Flight 93 question

[tj15]

Does anyone know about this guy named Donn de Grand-Pre? Apparently, he knows who shot down flight 93. Has this been debunked?

[ElMondoHummus]

Don't recall too much about supposed Col. de Grand-Pre, but his actual claim was so well known at the time that Popular Mechanics used it in their work (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=8) refuting 9/11 conspiracy claims:


F-16 Pilot

Claim: In February 2004, retired Army Col. Donn de Grand-Pre said on "The Alex Jones Show," a radio talk show broadcast on 42 stations: "It [Flight 93] was taken out by the North Dakota Air Guard. I know the pilot who fired those two missiles to take down 93." LetsRoll911.org, citing de Grand-Pre, identifies the pilot: "Major Rick Gibney fired two Sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in midflight at precisely 0958."

FACT: Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes — it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."

[T.A.M.]

Brainster knows a great deal about him, and his claims, IIRC, and I am sure Gravy knows his angle.


TAM:)

[beachnut]

Does anyone know about this guy named Donn de Grand-Pre? Apparently, he knows who shot down flight 93. Has this been debunked?
If you study the impact and FDR of flight 93 you find an intact aircraft at impact.

The FDR shows the terrorist making the inputs to make the passengers fall under high and low g forces; then the terrorist flies the plane into the ground. In the FDR the inputs made by the terrorist make the plane fly into the ground.

The impact debris field shows the plane was not shot down, impacted as a whole. All the debris starts at a single point and is ejected from that point in the direction it was moving. All debris originates from the impact point.

[tj15]

Don't recall too much about supposed Col. de Grand-Pre, but his actual claim was so well known at the time that Popular Mechanics used it in their work (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=8) refuting 9/11 conspiracy claims:
Im gonna play the other side of the debate for a moment... Truthers will then respond to the Popular Mechanics debunking by either completely dismissing Popular Mechanics by saying they are covering for the government, or they will just say that these two pilots (Gibney and Jacoby) were told to not say anything or that they were threatened.

[Mr.Herbert]

It really doesn't matter what was said. As Beachnut pointed out, all the evidence points to the plane being intact as it impacted the ground. There is not one shred of evidence to refute this.

[T.A.M.]

If you are trying to win an argument with people who call all existing evidence from the FBI/CIA/NIST/FEMA/USG faked or planted, you are fighting a lost cause.

TAM:)

[tj15]

If you study the impact and FDR of flight 93 you find an intact aircraft at impact.

The FDR shows the terrorist making the inputs to make the passengers fall under high and low g forces; then the terrorist flies the plane into the ground. In the FDR the inputs made by the terrorist make the plane fly into the ground.

The impact debris field shows the plane was not shot down, impacted as a whole. All the debris starts at a single point and is ejected from that point in the direction it was moving. All debris originates from the impact point.
This might be a stupid question, but can the FDR detect whether an engine (or all of the engines) have been damaged (from a missile strike or something like that)?

[AJM8125]

Im gonna play the other side of the debate for a moment... Truthers will then respond to the Popular Mechanics debunking by either completely dismissing Popular Mechanics by saying they are covering for the government, or they will just say that these two pilots (Gibney and Jacoby) were told to not say anything or that they were threatened.

Beachnut's post debunks that.

[tj15]

It really doesn't matter what was said. As Beachnut pointed out, all the evidence points to the plane being intact as it impacted the ground. There is not one shred of evidence to refute this.
To this they will just say that the airplane crashed fully intact, but the engines were hit by missiles, causing it to crash.

Another question: Did any of the eyewitnesses to flight 93 see smoke coming from flight 93 BEFORE it crashed?

[tj15]

If you are trying to win an argument with people who call all existing evidence from the FBI/CIA/NIST/FEMA/USG faked or planted, you are fighting a lost cause.

TAM:)
I agree... They are nearly impossible to debate.

[T.A.M.]

To this they will just say that the airplane crashed fully intact, but the engines were hit by missiles, causing it to crash.

Another question: Did any of the eyewitnesses to flight 93 see smoke coming from flight 93 BEFORE it crashed?

Not sure that it matters. Ed Felt, in a call to local 911, claimed he saw smoke, and this was well before the crash...I suspect the plane was breaking up at that time, or there was engine failure, or some other benign, non-truther explanation. If what he saw was smoke from a missile hitting the plane, do you think he would be able to tell them over the phone?

TAM:)

[Mr.Herbert]

Read the FDR report. It clearly shows both engines running at 100% just prior to impact

http://www.ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf

[T.A.M.]

Read the FDR report. It clearly shows both engines running at 100% just prior to impact

ok, thanks well I guess that eliminates engine failure, but certain smoke coming from a plane as it is about to go down, and maneuvering well outside its limits, is not unexpected is it?

Like I said, if the plane was hit by a missile, I would think that Ed Felt would not be able to call to report it, let alone continue his conversation with local 911.

TAM:)

[Mr.Herbert]

For the lazy truthers:

"From 10:00 to 10:02 there were four distinct control column inputs that caused the airplane to pitch nose-up (climb) and nose-down (dive) aggressively. During this time the airplane climbed to about 10,000 feet while turning to the right. The airplane then pitched nose-down and rolled to the right in response to flight control inputs, and impacted the ground at about 490 knots (563 mph) [FDR says 500 kts] in a 40 degree nose-down, inverted attitude. The time of impact was 10:03:11."
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/Flight%20_Path_%20Study_UA93.pdf

(From Mark Roberts Googlepages)

[tj15]

Read the FDR report. It clearly shows both engines running at 100% just prior to impact

http://www.ntsb.gov/info/UAL93FDR.pdf
And to this they say that the timeline is off and that flight 93 really crashed at 10:06, not 10:03. Meaning the last 3 minutes are cut off. What do I say to that?

[T.A.M.]

And to this they say that the timeline is off and that flight 93 really crashed at 10:06, not 10:03. Meaning the last 3 minutes are cut off. What do I say to that?

prove it.

read my post earlier about arguing with those who will claim all evidence against them (such as the FDR) is planted/faked.

TAM:)

[tj15]

prove it.

read my post earlier about arguing with those who will claim all evidence against them (such as the FDR) is planted/faked.

TAM:)
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/flight93/

[T.A.M.]

physical evidence (THE FDR) trumps recollection of times, and the variation by 2-3 minutes that can occur from clock to clock, time zone, to time zone.

TAM:)

[ElMondoHummus]

Im gonna play the other side of the debate for a moment... Truthers will then respond to the Popular Mechanics debunking by either completely dismissing Popular Mechanics by saying they are covering for the government, or they will just say that these two pilots (Gibney and Jacoby) were told to not say anything or that they were threatened.

Of course they do. But it's irrelevant. Jacoby gave a public interview clearly stating that he was with Gibney at the time. If he was indeed not, then it's up to the truthers to provide evidence that he was not, and above and beyond that, provide substantiation of de Grand Pre's claims. From what I know, de Grand Pre doesn't even mention Gibney. And right now, Jacoby is not the only "thing" (sorry to reduce him to that) contradicting de Grand Pre's statements; as one example, UA93's flight data recorder also indicates a perfectly functional airplane right up to the moment it hit. I'll leave details of how that was determined to folks like Beechnut here, who can actually describe what an FDR records, but the point is that there's another piece of information that corroborates the dominant narrative (i.e. the "Official Story") and contradicts the conspiracy fantasy.

If we need another piece: ATC radar data, to the best of my memory, does not show another jet in that vicinity (the "White Jet" arrived afterwards, IIRC) that could have been responsible for the shootdown. But someone here should correct me if I'm misremembering that.

Do we want another piece? The wreckage pattern is inconsistent with a jet being hit by a missile; human remains, and most of the large debris (if I remember correctly; again, others should correct me if I don't) was confined to a relatively tight area around the impact zone. It was light material, such as paper, fabrics, and light metals, which were found a mile-plus away. If the jet was truly hit by a missile and was truly coming apart prior to impact, why is the debris not found scattered along the flightpath?

