SteadyMercury
Gold Member
- Jan 1, 2013
- 4,731
- 1,203
- 190
They identified all the passengers on flight 93 from remains, and there are many pictures of plane debris in and around the crater.
Confessions of an Ex-"Truther"
- Thread starter SAYIT
- Start date
n0spam4me
VIP Member
To address the topic at hand here, the fact that a few ( & that is very few ) individuals publicly proclaim that they have seen the light and now totally believe the official story, has little bearing on what is real here. The real rebuttal to the "truthers" would be to produce proof that commercial airliners were indeed hijacked and caused all the damage that day.
However, unfortunately for the official version supporters, its simply not there, in the last 13 years, the mainstream media and assorted bodies of experts, have failed to prove the hijacked airliner story. So sorry about that guys.....
This misses the point of accounting for the aircraft, pictures of random bits, doesn't constitute accounting for the aircraft. How much of the aircraft was recovered from the crash site? either by weight, volume, or number of bits, there is NO measure as to how much of the aircraft was found, it would be all too simple for a few people to deliver a pickup truck load of junk to the site and scatter it around and the mainstream media claims there was an airliner crashed there, but I'm not buyin' it. The fact is that one possible and rather probable scenario is that the moment that the aircraft contacted the dirt, the shock to the airframe cause the break-up of the aircraft such that wings, tail (etc.... ) would break off and be found in large chunks near the center of the crash site.
However, unfortunately for the official version supporters, its simply not there, in the last 13 years, the mainstream media and assorted bodies of experts, have failed to prove the hijacked airliner story. So sorry about that guys.....
This misses the point of accounting for the aircraft, pictures of random bits, doesn't constitute accounting for the aircraft. How much of the aircraft was recovered from the crash site? either by weight, volume, or number of bits, there is NO measure as to how much of the aircraft was found, it would be all too simple for a few people to deliver a pickup truck load of junk to the site and scatter it around and the mainstream media claims there was an airliner crashed there, but I'm not buyin' it. The fact is that one possible and rather probable scenario is that the moment that the aircraft contacted the dirt, the shock to the airframe cause the break-up of the aircraft such that wings, tail (etc.... ) would break off and be found in large chunks near the center of the crash site.
Last edited:
SteadyMercury
Gold Member
- Jan 1, 2013
- 4,731
- 1,203
- 190
Nope it hits the point exactly.
They incorrectly claimed that no parts were found and the plane disappeared completely. This isn't true, there are pictures of large pieces of the fuselage. Whether you choose to dismiss this with speculation that someone planted airplane parts doesn't matter to me, you're doing that because you have a conclusion that you're chasing so will fabricate whatever story you need to validate it.
They also idenfitied all the passengers, so the claim about no bodies is wrong too. I'm sure you have another unfounded conspiracy angle for that, but again your speculation doesn't provide any evidence counter.
They incorrectly claimed that no parts were found and the plane disappeared completely. This isn't true, there are pictures of large pieces of the fuselage. Whether you choose to dismiss this with speculation that someone planted airplane parts doesn't matter to me, you're doing that because you have a conclusion that you're chasing so will fabricate whatever story you need to validate it.
They also idenfitied all the passengers, so the claim about no bodies is wrong too. I'm sure you have another unfounded conspiracy angle for that, but again your speculation doesn't provide any evidence counter.
n0spam4me
VIP Member
and to address the strawman
I have not claimed that no aircraft bits were found, I have stated that what has so far been displayed constitutes insufficient evidence.
What constitutes a "large piece" (?) ... and the famous pix I have seen shows a piece of fuselage that could easily be shifted by one person and its interesting to note that the bit is showing the inside of the part facing up, has this part ever been examined and photographed with the painted side documented so as to know that it matched the markings of the airliner that was alleged to have been hijacked? There is a serious lack of DUE DILIGENCE here and I for one don't buy it at all, the hijacked airliners story is as yet totally unproven.
