Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?
Hi 420:
Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?
First of all, the empty hole has grass growing on all the inclines (pic) and you are mistaking that rusty 'planted' evidence for a 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engine (like this):
Then you are missing more than 200 seats ..
... 60 Tons of Titanium Frame, two (2) massive wing sections, indestructible landing gear ...
... and a tail section ...
... that stands more than 40 feet above the tarmac. The question for the Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE cuckoo is:
How did your planted evidence get under the green grass? :0)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu3qDCv-jb4]Debunk This!!![/ame]
420 Is Another Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Good Grief ...
GL,
Terral
terral is another fucking stupid moronic troofer that makes stupid claims he cant back up420 Is Another Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Good Grief ...
GL,
Terral
That's what I'm asking you. How did that engine get under the ground?How did your planted evidence get under the green grass?Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?
Both the tail and wings left a marks in the ground. Do you think they are still going to be intact after crashing at nearly 600 mph?... and a tail section ...
thats consistent with the wreckage of flight 93, dipshit
true, but it still nose dived into the ground and there was very little OBVIOUS plane parts laying aroundthats consistent with the wreckage of flight 93, dipshit
and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.
That actually wouldn't matter as long as the speeds of impact were similar.and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.
That actually wouldn't matter as long as the speeds of impact were similar.and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.
I think the confusion with a lot of truthers is they expect larger debris and for most of the debris to be littered on the field. In the case of Flight 93, it appears most of the debris embedded into the ground because the ground happened to be a reclaimed strip mine.
I was just mentioning there's no difference if a plane nose dives and crashes nearly 600 mph into the ground on purpose, or accident.A nose-dive will give you a different debris field than a leveled off aircraft doing the same velocity.
i dont recall if anyone ever said what percentage was embedded and what they found around the siteDoes anyone know any reports that state most of the plane debris went into the ground? I'd like to use it in future debates with truthers when they ask what happened to the plane.
it wasnt 6 miles, moronIf you call 6 miles a small radius
I don't need what percentage was embedded if there was no mention of that, just a general official explanation that most of the plane was embedded.i dont recall if anyone ever said what percentage was embedded and what they found around the site
it doesnt matter that much to me
as they found 95% of the plane at the site
most of it within a small radius
Still no Proof, just more Questions and This guy wants an Investigation, blah blah.. In all the time you folks post and find this shit you could've been using that time for "Investigation".