At any rate, sure, the conspiracy peddlers can claim that Gibney and Jacoby lied. But that further puts the numbers of people who were "in on it" up by two, plus whomever else can corroborate or contradict the story (Jacoby's staff, air crew responsible for Gibney's jet, etc.). And on top of that, it does not answer the challenge posed by the other pieces of evidence, like the FDR. So they can claim away, but it amounts to nothing more than useless attempts to mitigate evidence disproving their allegations.

ETA: Whoops. Others beat me to some of this. That's what I get for taking my time to post...

[Mr.Herbert]

Where are the witnesses to the missile?

Why do the hijackers NOT react to a missile hitting the aircraft?

Why is the debris field NOT consistent with a shot down aircraft?

As TAM pointed out. Ed Felt was in the bathroom during the crash. His brother Gordon listened to his 911 call.. so did his wife. Neither of them heard an explosion. NEither of them stated that their loved one heard any explosion.

[Bobert]

Im gonna play the other side of the debate for a moment... Truthers will then respond to the Popular Mechanics debunking by either completely dismissing Popular Mechanics by saying they are covering for the government, or they will just say that these two pilots (Gibney and Jacoby) were told to not say anything or that they were threatened.
Its a never ending circle......
You will ask for proof of their assertions and then 90% of the time they will then turn on you and start accusing you of being an official story supporter, shill, Government LoyalistTM, etc.

[T.A.M.]

yes, i should ammend my original post on the matter however, to read that,

"Edward Felt is alleged to have seen smoke" as it was only from a single account, and flies in the face of many other accounts to the same call, including those who actually heard the recording of the call played back.

TAM:)

[Mr.Herbert]

John Shaw, the dispatcher who took the call from Ed Felt said point blank regarding an explosion or a puff of smoke: “Didn't happen”

The rumor started because of Jon Shaws supervisor Glen Cramer claims he read it off a transcript.

[MikeW]

John Shaw, the dispatcher who took the call from Ed Felt said point blank regarding an explosion or a puff of smoke: “Didn't happen”

The rumor started because of Jon Shaws supervisor Glen Cramer claims he read it off a transcript.
The actual transcript contains nothing like that. It's in one of my 9/11 Commission documents. It's available online somewhere, but I don't have a URL to hand, so I may as well upload that next. Give me an hour or so...

[Mr.Herbert]

You're right Mike... hence the word "claims"... Mr. Cramer was mistaken.

[MikeW]

Sure, I wasn't trying to pick at what you said, just thought the actual transcript would be of interest.

[Mr.Herbert]

Absolutely! I would love to see it.

Thanks in advance :)

[Brainster]

James B took on Donn de Grand Pre (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/06/who-is-colonel-donn-de-grand-pre.html) a couple years back. The American military's first combined Army/Air Force/Marines Colonel.

[MikeW]

Documents on demand! Here's the 9/11 Commission folder on Ed Felt's call (http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team7_Box12_93Calls_EdFelt.pdf) (4.3 MB PDF file).

Points for precisely what Mr Herbert was saying: the man who took the call (John Shaw) has nothing in his FBI interview about smoke or an explosion. That's not in the transcript, either . Cramer is the only person who mentions it.

Points truthers will cling on to: Shaw said Felt was "extremely hysterical", family members who listened to the tape said he wasn't. Also Cramer said he heard the conversation on another phone, so it seems odd that he would add these details.

[parky76]

Does anyone know about this guy named Donn de Grand-Pre? Apparently, he knows who shot down flight 93. Has this been debunked?

Flight 93 did not exist. It was made up by the Hollywood Jews.

[boloboffin]

My reconstruction of Flight 93's last moments. You can see a lot of the FDR information graphed out. The only thing wrong with the plane is its direction and speed.

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g171/boloboffin2/911/FinalMoments.png

[cludgie]

James B took on Donn de Grand Pre (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/06/who-is-colonel-donn-de-grand-pre.html) a couple years back. The American military's first combined Army/Air Force/Marines Colonel.

Was going to post similar that the guy sounded about as credible a military Colonel as Colonel Sanders.

[Bell]

Does anyone know about this guy named Donn de Grand-Pre? Apparently, he knows who shot down flight 93. Has this been debunked?

He knows who shot down flight 93?

:rolleyes:

What's there to debunk?

[Bell]

Flight 93 did not exist. It was made up by the Hollywood Jews.

Bah! Don't you just HATE those voice morphing Jews?

[Gravy]

From the Amazon.com page for Donn de Grand Pré's book "Barbarians Inside the Gates"

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3470/3380018319_8fd35dc8c7.jpg?v=0

BTW, he used to go by Donn R. Grand Pré. The "de" appears to be a recent affectation.

[Horatius]

voice morphing Jews?


Band Name!

[Mr.Herbert]

Documents on demand! Here's the 9/11 Commission folder on Ed Felt's call (http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team7_Box12_93Calls_EdFelt.pdf) (4.3 MB PDF file).

Points for precisely what Mr Herbert was saying: the man who took the call (John Shaw) has nothing in his FBI interview about smoke or an explosion. That's not in the transcript, either . Cramer is the only person who mentions it.

Points truthers will cling on to: Shaw said Felt was "extremely hysterical", family members who listened to the tape said he wasn't. Also Cramer said he heard the conversation on another phone, so it seems odd that he would add these details.

Mike,

What is your opinion on why Cramer will say that he heard Felt mention an explosion and white smoke. (although everyone else disagrees) This is something I feel the truthers will run with.

Has anyone filed an FOIA for the 911 tape?

[T.A.M.]

Donn the Big Meadow

TAM:)

[Gravy]

Mike,

What is your opinion on why Cramer will say that he heard Felt mention an explosion and white smoke. (although everyone else disagrees) This is something I feel the truthers will run with.

Has anyone filed an FOIA for the 911 tape?Sorry to butt in, but the truthers "ran with" this years ago and it went nowhere. I rarely see flight 93 mentioned at all by them these days. Not sure, but I don't think an FOIA request for the recording of a personal call would be productive. It's good enough for me that several people, including Felt's family, say there was no mention of an explosion or smoke.

[Mr.Herbert]

I hear ya Mark. After posting it, I realized I should know better by now to think that a copy of the call would change the minds of the dolts.

I was under the assumption (until today) that Cramer was only recalling what he read from a transcript. I wasn't aware of him listening in on a "spy phone."

[JoeyDonuts]

Sidewinders my ass. I don't suppose this all-knowing enlightened source knows the geometry of the intercept. Because if I recall Nasypany's piece with Vanity Fair - he made the suggestion of a missile right into the nose of the plane - a firing solution plan that was REJECTED by military command (presumably NMCC) who gave a thumbs-down to ANY engagement of ANY kind.

But I guess if Field Marshal Con Du Pee or whatever he's calling himself these days is telling the truth, then your F-16 pilot was vectored in by NEADS and shot down - making Nasypany, his CO, and all the men and women on watch that morning liars.

Anybody want to do the quick flight math on an F-16 scrambling from NORTH DAKOTA in time to intercept UA93, get clearance from the President to engage, get within AIM-9 range, dial in a firing solution, and ripple off two at the airliner?

The nads on some people, I swear.

[gumboot]

This might be a stupid question, but can the FDR detect whether an engine (or all of the engines) have been damaged (from a missile strike or something like that)?

In a word, yes.

If the aircraft had been hit with missiles you would have lost control surfaces, fuel pressure, would have had engine issues, or would have lost cabin pressure. I don't think it would have been possible to get a missile hit on an airliner (let alone 2) without one of those things going bad.

According to the FDR fuel pressure was normal, engines were normal (at about 90% power from memory), cabin pressure was normal, and the aircraft was responding normally to control column inputs.

In a word, not a bolt was out of place. If a missile was secretly fired at UA93, simple fact is it either missed or bounced off.

