Post by turbonium on Mar 2, 2007 4:07:26 GMT -4
lenbrazil said:
I don’t recall whether or not the white jet was mentioned in the 9-ll Commission report or not...Not.
lenbrazil said:
....but I doubt they deny it.They just forgot to mention it, I suppose?
lenbrazil said:
As reported extensively in truther and debunking sites the FBI later identified the aircraft as an executive jet sent by ATC’s to verify the coordinates of the crash.
A feeble claim, which is not at all consistent with the witness accounts. The aircraft was described as a military jet, and it was seen before and immediately after the crash (ie: when an explosion was heard and smoke was seen)
lenbrazil said:
If the plane had been shot down we would expect debris to have been found along it’s flight path but we have no reports of this. Indian Lake and New Baltimore are all beyond the flight path.
Time for some logic. Let's consider your argument - debris was not found along the flight path. Ergo, the plane could not have been shot down.
Now, we know that the purported crash site - the Shanksville hole - has very little debris whatsoever. Your explanation is that the impact force and wind blew nearly all the debris away from the hole. Up to 8 miles away.
But if the plane was hit by a missile in mid-air, the explosive impact (with a greater force than a crash) and winds (much stronger at higher altitudes than on the ground) would have no effect on where the debris landed. It would fall straight down directly in line with the flight path.
Is that really your argument?
lenbrazil said:
Perhaps Turbonium can tell us how tall the mountain ridge is and how long it took paper from the plane to show up 8 miles away. It also should be noted that the force of the crash would have been another factor in distributing debris.
The range is evident in the image below. The elevation, after a quick look at a topography map, appears to be about 2000 - 2200 ft.
The force from a crash and/or the mild wind would not scatter debris in New Baltimore.
lenbrazil said:
I don’t think you convinced many people you’d “utterly falsified” my point several witnesses said the plane flying erratically just before hearing the crash or seeing it’s affects some saw it dive to the ground. Your hair splitting was rather unconvincing.
Nonsense. You were the one insisting that all sorts of people witnessed the crash. I looked at your own sources and showed you that wasn't true at all. Now you call it "hair splitting". It's not. Seeing a plane flying erratically is not the same as seeing the plane crash.
lenbrazil said:
“But other witnesses say it did everything from multiple somersaults to backward flips”
Hyperbole? Or can you cite some examples?
Your own links mention it flying upside down. This is one that inspired my comment...
Eric Peterson, 28, was working in his shop in the Somerset County village of Lambertsville yesterday morning when he heard a plane, looked up and saw one fly over unusually low.
The plane continued on beyond a nearby hill, then dropped out of sight behind a tree line. As it did so, Peterson said it seemed to be turning end-over-end.
www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912crashnat2p2.asp
lenbrazil said:
"People were calling in and reporting pieces of plane falling," a state trooper said. Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane”
This is the only report I’ve seen suggesting debris falling from the plane before it crashed.That we have no reports of debris actually being found along the plane’s flight path suggests that either
a) Jim Stop and any other (if there were any other) people who said this were mistaken OR
b) The pieces that fell off before the crash were very small.
No. Others reported seeing debris falling on Indian Lake, for example. It's not the only account.
lenbrazil said:
I wouldn’t be surprised if some small parts were shaken off a 757 flying as erratically and as fast at low altitude as flight 93 was reported to have.
But it wouldn't create the huge amount of debris reported in several areas.
lenbrazil said:
“That brings us to the hole at Shanksville, then. Do you find it consistent in any way with a 40 degree crash? If so, how?”
My experience regarding crash scene investigation like yours and presumably the author of the Pilots for Truth article is close to zero. It’s not that different from the United 585 and American Eagle sites.
Please provide details that indicate how they aren't really different, because I find them entirely different.
lenbrazil said:
“The official account is that the plane was near vertical when it crashed nose first into the ground.”
40 degrees nose down is about halfway between perfectly vertical and perfectly horizontal
Indeed. And that's my point - 40 degrees is nowhere close to being completely vertical.
lenbrazil said:
“The hole at Shanksville was reported to be 15-20 feet wide by 10 feet long. The depth has been variously reported to be 5-6 feet, or 10, or 15 feet, or greater.”
Citations for the cited dimensions of the hole please. I would expect the fuselage to fragment and or compress and the wings to shear off and fragment.
Look for yourself, for once. Sources are everywhere for the numbers, if you dispute them.
lenbrazil said:
Your theory seems to be the 757 that wasn’t really there was shotdown.
No, as should be clear from my earlier post.