or targeted the old gash in the ground and WAS NOT A BOEING 757.


I found this interesting picture that is supposed to be from the USGS taken in 1994. if this is a valid photo from USGS I don't see how it can be from 7 years earlier than 2001,
trees don't grow that fast. Whatever year this photo was taken it does appear to show the same area and the same "scar".
I am curious what others think about this scar.







Godspeed2012
QUOTE (WhisperingWnd @ Mar 2 2014, 09:59 PM) *
I found this interesting picture that is supposed to be from the USGS taken in 1994. if this is a valid photo from USGS I don't see how it can be from 7 years earlier than 2001,
trees don't grow that fast. Whatever year this photo was taken it does appear to show the same area and the same "scar".
I am curious what others think about this scar.










Not same scar. But what caused the old ravine is what caused the new ravine was water and not a plane or bomb. The round circular crater was caused by something much smaller and not a Boeing 757.

The scar you show is not the exact one.
WhisperingWnd
QUOTE (Godspeed2012 @ Mar 3 2014, 08:42 AM) *
Not same scar. But what caused the old ravine is what caused the new ravine was water and not a plane or bomb. The round circular crater was caused by something much smaller and not a Boeing 757.

The scar you show is not the exact one.



thank you very much, I did a search for this photo and many of the sites it was posted on tried to persuade readers this was a shot of the same scar.
Obwon
QUOTE (amillionto1 @ Feb 14 2014, 08:16 AM) *
My USA today from September 12th quoted Carl Ray Landis, a 'contractor' from Somerset, PA, and his Nephew Carl Young, who were driving their pickup and saw the plane come straight down into the ground totally intact. Obvious BS. Paid shills. They still had an address in Somerset as of a couple years ago. Doubt that it is real.


Working from memory of the area, I don't believe that anyone on the ground had any sight lines to the actual impact. We saw the film of the lady on the road and all she could see in that direction was trees. The Arial maps, if I recall correctly, do not show any roads immediately adjacent to the crash site, which is probably the reason that site was picked. The "crater" looks more like something scooped out by a backhoe, and the grass at the edges is not singed or soot covered.

The "Jill Shively" photo of the crash plume is a fake, enlarged to a size where the pixels can be seen, the pixel blocks in the lower half do not match the pixel blocks in the sky which is smoothly pixelated. Also, again iirc the sky appears pasted in such away that at least one tree top is clearly obliterated. Not to mention that other analysts of photo data have taken issue with the nature of the plume itself.
paranoia
QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 26 2014, 06:31 PM) *
We now have three posters in this thread alone who have surfaced out of no where, averaging two or three posts a year, or less in the case of amillionto1.

amillionto1 (Mar '08) 2 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
Godspeed2012 (Sep '09) 14 posts total on Feb 26, 2014
WhisperingWnd (Jan '10) 8 posts total on Feb 26, 2014

What compelled them/him/her to post to this thread?

I said it before and I'll say it again.
Please stick around folks, I'm looking forward to more of your intellectual contributions to this forum!

Please prove me wrong; that you aren't shills/socks.

np1mike, even though i too am curious when i see new posts by seldom-posting "old" users (as in having registered a long time ago and been relatively quiet since), in this instance i find that your suspicions are misplaced. if these 3 posters were alleging that a plane had crashed in shanksville, then sure - give em hell, but it seems all 3 basically agree that the official shanksville story is bullshit. they arent pushing shoot-down theories either, so im not sure why you're being so tough on them. we welcome civil, rational, intellectually-honest debate, and even if it is perhaps a bit redundant, we dont mind the rehashing of already-known and mostly-accepted and agreed upon research (yes most of us here agree that the hole in shanksville was not caused by an aircraft having crashed there).



QUOTE (Obwon @ Mar 3 2014, 12:36 PM) *
The "Jill Shively" photo of the crash plume is a fake, enlarged to a size where the pixels can be seen, the pixel blocks in the lower half do not match the pixel blocks in the sky which is smoothly pixelated. Also, again iirc the sky appears pasted in such away that at least one tree top is clearly obliterated. Not to mention that other analysts of photo data have taken issue with the nature of the plume itself.

obwon, i believe you mean the val mcclatchey photo - jill shively is a name related to the oj simpson trial.
NP1Mike
QUOTE (paranoia @ Mar 3 2014, 06:54 PM) *
np1mike, even though i too am curious when i see new posts by seldom-posting "old" users (as in having registered a long time ago and been relatively quiet since), in this instance i find that your suspicions are misplaced. if these 3 posters were alleging that a plane had crashed in shanksville, then sure - give em hell, but it seems all 3 basically agree that the official shanksville story is bullshit. they arent pushing shoot-down theories either, so im not sure why you're being so tough on them. we welcome civil, rational, intellectually-honest debate, and even if it is perhaps a bit redundant, we dont mind the rehashing of already-known and mostly-accepted and agreed upon research (yes most of us here agree that the hole in shanksville was not caused by an aircraft having crashed there).



paranoia, I understand your take on this.
Perhaps I am just a little more paranoid than you in this respect. smile.gif

With amillionto1 (Mar '08) coming back to make just his second post, in this thread; no I don't buy it that the thread was so compelling he had no other choice but to contribute. Where is he now?