[JoeyDonuts]

If a missile was secretly fired at UA93, simple fact is it either missed or bounced off.

In which case Raytheon, Loral Corporation, Nammo, and Ford Aerospace are lying about the effectiveness of the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile system.

[MikeW]

Mike,

What is your opinion on why Cramer will say that he heard Felt mention an explosion and white smoke. (although everyone else disagrees) This is something I feel the truthers will run with.

Has anyone filed an FOIA for the 911 tape?
I don't know. And you're right, this is one of those contradictions that Griffin will surely include when he eventually notices it.

I suspect it won't go any more than the "just asking questions" phase, though, because accepting the call as valid must also mean accepting it as evidence that a) there were hijackers on the plane, and b) it quite probably did crash in the area. And that would mean casting doubt on some of their other arguments, which truthers just hate to do. So I believe they'll continue to use the "explosion" and "white smoke" bits of the call, gloss over the fact that Felt said he was hijacked, and not pursue any of it too much further in case anyone notices.

I doubt if a FOIA request would be successful as it's a privacy thing for the family. And I'm not going to try, that's just too unpleasantly intrusive. But it doesn't matter, as I think the truther argument would be that this was faked or edited for the family: its contents would make no difference at all.

[JoeyDonuts]

I'm bored and just did some more math.

An F-16 taking off from Fargo, ND would have to refuel once on the way to the Shanksville, PA area, and if I remember the specs right, it would be bingo fuel when it got there, so realistically it would have had to fuel twice.

One of three possibilities now exist.

1. The F-16 landed and refueled, thus implicating the ground crews on at least one air base or airport on the way.

2. The F-16 refueled in the air on the way to intercept UA93, and we've just implicated the entire Air Mobility Command of the USAF.

3. Uhhhhh...The intercept never occurred and our whistleblower is an lying idiot.


Damn. Door number three wins again.

[911files]

Does anyone know about this guy named Donn de Grand-Pre? Apparently, he knows who shot down flight 93. Has this been debunked?

Everyone has provided excellent resources for you, but the bottom line is, we have the radar data from 9/11. Over the past year-or-so, myself and many others here have matched up radar data with eyewitness/pilot accounts for almost all of the fighter intercepts and activity related to the hijackings. There is absolutely NO evidence of a fighter aircraft within a hundred miles of UAL93 when it went down...period. At some point it would have also had to have been under air traffic control. Guess what, we have the ATC audios from the affected areas. Again, absolutely NO evidence of a fighter aircraft anywhere near UAL93's airspace. So if there was no fighter in the air, how could it have shot UAL93 down?

[ElMondoHummus]

Everyone has provided excellent resources for you, but the bottom line is, we have the radar data from 9/11. Over the past year-or-so, myself and many others here have matched up radar data with eyewitness/pilot accounts for almost all of the fighter intercepts and activity related to the hijackings. There is absolutely NO evidence of a fighter aircraft within a hundred miles of UAL93 when it went down...period. At some point it would have also had to have been under air traffic control. Guess what, we have the ATC audios from the affected areas. Again, absolutely NO evidence of a fighter aircraft anywhere near UAL93's airspace. So if there was no fighter in the air, how could it have shot UAL93 down?

Do you have the radar data posted anywhere? I was trying to remember if it showed no fighter aircraft in the vicinity, or no aircraft period, regardless of type ("vicinity" meaning 'within shootdown range'; from what I understand, an AMRAAM (AIM-120) has an operational range of about 50 miles, so arbitrarily I'll select that figure as the one to use).

[911files]

Do you have the radar data posted anywhere? I was trying to remember if it showed no fighter aircraft in the vicinity, or no aircraft period, regardless of type ("vicinity" meaning 'within shootdown range'; from what I understand, an AMRAAM (AIM-120) has an operational range of about 50 miles, so arbitrarily I'll select that figure as the one to use).

Unfortunately, it is not that simple. The radar data I have for the area is the 84 RADES ARSR data. Because of the mountains and range from the antenna, UAL93's primary is not visible either until the final minute of flight because of the altitude "floor" of the radar in that area. My recall is that there were other aircraft in the area below that "floor". However, most planes can be tracked over time into the area and I don't recall seeing any that originated from military installations heading into that area. Of course, the CT's would suggest that a NWO/CIA plane could take off from anywhere and get the job done.

However, what can be said is that in reference to the OP, no planes with military identifiers entered that area before GOFER06.

[Bell]

[...]

BTW, he used to go by Donn R. Grand Pré. The "de" appears to be a recent affectation.

Should have changed his name to Donn R. Kebab

[fezzic]

I'm bored and just did some more math.

An F-16 taking off from Fargo, ND would have to refuel once on the way to the Shanksville, PA area, and if I remember the specs right, it would be bingo fuel when it got there, so realistically it would have had to fuel twice.

One of three possibilities now exist.

1. The F-16 landed and refueled, thus implicating the ground crews on at least one air base or airport on the way.

2. The F-16 refueled in the air on the way to intercept UA93, and we've just implicated the entire Air Mobility Command of the USAF.

3. Uhhhhh...The intercept never occurred and our whistleblower is an lying idiot.


Damn. Door number three wins again.


Bozeman is about 600-700 miles West from Fargo. *
Albany is about 1,800 miles East from Bozeman.
Shanksville is about 1,000 miles SE of Fargo. It is also about 200 miles South of the direct line from Bozeman to Albany.

* Shows my ignorance of geography. I didn't realize where Bozeman and Fargo were in relation to each other. :boggled:

.

[Reheat]

I suspect this whole issue that a SD ANG member, Gibney, shot down UA93 started from a Medals presentation at the unit in Fargo. That video is floating around the 'net somewhere if someone wants to try and find it.

During that ceremony several members of the unit got medals for their actions on 9/11, but one of them received one higher than the others. That may have been Gibney. Twoofers likely didn't understand the ceremony, nor the citations during the awards presentation and it probably began from there.

I recall viewing some of the video on a twoofer site and the comments related to it were very ignorant indicating typical lack of understanding. Yet, the implication was that the higher medal was awarded for mysterious reasons resulting in perpetuating the conspiracy....

Perhaps that was the root of allegation and Donn de' Pre' was either misquoted or perhaps he is a nutjob like a few other retired military floating around. Nutjobs obviously come from all professions to include some otherwise fairly respectable military retirees. Apparently, no one is immune from loosing their marbles and becoming a victim of mental masturbation.

[Mangoose]

BTW, Mr. "de Grand Pre" is cited as a source in one of Steven Jones' papers on the WTC. See the second link in my sig for more details.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Perhaps that was the root of allegation and Donn de' Pre' was either misquoted or perhaps he is a nutjob like a few other retired military floating around. Nutjobs obviously come from all professions to include some otherwise fairly respectable military retirees. Apparently, no one is immune from loosing their marbles and becoming a victim of mental masturbation.

First off, who the hell of de Pre? I've heard the name floated around the Internet, but does he really exist? Is he just someone's invention kinda like the debunker's Mike Rotch?
The American military's first combined Army/Air Force/Marines Colonel.
For real?

As for the retired military nutjobs. The New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology did a full scale test to determine who was right regarding the Murrah federal building bomb, Dr. Corely or a retired USAF conspiracy nut. Dr. Corley was right.

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/30580-conspiracy-test-oklahoma-bombing-reenactment-video.htm

[fezzic]

Well, I found that the 119th was assigned to Langely when 9/11 occurred. It probably supplied the two alert fighters that came from there.

So that would take care of my confusion about why fighters from Fargo would be directed to an intercept 1,000 miles away. Just not possible.

Now if LTC Gibney had been at Langely, then he would have had to fly to Fargo -- to keep the records square since he supposedly left Fargo about 10:45 -- so after allegedly shooting down flight 93, he then abandoned (or was ordered to abandon) the defense of the nation's capital and fly to Fargo in about 45 minutes? Admittedly it seems possible if he could fly supersonic, say 1,300 mph, for the whole 1,000+ miles :), but then I would expect he'd be needing to refuel, because he's going to fly another 600 miles to Bozeman, and couldn't leave at 10:45 as he supposedly did.