Last edited:
SteadyMercury
Gold Member
- Jan 1, 2013
- 4,731
- 1,203
- 190
Nope. You clearly said no fuselage parts, now you're changing it to some nebulous metric of sufficient size. So let's start over, you're backing away from your claim no fuselage parts were found and now you're demanding parts that are of a minimum size.
n0spam4me
VIP Member
There is such a thing as "INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE"
and indeed this is exactly what we have here.
The fact remains that the events of 9/11/2001 are insufficiently documented
as would be in the case of any other airline disaster, however in the case of the 4 alleged hijacked airliners crashed, there is no accounting for the aircraft. WHY?
how much aircraft wreckage was recovered to show that any one of the 4 airliners actually existed at all?
The whole concept of the wing shaped impressions in the dirt at Shanksville
is a FARCE. What would have been much more likely to have happened was for the nose of the aircraft to contact the dirt and the immediate stress to the whole aircraft, ( because the aircraft was made as a monocoque and by its very nature the whole structure would suffer the stress from striking the dirt,) The whole aircraft would be stressed beyond its capacity to hold together, that is wings break off, tail breaks off .... etc ....
The ONLY example of an aircraft making aluminum confetti out of itself is from a crash test involving NO penetration at all of the concrete block used as target, if indeed the dirt didn't offer up total resistance ( and since the cockpit voice recorder was allegedly found 15ft underground ... ) the total aluminum confetti concept is out of the question.
The total net result of all this is still insufficient evidence.
Either the Gov. is lying or is withholding evidence.
and indeed this is exactly what we have here.
The fact remains that the events of 9/11/2001 are insufficiently documented
as would be in the case of any other airline disaster, however in the case of the 4 alleged hijacked airliners crashed, there is no accounting for the aircraft. WHY?
how much aircraft wreckage was recovered to show that any one of the 4 airliners actually existed at all?
The whole concept of the wing shaped impressions in the dirt at Shanksville
is a FARCE. What would have been much more likely to have happened was for the nose of the aircraft to contact the dirt and the immediate stress to the whole aircraft, ( because the aircraft was made as a monocoque and by its very nature the whole structure would suffer the stress from striking the dirt,) The whole aircraft would be stressed beyond its capacity to hold together, that is wings break off, tail breaks off .... etc ....
The ONLY example of an aircraft making aluminum confetti out of itself is from a crash test involving NO penetration at all of the concrete block used as target, if indeed the dirt didn't offer up total resistance ( and since the cockpit voice recorder was allegedly found 15ft underground ... ) the total aluminum confetti concept is out of the question.
The total net result of all this is still insufficient evidence.
Either the Gov. is lying or is withholding evidence.
SteadyMercury
Gold Member
- Jan 1, 2013
- 4,731
- 1,203
- 190
You said there were no parts of the fuselage. There are. Why did you lie?
n0spam4me
VIP Member
can you guarantee for certain that the bits shown in the pix are from the hijacked "FLT93"?
- Thread starter
- #30
No, but he has a "feeling."
SteadyMercury
Gold Member
- Jan 1, 2013
- 4,731
- 1,203
- 190
Can you guarantee the moon isn't made of cheese?
It just bring up an interesting angle to it all.... the conspiracy theory types who lean on the battle cry of trying to find the truth seem to be very comfortable with outright lies to support their argument in search of said truth. Whether it is Paulitard with his doctored backpack photos or this stupid "no fuselage parts" bullshit, you guys are so willing to misrepresent and distort as much as you can.
Sweet irony... seeking the truth.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Seems like Leftwing Threads are Diminishing. Either Trump is Converting these people, or they're giving up.
- Started by Mashmont
- Replies: 0
-
I know why old joe's cancer was never reported/tested..... answer inside.- Started by tyroneweaver
- Replies: 5
-
Let me be the first conservative to say, this golden dome missile system is a bunch of happy horse pucky
- Started by tyroneweaver
- Replies: 18
-