Godspeed2012 and WhisperingWnd are sticking around a bit now. Let's see how much continued interest they have for this site.

As far as judging the nature of the post to determine whether the poster is genuine or not is concerned, one has to be careful here too.
A slick operative will sometimes use poor grammar or take a pro-truther stance for a period of time.
Then they may slip in the odd anti-truther stance to confuse your take on them.

There are many variations and possibilities to a shill's work. It's not always obvious.


paranoia

np1mike - fair enough, but we try to be hospitable and accomodating until members actually do start trying to mis or disinform, lest we ward off genuine truth seekers with unearned hostility. its not a violation of the forum's rules or culture to register and not post, or to post occasionally, so that alone is not sufficient grounds for an accusatory tone (toward other posters). rest assured man, in the end most if not all of the pseudo-skeptics are transparent and expose themselves here by way of (if nothing else) their intellectual dishonesty. even then we are not in the habit of censoring or squelching them; if needed (or desired) we engage them in debate, but even if we dont, we trust in the ability of readers/members to discern what is and isnt bullshit. and unless someone is an outright disruptor, we give users a wide berth, but when its time to for the foot to come down, it will come down.

and think about this np1mike, that we dont really know you either! you taking such a hard line against other members - technically an act of provocation or disruption (albeit minor) - can itself be seen as a cause for possible suspicion, right? wink.gif i'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you mean well and are simply trying to defend the integrity of the forum, but to avoid any conflict, i ask that you please leave moderation to those tasked with it. but getting back on topic... for the record np1mike, do you agree that the hole in shanksville is staged/fabricated? and do you agree that a plane did not crash into that small hole out there?


btw - when it comes to shanksville, i'd be remiss if i didnt point the reader to the work (research / interviews) conducted by dom dimaggio, please check at least the pinned topics at the top of the pages here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showforum=6
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showforum=2
thumbsup.gif


last note: im not trying to be condescending in repeatedly using your full screen name np1mike, its just that there are so many mikes around lately i dont want to risk any confusion! cheers.gif

Obwon
QUOTE (paranoia @ Mar 3 2014, 06:54 PM) *
<snips>

obwon, i believe you mean the val mcclatchey photo - jill shively is a name related to the oj simpson trial.


Hahaha... You're right of course! I don't know how I made that incorrect connection but
it's because her name stuck in my head and popped up at one point or another, instead
of the Val Mcclatchey name. In any event they were both fraudulent, OJ was never anywhere
near Bundy that night at all. So they probably reminded me of one another but the easier name stuck. Oh well.

I do remember examining several copies of that photo and blowing it up really big so
that I could examine the pixel block arrangement. The bottom half is made up of the kind
of blocks of pixels you see written by SLR digital cameras, while the top half has a very different pixel block structure that is so faint that it appears smooth. They are so different
that you can trace along the dividing line where the pictures were merged and you'll see
on the right side at the tree tops, one of the tree tops was clipped off because they weren't
too careful with the paste job. On the left side at the paste line there's another anomaly
with the fence, but I can't recall exactly what that one was, it's been so long since
I examined it.

Over all, I don't much care what they've told us, if these events were real, then there should not be even one fake photo, and/or if there was one, it should have been way out numbered by the number of real photos and videos. The science says all the videos and photos are fake.
Thus, one has no other choice but to conclude that these claimed events never happened.
Godspeed2012
On the topic of Shills, disnfo, and all that pretend you are a truther crap is quite unintelligent on this site no?

Look at all the poor attempts to derail this thread. Look at all the finger pointing yet you the evidence that FLIGHT 93 DID NOT CRASH IN SHANKSVILLE on September 11th 2001. The Crater in SHANKSVILLE WAS NOT CAUSED BY A BOEING 757 AKA FLIGHT 93 on September 11th 2001 as the images in the first page show.

Would you amateurs please start another thread rather than practice these tactics.

Check out this picture I made years ago, I am sure everyone has seen it.


As reminder to the mods if there are any, would you please moderate and keep the topic on topic and delete derailing posts?

Letsroll, cheers, lol.

Godspeed2012
This thread is not about Radars, or the twin towers, or about Val and her camera. Its about the crater and how it is only 15 feet wide and 10 feet deep, the mistake is thinking that the weathered ravine was caused by wings which it wasnt.

A 10 foot deep hole was not caused by a Boeing 757 but by something very small maybe the size of a small van as one of the last eyewitnesses saw but that is another topic.
Scooby
My two cents on the crater the official report states the plane hit at close to a 45 degree angle. If that were the case a massive amount of earth would have been launched/displaced by the impact. There should be a debris field of dirt radiating out from the impact site.

Also if it hit at a 45 degree angle the black box would not be in that hole. Strange that the bulk of the plane vanishes but the black box is in that hole.

The study showing no traces of jet fuel in the soil or ground water is IMO direct evidence no plane crashed there.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.