Hmmm. :boggled:

[911files]

Well, I found that the 119th was assigned to Langely when 9/11 occurred. It probably supplied the two alert fighters that came from there.

So that would take care of my confusion about why fighters from Fargo would be directed to an intercept 1,000 miles away. Just not possible.

Now if LTC Gibney had been at Langely, then he would have had to fly to Fargo -- to keep the records square since he supposedly left Fargo about 10:45 -- so after allegedly shooting down flight 93, he then abandoned (or was ordered to abandon) the defense of the nation's capital and fly to Fargo in about 45 minutes? Admittedly it seems possible if he could fly supersonic, say 1,300 mph, for the whole 1,000+ miles :), but then I would expect he'd be needing to refuel, because he's going to fly another 600 miles to Bozeman, and couldn't leave at 10:45 as he supposedly did.

Hmmm. :boggled:

RADES CD1 zip (http://aal77.com/rades/rades_cd1.zip) (172 mb)

Okay, here is a zip for the RADES data. It comes with software (RS3) and you can set up any query you want. Every plane out of Langley can be tracked. Get back with me when you have found LTC Giney's plane flying out of there.

[Reheat]

Well, I found that the 119th was assigned to Langely when 9/11 occurred.

There was only a detachment at Langley, not the entire unit. I believe there were 4 aircraft and the same number of pilots.

Gibney was in Fargo until he made the trip to Bozeman and then to NY....

[ElMondoHummus]

Unfortunately, it is not that simple. The radar data I have for the area is the 84 RADES ARSR data. Because of the mountains and range from the antenna, UAL93's primary is not visible either until the final minute of flight because of the altitude "floor" of the radar in that area. My recall is that there were other aircraft in the area below that "floor". However, most planes can be tracked over time into the area and I don't recall seeing any that originated from military installations heading into that area. Of course, the CT's would suggest that a NWO/CIA plane could take off from anywhere and get the job done.

However, what can be said is that in reference to the OP, no planes with military identifiers entered that area before GOFER06.

Ah. Okay. Got it. Ick... :boggled:

Well, it doesn't really matter; I'm feeling too lazy to untangle whatever data anyone's got anyway. Other pieces of evidence contradict the notion of a shootdown, not the least of which is the FDR. Radar data would just be icing on the cake.

Thanks for the info, man!

[JoeyDonuts]

Do you have the radar data posted anywhere? I was trying to remember if it showed no fighter aircraft in the vicinity, or no aircraft period, regardless of type ("vicinity" meaning 'within shootdown range'; from what I understand, an AMRAAM (AIM-120) has an operational range of about 50 miles, so arbitrarily I'll select that figure as the one to use).

No way. I think an over-the-horizon air-to-air engagement would be completely out of the question. It's one thing in a military campaign when you have CAP aircraft, air defense sectors, and an E-2 or E-3 vectoring the engagements. One fighter targeting an airliner full of civilians? Even IF in the wildest stretch of the imagination this were to occur, the pilot would have at the very least visually ID'd the airliner and made damn sure he was fragging the correct plane.

With an AIM-120 you're depending on your electronic sensors pegging the correct target.

[Reheat]

No way. I think an over-the-horizon air-to-air engagement would be completely out of the question.

It's known as Beyond Visual Range (BVR), but you are otherwise absolutely correct. No one in his right mind would attempt that and it would never ever be approved against a civilian airliner.

The last time it was approved just prior to GW I an F-15 shot down a UN Helicopter full of UN Personnel. A very good friend of mine lost his daughter in that foray.....

[ElMondoHummus]

No way. I think an over-the-horizon air-to-air engagement would be completely out of the question. It's one thing in a military campaign when you have CAP aircraft, air defense sectors, and an E-2 or E-3 vectoring the engagements. One fighter targeting an airliner full of civilians? Even IF in the wildest stretch of the imagination this were to occur, the pilot would have at the very least visually ID'd the airliner and made damn sure he was fragging the correct plane.

With an AIM-120 you're depending on your electronic sensors pegging the correct target.

Remember, I was choosing that figure arbitrarily. Of course firing BVR into an area that could have multiple aircraft would be foolish in the extreme. You're just asking to hit the wrong target at that point. Of course, a more real-world scenario would be an eyes-on engagement. But I was expanding the circle out to take into account what truthers might argue the engagement range could be (after they would've acted true-to-form and simply did a quick Google to see what the maximum range of an AA missile is, without bothering to think about the practical issues involved in such a scenario). I was not trying to paint an actually plausible scenario from the point of view of the people who'd supposedly have to carry it out.

[JoeyDonuts]

It's known as Beyond Visual Range (BVR) and you are otherwise absolutely correct. No on in his right mind would attempt that and it would never ever be approved against a civilian airliner.

The last time it was approved just prior to GW I an F-15 shot down a UN Helicopter full of UN Personnel. A very good friend of mine lost his daughter in that foray.....

Meh. Navy calls it OTH, but same thing. If you have other information to correlate on your BVR contacts like ESM intercepts, then Tallyho and let slip the AMRAAMs of war. Otherwise it's a big fat "weapons tight" there, Ghostrider.

[leftysergeant]

As for the retired military nutjobs. The New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology did a full scale test to determine who was right regarding the Murrah federal building bomb, Dr. Corely or a retired USAF conspiracy nut. Dr. Corley was right.


Partin is a little more than a conspiracy nut. He is also a big active supporter of various terrorist organizations around the world, particularly in Africa.

He also lies a lot. Claims to have done some kind of tests at McDill AFB.

To his credit (sort of,) he has not sided with the twoofers on 9/11. (He wants a war against Muslims.)

He and Grand Pre have a lot in common. Problem is, I can find no official record of the whackjob Grand Pre's ever having actually served in the military. He does exist, but that is all we know for sure.

[Reheat]

Meh. Navy calls it OTH, but same thing. If you have other information to correlate on your BVR contacts like ESM intercepts, then Tallyho and let slip the AMRAAMs of war. Otherwise it's a big fat "weapons tight" there, Ghostrider.

JD, in the interest of accuracy, I think you're confusing GROUND based terminology with air-to-air stuff. From a ground based perspective Over-the-Horizon would be further than about 20 nm well within the range of most modern ground based anti-aircraft weapons. From an airborne perspective OTH would be further than the capability of any "anti-aircraft" weapon.

Again, BVR type engagements might be appropriate for strictly military against military engagements as all of the Air Defense type aircraft have the capability to interrogate Mode 4. Even then it's risky as all electronic devices are subject to human input errors. There are several recent examples, one of which I've already mentioned. In another mistake, a British Tornado was shot down by a Patriot Battery in Kuwait as he was returning from a mission in Iraq. IIRC, he had the wrong Mode 4 squawk and a Patriot Battery successfully engaged without visual ID. Oops!

I can not envision any authorization ever for which the National Command Authority would approve these type of engagement for a civilian airliner. There will be great uncertainty and hesitation anyway from both a Command and a pilot perspective. Both are likely to refrain from hasty decisions until the last possible moment and not before a pair of Mk 1 eyeballs have positively identified the target.

[funk de fino]

A In another mistake, a British Tornado was shot down by a Patriot Battery in Kuwait as he was returning from a mission in Iraq. IIRC, he had the wrong Mode 4 squawk and a Patriot Battery successfully engaged without visual ID.

Ahem. It was a faulty transponder which failed during flight after passing pre flight checks on the ground. Along with a combination of a trigger happy, inexperienced Patriot Crew.

Can't knock the Patriots though, as they did a good job for us in Dharhan during Desert Storm. Impressive to watch at work.

[Egil]

Ahem. It was a faulty transponder which failed during flight after passing pre flight checks on the ground. Along with a combination of a trigger happy, inexperienced Patriot Crew.

Can't knock the Patriots though, as they did a good job for us in Dharhan during Desert Storm. Impressive to watch at work.

Visual engagement rules go back to Vietnam. I think a pair of Phantoms splashed a pair of Thuds BVR thinking they were NV Migs. Thus, the air arms had to relearn dogfighting and arm the Phantoms with a gun.

[bob the analyst]

I was wondering how little evidence, wreckage, body parts, crash marks or the lack of everything in Shanksville, Pa. there was?

I mean, if you look at the hole in the ground, in Shanksville, where this jet allegedly crashed and the hole is about as big and as deep as most people's backyard swimming pool is in size.

[Disbelief]

I was wondering how little evidence, wreckage, body parts, crash marks or the lack of everything in Shanksville, Pa. there was?

I mean, if you look at the hole in the ground, in Shanksville, where this jet allegedly crashed and the hole is about as big and as deep as most people's backyard swimming pool is in size.

Since you are a scientist, you should be able to figure out how much dirt should have been displaced and compare it to what was actually displaced. Come back when your calcs are done.

[twinstead]

No no, it "just doesn't look right to smartpants"; that's good enough for me

[lapman]

I was wondering how little evidence, wreckage, body parts, crash marks or the lack of everything in Shanksville, Pa. there was?

I mean, if you look at the hole in the ground, in Shanksville, where this jet allegedly crashed and the hole is about as big and as deep as most people's backyard swimming pool is in size.
Can you please provide a comparison crash to show how big and deep the hole should have been?

So the 600 pounds of human flesh that was recovered and delivered for DNA matching is little evidence?

[stateofgrace]

I was wondering how little evidence, wreckage, body parts, crash marks or the lack of everything in Shanksville, Pa. there was?

I mean, if you look at the hole in the ground, in Shanksville, where this jet allegedly crashed and the hole is about as big and as deep as most people's backyard swimming pool is in size.

Is your area of expertise, now, holes left by planes in the ground? I thought you were an ex NIST scientist who worked on the WTC reports, remember, the one that had his emails and phones monitored?

[Foolmewunz]

Since you are a scientist, you should be able to figure out how much dirt should have been displaced and compare it to what was actually displaced. Come back when your calcs are done.

Where's Alanis Morisette when you need her? Poseurs and frauds visiting a thread about a poseur/fraud. Who'd a thunk it?

[bob the analyst]

well, you people are hysterical, down right juvenile in yopur responses. I posed if it bothered you that there was no wreckage, like you would expect and the very shallow and small indentation, in regards and relation to the jumbo jet's size when it allegedly crashed?

If that does not bother you, then move along quietly, there's no sense in you opening your mouths and acting like snotty assed brats. No one here needs comments like some of your post.
Attack the argument and not the person making the argument.

[stateofgrace]

well, you people are hysterical, down right juvenile in yopur responses. I posed if it bothered you that there was no wreckage, like you would expect and the very shallow and small indentation, in regards and relation to the jumbo jet's size when it allegedly crashed?

If that does not bother you, then move along quietly, there's no sense in you opening your mouths and acting like snotty assed brats. No one here needs comments like some of your post.

Reported.

[Disbelief]

Where's Alanis Morisette when you need her? Poseurs and frauds visiting a thread about a poseur/fraud. Who'd a thunk it?

Shocking, isn't it? I mean these calcs should be simple for an esteemed NIST scientist who knows the WTC report was a fabrication. I mean, there is no chance that he will run away from the calcs like all the other truthers here.:rolleyes:

[Disbelief]

well, you people are hysterical, down right juvenile in yopur responses. I posed if it bothered you that there was no wreckage, like you would expect and the very shallow and small indentation, in regards and relation to the jumbo jet's size when it allegedly crashed?

If that does not bother you, then move along quietly, there's no sense in you opening your mouths and acting like snotty assed brats. No one here needs comments like some of your post.

You mean like asking for calculations to support your claim?

[twinstead]

well, you people are hysterical, down right juvenile in yopur responses. I posed if it bothered you that there was no wreckage, like you would expect and the very shallow and small indentation, in regards and relation to the jumbo jet's size when it allegedly crashed?

If that does not bother you, then move along quietly, there's no sense in you opening your mouths and acting like snotty assed brats. No one here needs comments like some of your post.

Frankly you invited responses like these with your attitude when you joined the forum. You outed yourself right away as an antagonist who thinks the people here who are expert in some relevant sciences don't know what they are talking about. Maybe you should grow a thicker skin and answer the questions.

For example, what do you think about the 600 lbs of human flesh recovered from the site and sent in for DNA testing? What is your response to investigators comments about the lack of plane parts and obvious remains after other similar crashes?

[bob the analyst]

You mean like asking for calculations to support your claim?
base on what you have seen, go away iof yopu can not act like an adult instead of a pimply faced teeneager. Time to report you for agitation, trolling and general annoyance, I will recommend that you get banned permanantly from here, meanwhile, I recommebnd to everyone on randi that they place you on ignore as I am doing. click!

professor smartpants, I suggest you review the Membership Agreement that you agreed to abide by when joining this forum. Attack the argument, and not the person making the argument.

[ElMondoHummus]

I was wondering how little evidence, wreckage, body parts, crash marks or the lack of everything in Shanksville, Pa. there was?


More than what you're alleging.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page1

Trying to inject doubt about the veracity of the narrative of FL93 by making unsupported and terribly vague allegations about the presence of debris or remains is ridiculous. Study the evidence.


I mean, if you look at the hole in the ground, in Shanksville, where this jet allegedly crashed and the hole is about as big and as deep as most people's backyard swimming pool is in size.


Trying to inject doubt about the veracity of Flight 93's narrative by complaining about the size of the impact crater is also ridiculous. The jet's crash in Shanksville was verified by ATC radar data, flight data recorder information, cockpit voice recordings, airphone calls, eyewitness testimony to the jet going down, and human remains, not to mention jet debris recovery. There is zero doubt that UA93 crashed in Shanksville. Multiple, converging lines of evidence establishes this. If you want to critique the narrative, you must establish
That characteristics of the impact crater are unusual or contradictory to the notion that a jet crashed there.
That the presence of all the other lines of evidence does not contradict any alternate explanation you give for FL93's fate.
To date, no one's been able to establish any coherent explanation. All people do is what you do: Raise vague, unsupported allegations. Allegations that have been definitely refuted over the years. There is nothing to doubt about UA93's crash in Shanksville. That is, unless you're overly credulous and selective about the information you accept.

[stateofgrace]

base on what you have seen, go away iof yopu can not act like an adult instead of a pimply faced teeneager. Time to report you for agitation, trolling and general annoyance, I will recommend that you get banned permanantly from here, meanwhile, I recommebnd to everyone on randi that they place you on ignore as I am doing. click!

Reported.

[ElMondoHummus]

well, you people are hysterical, down right juvenile in yopur responses. I posed if it bothered you that there was no wreckage, like you would expect and the very shallow and small indentation, in regards and relation to the jumbo jet's size when it allegedly crashed?

If that does not bother you, then move along quietly, there's no sense in you opening your mouths and acting like snotty assed brats. No one here needs comments like some of your post.

There was wreckage. It was recovered. And the size of the impact crater does not contradict the notion that the jet crashed. If you want to claim that the crater refutes this, present your evidence. State why it is insufficient for Flight 93's crash. Then explain the debris and human remains, the ATC radar data, the eyewitness accounts, the airphone calls, and the FDR/CVR recordings.

[bob the analyst]

compare the amount of wreckage to other flights that crashed, pre and post shanksville

[Foolmewunz]

Prof,
How's that vast movement of yours to ban Gravy going?


Aside: We're all heading to AAH, ya know?

Flight 93 was such a desperate CT that all but the completely delusional have given up on it. Killtown really was the Killjoy on this one. Once he and his band of merry followers got going, everyone just "all moved away from him on the bench"(with apologies to Arlo Guthrie).

[911files]

compare the amount of wreckage to other flights that crashed, pre and post shanksville

Yeah, we have...and it is exactly what would be expected from an nose-dive into the ground.

[stateofgrace]

compare the amount of wreckage to other flights that crashed, pre and post shanksville

Why? Were they all deliberately slammed into the ground after being hijacked?

Maybe you can offer one that was, for comparison.

[Disbelief]

base on what you have seen, go away iof yopu can not act like an adult instead of a pimply faced teeneager. Time to report you for agitation, trolling and general annoyance, I will recommend that you get banned permanantly from here, meanwhile, I recommebnd to everyone on randi that they place you on ignore as I am doing. click!

If you can't do the calculations, just say so. Feel free to report my post and/or put me on ignore, as that is your right under the MA. For future reference, you will be asked every time to back up claims here, so don't make them if you can't support them.

If someone can quote this for me, in case he really did put me on ignore, it would be greatly appreciated.

I am so happy! This will be the first time I made someone's ignore list!!

[ElMondoHummus]

compare the amount of wreckage to other flights that crashed, pre and post shanksville

A majority of the aircraft was recovered. Do you have information saying that this wasn't the case? Please present it if you do.

Also: What are you saying this tell us? Consider the fact that the radar data definitively shows FL93 in that location, that witnesses saw the jet going down, and that rescue workers recovered remains definitively tied to passengers and crew.

Also, consider the fact that the CVR recordings is consistent with a hijacking, and that airphone testimony ties in the hijackings with FL93, and further validates the fact that the passengers were victims of a hijacking.

There is evidence of the hijackings, of the passengers and crew, and of the location of the jet at impact. That all puts Flight 93 at the crash location, and demonstrates that it was the jet that crashed. Making vague posts about the amount of debris that was there, when in fact most of the jet was recovered, is hardly cause to doubt the narrative as it currently exists.

ETA: Aha, found it. The FBI told the press they recovered 95% of the jet. Source (http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp).

[bob the analyst]

Yeah, we have...and it is exactly what would be expected from an nose-dive into the ground.
Rule 12 violation removed.

[lapman]

compare the amount of wreckage to other flights that crashed, pre and post shanksville
Please point out the vast amount of wreckage in the picture of the ValuJet 592 crash.
http://images.ibsys.com/2001/0523/785333.jpg

[twinstead]

I hope to God that smartpants doesn't don the Cloak of Undebunkabilitytm and declare all the evidence that supports the 'official story' of flight 93 faked.

[Egil]

PSA Flight 1771 was a British Aerospace 146 that crashed into the ground at a steep angle and at a speed of around 700 miles per hour.

I got one picture, looks to be of the crater with workers around it. Looks very similar to Shanksville.

[bob the analyst]

Please point out the vast amount of wreckage in the picture of the ValuJet 592 crash.
http://images.ibsys.com/2001/0523/785333.jpg
you compare a jet crashed in a fieldfield to crashed jet in the everglades? wooo hoo, we have ourselves a live one here folks, thanks for the laugh, it was much needed relief because this conversation had hit the wall, i posed a question, everyone just stood their like deer in the headlights, at l;east we got a good chuckle, thank you very much!

[Disbelief]

you compare a jet crashed in a fieldfield to crashed jet in the everglades? wooo hoo, we have ourselves a live one here folks, thanks for the laugh, it was much needed relief because this conversation had hit the wall, i posed a question, everyone just stood their like deer in the headlights, at l;east we got a good chuckle, thank you very much!

Well, except the part where I asked for your calculations on the crater size. Are you done with those yet?

[Foolmewunz]

you compare a jet crashed in a fieldfield to crashed jet in the everglades? wooo hoo, we have ourselves a live one here folks, thanks for the laugh, it was much needed relief because this conversation had hit the wall, i posed a question, everyone just stood their like deer in the headlights, at l;east we got a good chuckle, thank you very much!


There's that "we" again. Are you, like, Queen Victoria or sumfin? There is no WE. It's you on your little island of crazy.

[twinstead]

Speaking of deer in a headlight--smartpants: You have been shown what evidence was collected at the site of the crash of flight 93. What is your reaction to it? Was it faked? Did you even read the link that was provided to you that details, in great detail, how that evidence was collected, who collected it, and what it was.

The ball is in your court. You can declare the crash site just "didn't look right" all you want. The evidence supports US.

[TheRedWorm]

If you can't do the calculations, just say so. Feel free to report my post and/or put me on ignore, as that is your right under the MA. For future reference, you will be asked every time to back up claims here, so don't make them if you can't support them.

If someone can quote this for me, in case he really did put me on ignore, it would be greatly appreciated.

I am so happy! This will be the first time I made someone's ignore list!!


Done, because I like your avatar.

[lapman]

you compare a jet crashed in a fieldfield to crashed jet in the everglades? wooo hoo, we have ourselves a live one here folks, thanks for the laugh, it was much needed relief because this conversation had hit the wall, i posed a question, everyone just stood their like deer in the headlights, at l;east we got a good chuckle, thank you very much!
I asked you for a comparison. Instead, you keep on with your infantile jibes while running away from the fact that you have nothing to back your claims. If you're trying to be the laughing stock of the twoofers, you're succeeding. I at lease posted a comparison. From you, all we get is :words:

[Egil]

I cannot believe that Twoofers are real.

[Disbelief]

Done, because I like your avatar.

Thank you. You just wanted to get me to post again, right?

[bob the analyst]

Speaking of deer in a headlight--smartpants: You have been shown what evidence was collected at the site of the crash of flight 93. What is your reaction to it? Was it faked? Did you even read the link that was provided to you that details, in great detail, how that evidence was collected, who collected it, and what it was.

The ball is in your court. You can declare the crash site just "didn't look right" all you want. The evidence supports US.
why not at all, I am waiting for evidence, for example, in Shansville, for a fully loaded plane, the wreckage is sparse to say the least, no photos of whole or mutilated bodies, organs, limbs, the crash site is very miniscule, if you do graphic measurements, take the available photos, lay them on a graph, account for distance variances, known figures and landmarks for sizing, you will determine and you will see that the impact "crater" is only 1 to 1 1/2 meters deep and 3 meters wide by 8 meters in length

[Egil]

Flight 1771 crashed into the ground at a steep angle at supersonic.

http://www.psa-history.org/museum/pic/87crash.jpg

Where is the plane?

[TheRedWorm]

Thank you. You just wanted to get me to post again, right?


No. And by no, I mean yes. :D

[lapman]

why not at all, I am waiting for evidence, for example, in Shansville, for a fully loaded plane, the wreckage is sparse to say the least, no photos of whole or mutilated bodies, organs, limbs, the crash site is very miniscule, if you do graphic measurements, take the available photos, lay them on a graph, account for distance variances, known figures and landmarks for sizing, you will determine and you will see that the impact "crater" is only 1 to 1 1/2 meters deep and 3 meters wide by 8 meters in length
The running away continues. Still waiting for your comparison that shows what you think it should look like.

[twinstead]

Lurkers, pay close attention to smartpants' tactics. This is textbook stuff. You'll notice he didn't answer a SINGLE question posed to him, and he either didn't respond to any evidence presented to him, or simply insulted the person presenting it with no further comment.

And then I'm sure he declares victory. It's almost as if we haven't seen it a thousand times.

[dtugg]

Hey Professor! How are you?!?!? Can you tell all of us how many engines are on a DC-10? Thanks!

[ElMondoHummus]

Gravy had already posted information some time ago regarding FL93's impact crater:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page2 (scroll down a bit till you get to it).

[Disbelief]

why not at all, I am waiting for evidence, for example, in Shansville, for a fully loaded plane, the wreckage is sparse to say the least, no photos of whole or mutilated bodies, organs, limbs, the crash site is very miniscule, if you do graphic measurements, take the available photos, lay them on a graph, account for distance variances, known figures and landmarks for sizing, you will determine and you will see that the impact "crater" is only 1 to 1 1/2 meters deep and 3 meters wide by 8 meters in length

Even with your low figures, you very nearly debunk yourself. Great job!

[Egil]

Oh, and this.

This is the crater a F-86 left back in the fifties, it is now overgrown. It impacted near vertical.

http://www.mywvhome.com/1crash3.jpg

[ElMondoHummus]

Furthermore, the professor is ignoring the reams of information regarding the debris and human remains that were recovered. Gravy has accumulated links to much of this evidence; once again, I point to his link:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page1

[bob the analyst]

Furthermore, the professor is ignoring the reams of information regarding the debris and human remains that were recovered. Gravy has accumulated links to much of this evidence; once again, I point to his link:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page1
Gravy is banned from this forum abnd everyone has him on ignore, mostly for his adolosecent style and his attacks, no sense name dropping him, he is his-tor-y

PS, stick to the topic and don't derail threads with irrelevant nonsense like this. Gravy is NOT banned.

[ElMondoHummus]

Gravy is banned from this forum abnd everyone has him on ignore, mostly for his adolosecent style and his attacks, no sense name dropping him, he is his-tor-y

That's just silly. If he was banned, there'd be a notice here (http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53).

Besides which, it's irrelevant. The collection of links provides facts that stand on their own, regardless of who cites them. The fact of the matter is that over 90+% of the jet was recovered, and over 1500 human remains identifications were done. Furthermore, radar data definitively places FL93 at that location, and FDR data clearly shows that the plane was deliberately piloted into the ground. Airphone call testimony from families and GTE operators clearly place the victims in the planes, and forensic analysis clearly places those victims remains at Shanksville. The fact of the matter is that the evidence is overwhelming that FL93 crashed at that location. You've yet to even make a dent in that conclusion.

[dtugg]

Gravy is banned from this forum abnd everyone has him on ignore, mostly for his adolosecent style and his attacks, no sense name dropping him, he is his-tor-y

Do you think that you gain anything by blatantly lying?

[lapman]

Gravy is banned from this forum abnd everyone has him on ignore, mostly for his adolosecent style and his attacks, no sense name dropping him, he is his-tor-y
So, now you come back with a blatant lie. That's not exactly helping.

[stateofgrace]

Gravy is banned from this forum abnd everyone has him on ignore, mostly for his adolosecent style and his attacks, no sense name dropping him, he is his-tor-y

Yet more claims, all unsubstantiated of course, any chance you will back this claim up?

Any chance you will back up a single claim you have made so far?

[ElMondoHummus]

Folks, in all due respect to you all here, what Professor Smartpants says about Gravy doesn't matter. That's a dodge; I shouldn't have have indulged in responding to it myself. What matters is his inability to confront the evidence about FL93. As well as his failure to explain why the impact crater should have been any different.

It's not about personalities. It's about statements. And what Smartpants is saying gives away the fact that he's simply not well informed about Flight 93 facts. That's what matters. Not his attempt to deflect inevitable conclusions about his lack of supporting facts by making absurd statements regarding Gravy.

[beachnut]

I was wondering how little evidence, wreckage, body parts, crash marks or the lack of everything in Shanksville, Pa. there was?

I mean, if you look at the hole in the ground, in Shanksville, where this jet allegedly crashed and the hole is about as big and as deep as most people's backyard swimming pool is in size.
The whole plane is there and all the people are there exactly like a 600 mph impact into the ground. All trained aircraft accident investigators with experience or knowledge of high-speed impacts understand Flight 93 impact bob.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris21sm.jpg

[bob the analyst]

Folks, in all due respect to you all here, what Professor Smartpants says about Gravy doesn't matter. That's a dodge; I shouldn't have have indulged in responding to it myself. What matters is his inability to confront the evidence about FL93. As well as his failure to explain why the impact crater should have been any different.

It's not about personalities. It's about statements. And what Smartpants is saying gives away the fact that he's simply not well informed about Flight 93 facts. That's what matters. Not his attempt to deflect inevitable conclusions about his lack of supporting facts by making absurd statements regarding Gravy.
If you are satisfied that there is almost zero wredkage in Shanksville, then move along,. stop posting here, you have nothing of value to add in. Here's an idea, sinbce you admitted the entire Shanksville crash was over your head, that you don;t see any problem with the lack of wreckage there.

Switch to another topic or just leave this site completely, which is what all of us think about your and your trolling attitude

[beachnut]

Gravy is banned from this forum abnd everyone has him on ignore, mostly for his adolosecent style and his attacks, no sense name dropping him, he is his-tor-y
What a doltish post.

You have zero on this topic as your troll and spew doltish statements without effort.

Flight 93, try hard to focus without spewing all your failed knowledge in one statement.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris22sm.jpg

Flight 93 was found in PA, your inability to learn what a 600 mph ground impact is your problem. If you have a specific problem speak up, but your display of total ignorance on 93 is not needed.

[lapman]

If you are satisfied that there is almost zero wredkage in Shanksville, Evidence that there was almost zero wreckage?

[A W Smith]

If you are satisfied that there is almost zero wredkage in Shanksville, then move along,. stop posting here, you have nothing of value to add in. Here's an idea, sinbce you admitted the entire Shanksville crash was over your head, that you don;t see any problem with the lack of wreckage there.

Switch to another topic or just leave this site completely, which is what all of us think about your and your trolling attitude


Once again I have bolded all your lies.

Zero wreckage? A blatant lie!!

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/24/inv.pennsylvania.site/index.html
SHANKSVILLE, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- The FBI announced Monday that its investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered.

[Egil]

The investigators stated in their report that they recovered debris consistent with Flight 93, the debris recovered amounted to +90% of Flight 93, the Flight Data and Cockpit Voice Recorder were recovered, radar data corroborates that Flight 93 was in the area. Remains were found and some identifications were made through DNA.

We have pictures of some large debris found at the site, a part of the fuselage as large as a door and what appears to be the compressor hub of a jet engine.

It is your job to prove that the Investigations by competent, skilled, educated and experienced individuals was wrong, a fraud, a cover-up or due to incompetence.

If all you have to offer is an argument born of incredulity then you got nothing to offer as you do not refute the claims of the OT which are backed up by skilled, competent, educated and experienced investigators and forensic specialists.

[twinstead]

Note to lurkers. Not only has smartpants refused to address the evidence of wreckage presented to him, but continues to claim there was hardly any wreckage at all and insults everybody he can get his hands on. This leads A W Smith to exasperatingly post yet ANOTHER link to evidence, which will be ignored as well.

[911files]

Obviously you are just trying to act silly and juvenile, but no, I will not give you the pleasure of bringing me into your ficticious piddly arguments, you seriously need to grow up.

What is juvenile about stating the fact that the 93 crash site looked exactly like other crash sites where planes impacted the ground in a virtual nose-dive at high velocity? The 93 site is EXACTLY what I would have expected it to look like. Go find a high-velocity nose-dive crash site that don't look like the 93 site. You won't find one.

[1337m4n]

Based on what you have seen, go away iof yopu cannot act like an adult instead of a pimply faced teeneager. Time to report you for agitation, trolling, and general annoyance. I will recommend that you get banned permanently from here; meanwhile, I recommebnd to everyone on Randi that they place you on ignore as I am doing. Click!

See me after class.

[beachnut]

See me after class.
He was a tech writer at NIST, you could learn from him.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/flt93debris8sm.jpg
He has problems doing research and does not see the aircraft parts in this photo. He may be too young to see the news reports on 911.

[ElMondoHummus]

If you are satisfied that there is almost zero wredkage in Shanksville, then move along,. stop posting here, you have nothing of value to add in. Here's an idea, sinbce you admitted the entire Shanksville crash was over your head, that you don;t see any problem with the lack of wreckage there.

Switch to another topic or just leave this site completely, which is what all of us think about your and your trolling attitude

Negative. I'm not only not trolling, I am making posts of substance. Please provide sources corroborating your claim of "almost zero wredkage (sic) in Shanksville". In return, I'll provide you mine clearly demonstrating that the wreckage and human remains were in fact there. Here it is:

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article, quoting FBI spokesman (http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp):


STONYCREEK, Pa. -- The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner and concluding that explosives were not responsible for bringing it down.

At the same time, the Somerset County coroner said that he has ended his own search for remains of the 44 people aboard the airliner.
"It's been very thorough," Coroner Wallace Miller said of the recovery effort.

Of the airliner parts, the pieces that investigators judged most significant were the plane's cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder, both unearthed within 3 1/2 days of the crash. The voice recording that remained is being analyzed for clues to confirm the identities of the four hijackers who seized the Newark-to-San Francisco flight before it crashed.


1500 remains found (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8&notFound=true) (Washington Post article):

Hundreds of searchers who climbed the hemlocks and combed the woods for weeks were able to find about 1,500 mostly scorched samples of human tissue totaling less than 600 pounds, or about 8 percent of the total.


First responder testimony verifying that the debris was present:


King: "We stopped and I opened the door. The smell of jet fuel was overpowering. I will never forget that smell; it is really burnt into my mind. ...I walked down the power line and got my first glimpse of human remains. Then I walked a little further and saw more."

Shanksville VFD firefighter Keith Curtis: "I walked up to where the tire was on fire, probably a hundred feet past the crater. It was a big tire. I was thinking that this is a big jet. I hit it good with the hose and put it out. I stopped and 'poof,' it just started on fire again."

Firefighter Mike Sube: "We made our way to a small pond. That's where I observed the largest piece of wreckage that I saw, a portion of the landing gear and fuselage. One of the tires was still intact with the bracket, and probably about three to five windows of the fuselage were actually in one piece lying there. ...There were enough fires that our brush truck was down there numerous times. ...I saw small pieces of human remains and occasionally some larger pieces. That was disturbing, but what was most disturbing was seeing personal effects."

Lieutenant Roger Bailey, Somerset Volunteer Fire Department: "We started down through the debris field. I saw pieces of fiberglass, pieces of airplane, pop rivets, and mail...Mail was scattered everywhere. ...the one guy who was with us almost stepped on a piece of human remains. I grabbed him, and he got about half woozy over it."

Source: Courage After the Crash: Flight 93" by Glenn J. Kashurba. SAJ Publishing, 2002.

Flight 93 crew effects, donated to the Smithsonian: http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?ID=160

Debris fragments, also donated to the Smithsonian:
http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?ID=45

Recovery worker's testimony (http://www.usnews.com/usnews/9_11/articles/911shanksville.htm):

Lambert (a distant relative of Nevin's) says his first trip around the site in October was "overwhelming and heartbreaking." He was absorbing the devastation when his escort, Somerset County Coroner Wally Miller, held up a quarter-size piece of metal. "As soon as he did that, you saw plane parts everywhere," Lambert says. Now, he can't help searching the ground every time he visits. "I don't notice the trees, the beauty of the land, the grass, or the snow," he says. "I just notice plane parts."

... Errant shards of the aircraft can still be found there–twisted plates of the machine's metal skin and swatches of patterned seat covers–but it's illegal to keep them. They're still considered evidence, and the area a crime scene, "until they catch [Osama] bin Laden," say many local police officers.





Links to photos of the debris:

http://pittsburgh.about.com/library/pictures/shanksville/uc_flight_93-8.htm
http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/
http://html.thepittsburghchannel.com/sh/slideshow/_auto/sh1364s1.html
http://www.amny.com/news/local/newyork/ny-flight93-pg,0,844175.photogallery?coll=am-topheadlines&index=8
... and note that all this is only a fraction of the evidence of debris and human remains. I haven't even gotten to citing other lines of evidence converging on the point of FL93 crashing in Shanksville; I haven't provided anything about the FDR, for example, or made anything other than simple mention of the radar data.

Most links taken from here:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page2
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page3

The simple fact is that there was indeed much debris and human remains found at the crash site. However, Professor, you claim there was nearly zero. Again, please provide sources supporting your contention. I have provided a portion of mine, please return the favor. Provide corroborating evidence.

ETA: By the way, when did I "admit" that the crash was "over my head" :confused:? I did no such thing; on the contrary, I've demonstrated a more complete understanding of the event than you have. Please provide evidence supporting your stance that there was nearly zero debris there. I've yet to see you actually attempt to prove that point.

[twinstead]

Now lets see if smartpants even acknowledges the above post or the work that went into providing it. So far smartpants has done nothing but insult anybody who presents ANY evidence at all.

[ElMondoHummus]

Now lets see if smartpants even acknowledges the above post or the work that went into providing it. So far smartpants has done nothing but insult anybody who presents ANY evidence at all.

Pff... I'd hold my breath, but I don't want to pass out.

[Egil]

And I bring up the crash of a B-1A in 1984. Here are the pictures.

http://www.check-six.com/images/Crash_Sites_images/B-1A/B1-site-ground.jpg Notice the fragmentation of the debris.

[lapman]

Now lets see if smartpants even acknowledges the above post or the work that went into providing it. So far smartpants has done nothing but insult anybody who presents ANY evidence at all.
Doubtful. He'll just say it was an immature attack or some garbage like that. Then will require photos of human remains that would have never been posted anywhere.

[Egil]

I will post more photos of Flight 93's crash site:

Edit* The Photos don't wanna show, so, I'll just link to the site:

Photos (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page3)

PSA Flight 1771, Swiss Air Flight 111, UA Flight 585 and Northwest Airlines flight 710 are similar crashes and all show a high degree of fragmentation of the aircraft and human remains.

[1337m4n]

Switch to another topic or just leave this site completely, which is what all of us think about your and your trolling attitude

I would like to ask: who are the "all of us" you're referring to?

[twinstead]

I would like to ask: who are the "all of us" you're referring to?

They may very well be the voices in his head.

[Mangoose]

Closeup of the pit with smoke still rising from it (as photographed by Mark Stahl):

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5739/00037va.jpg

It is absolutely strewn with shredded and fragmented debris. Notice the riveted piece of metal (red arrow) and the yellow arrow points to a metal fragment with a round oval hole (wing assembly?).

Of course, none of this is visible in the usual low-res versions of Stahl's photos:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/images/static/terrorism/photogallery/9306.jpg

[911files]

Switch to another topic or just leave this site completely, which is what all of us think about your and your trolling attitude

Are you sure you are on the right forum?

[leftysergeant]

If you are satisfied that there is almost zero wredkage in Shanksville, then move along,

There is an airplane-siuzed and airplane-shaped hole inn the ground, in a substrate which is easily penetrated to considerable depth by cylindrical objects. There are identifiable pieces of aircraft scattered on the surface in aerial photos of the site. Given the size of the crater, that is sufficient to determine what is in the crater.

For those who have never had to work for a living, I should point out that the substrate into which the plane crashed is glacial till. If you dig a ditch in that stuff, most states require that you put some sort of caisson along the sides if you go deeper than waist level to a man to prevent workers' accidental burial due to collapse.

And twoofers think that it should not have back-filled itself! What a difference twenty IQ points or having to work for a living can make.

stop posting here, you have nothing of value to add in.

By that standard, you would long since have departed from this forum.

Here's an idea, sinbce you admitted the entire Shanksville crash was over your head,

None of the debunkers here have admitted any such thing. We have said that it all goes over your head, obviously because you deliberately ducked.

that you don;t see any problem with the lack of wreckage there.

To those of us who ever had to actually pick up aircraft wreckage, there really seems to be more than might be expected there.

Switch to another topic or just leave this site completely, which is what all of us think about your and your trolling attitude

Your divorce from reality was obviously very messy and involved protection orders.