POPCORN! Gravy is on...! :D - Page 2

Oliver · 17th December 2006, 12:10 PM

beachnut · 17th December 2006, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Are you serious? Gravy compared the crashing of a plane to a bullet.

Bermas was totally convincing

It was like a bullet; only someone as dumb as Alex Jones would disagree!

Bermas was spewing lies and being corrected by Dylan. Both liars look kind of weak on facts (Dylan/Bermas for the mentally challenged)

Pardalis · 17th December 2006, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Wow, your confirmation bias is really funny, folks. No wonder Bermas gets the most insults thrown at him - he dominated the show. This guy is a natural.

Dominates?

Do you hear what he is actually saying?

He's a loud mouth, that's for sure, but what he's saying is total crap.

Arus808 · 17th December 2006, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Are you serious? Gravy compared the crashing of a plane to a bullet.

He was comparing the SPEED of the plane. Do you know how much damage can be caused by soemthing traveling at 800 feet per second?

Quote:

Bermas was totally convincing

Give a liar something to lie about, and he can be convincing enough to look to be telling ot truth. The only thing is, its still a lie.

Bermas can be convincing, but he wasn't stating any sort of facts.

Mancman · 17th December 2006, 12:19 PM

sat556 · 17th December 2006, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Oliver

It´s LTW´s account at Google-Video.

So it's their own take? I do hope that's the explanation for the dodgy audio

Wizard · 17th December 2006, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Arkan_Wolfshade

No, he used the .45 ACP round's velocity as an aid to help people visualize the speed of Flight 93 at impact.

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

uk_dave · 17th December 2006, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

They'll find a video on youtube, silly.

uk_dave · 17th December 2006, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Roxdog whines:

I think you nailed it right there. I know I can come off as pretty abrasive but I'm am normally very polite and nice until my intelligence or sanity is questioned. Once that happens I have no problem taking off the gloves. Gravy is a grade A piece of trash and deep down I believe he knows that.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...showtopic=1637

Pssssst roxy? You forgot to mention marxists and degenerates.....

ConspiRaider · 17th December 2006, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

Try this one then.

Go to an Indy car race.

Get down to track level, about halfway down the straightaway. Stand as close to the fence as you can.

Feel the sound, power and SPEED of those cars roaring down the straightaway as they pass your position. Awesome.

When Flight 93 hit the ground, it was travelling at more than twice the speed of the fastest Indy car on the longest straightaway.

Wizard · 17th December 2006, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by ConspiRaider

Try this one then.

Go to an Indy car race.

Get down to track level, about halfway down the straightaway. Stand as close to the fence as you can.

Feel the sound, power and SPEED of those cars roaring down the straightaway as they pass your position. Awesome.

When Flight 93 hit the ground, it was travelling at more than twice the speed of the fastest Indy car on the longest straightaway.

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.

Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.

A W Smith · 17th December 2006, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by ConspiRaider

Try this one then.

Go to an Indy car race.

Get down to track level, about halfway down the straightaway. Stand as close to the fence as you can.

Feel the sound, power and SPEED of those cars roaring down the straightaway as they pass your position. Awesome.

When Flight 93 hit the ground, it was travelling at more than twice the speed of the fastest Indy car on the longest straightaway.

ok heres a video of a car going 267MPH as viewed from behind. imagine twice this speed hitting the ground. its towards the end of the video but i think you will get the picture. I know shameles plug i crew on such a car.

Pardalis · 17th December 2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.

Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.

Start your own thread about it.

uk_dave · 17th December 2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.

Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.

You're an expert on plane crashes?

Why should they show you ANY of the wreckage? You wouldn't understand it even if they did, unless you are an expert on plane crashes.

Do you never trust experts?

Do you always argue with your doctor?

Levantine · 17th December 2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.

No you wont. Experience tells you will find another way to "question" the evidence. Evidence only means something to you folk if it happens to support your position. That's why you cling to the conspiracy theory - the preponderance evidence is against you, but you cherry pick anyway.

Pardalis · 17th December 2006, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

It took me 5 seconds to find one on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkrsDpW6ly4

Arkan_Wolfshade · 17th December 2006, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.
...

Show your work supporting this statement, or retract it as being nothing more than your non-authoritative opinion.

defaultdotxbe · 17th December 2006, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by sat556

So it's their own take? I do hope that's the explanation for the dodgy audio

i was wondering why ron showed th ePM book to the wrong camera, lol

Originally Posted by Wizard

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

whats the point of saying superman is "faster than a speeding bullet"

even if people havent SEEN a bullet they still have an idea that its pretty darn fast

Originally Posted by Wizard

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.

im sure you have some sort of proof to back that up

Quote:

Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.

whats the point? it wont convince the truthers, they look at all the evidence out there, dismiss it all as fake, then say theres no evidence

they couldnt pull their logic into a tighter circle if they tried

ConspiRaider · 17th December 2006, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.

Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.

Oh? Are you making that statement based on your storehouse of knowledge gained as an onsite jet crash investigator? Or, is this just what you "feel"?

Reassembling a crashed jet is a very painstaking, time-consuming, labor-intensive undertaking. Expensive too. Such an activity proceeds when, all things considered, it is deemed a worthy venture. Despite the difficulty. To determine WHY an aircraft crashed when there is no other reliable methodology to draw upon.

But we KNOW why Flight 93 crashed. No mystery.

Spins · 17th December 2006, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

Basically Flight 93 hit the ground at an almost 90-degree angle at this speed...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

...now after viewing the video could you please explain to us all why you think the plane shouldn't have buried itself 25 feet undergound and left a crater about 10 feet deep?

boloboffin · 17th December 2006, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

It took me 5 seconds to find one on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkrsDpW6ly4

Of all those shots, the apple at the beginning is most like the ground.

Pay attention to the size of the entry wound. Flight 93 could not penetrate the ground, so all of that expulsive force was contained in the ground.

ConspiRaider · 17th December 2006, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by A W Smith

ok heres a video of a car going 287MPH as viewed from behind. imagine twice this speed hitting the ground. its towards the end of the video but i think you will get the picture. I know shameles plug i crew on such a car.

Nice find, Smitty, that's pretty awesome. I think it was 267 MPH? Wow. And to think that Flight 93 was moving more than twice as fast when it impacted...

A W Smith · 17th December 2006, 12:56 PM

you are aware that the crash site was a landfill correct? Its not like the plane hit shale or as we call it in the industry "undisturbed earth" You do know that not all the dirt will be ejected from the crater correct? even if you shoot a 22 rifle into the ground the bullet is well below any crater that is formed. Unless your thinking.. well the wings should certainly prop it up over the hole as it hits the ground. Wizard Tell me your not that foolish.

Wizard · 17th December 2006, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by uk_dave

You're an expert on plane crashes?

Why should they show you ANY of the wreckage? You wouldn't understand it even if they did, unless you are an expert on plane crashes.

Do you never trust experts?

Do you always argue with your doctor?

Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions.

Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases?

Wizard · 17th December 2006, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by Spins

Basically Flight 93 hit the ground at an almost 90-degree angle at this speed...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

...now after viewing the video could you please explain to us all why you think the plane shouldn't have buried itself 25 feet undergound and left a crater about 10 feet deep?

Gravy said 40 degrees didn't he?

A W Smith · 17th December 2006, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by ConspiRaider

Nice find, Smitty, that's pretty awesome. I think it was 267 MPH? Wow. And to think that Flight 93 was moving more than twice as fast when it impacted...

yes i just now fixed my typo it was in fact 267mph

uk_dave · 17th December 2006, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions.

Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases?

So, do you keep on arguing with doctors until you find one who says what you want to hear?

And in other plane crashes the reasons for the crash are unknown and need to be investigated. Finding voice recordings and witness testimony regarding telephone conversations from those on the plane gives a pretty good explanation of what happened.

Why recreate the plane from wreckage if it is not considered possible that a bomb or mechanical fault caused the crash?

You just want the plane recreated because you don't believe it was that plane.

Well, tough. Your personally incredulity does not outweigh other peoples professional and investigative integrity.

defaultdotxbe · 17th December 2006, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions.

Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases?

unlike other plane crashes this one was known to be a criminal act from the beginning, so it was under FBI juridiction from the beginning

Spins · 17th December 2006, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Gravy said 40 degrees didn't he?

One of the eye-witnesses said an almost 90 degree angle, the FDR recovered at the crash site recorded a 40 degree angle. Are you going to dodge the question?

uk_dave · 17th December 2006, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Killtown further spews:

QUOTE (thehighwaymanq @ Dec 17 2006, 07:28 PM)
i wanna see KT vs. Mark Roberts in a flight 93 debate

i would pay for that

If he wasn't such a pr*ck, I would and I'd DESTROY him.

Btw, he thinks Val McClatchey is a "9/11 victim"!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'd like to see killy and gravy in a videotaped debate...only condition being killy can't wear a mask or be filmed in silhouette.

geni · 17th December 2006, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Wow, maybe Dylan really is humble! Starting at about 6:45:

I'm starting to wounder if he is suffering from an attack of intellectual honestly. Or rather he's reaching the point where the doubethink is causeing him problems.

Wizard · 17th December 2006, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by Spins

One of the eye-witnesses said an almost 90 degree angle, the FDR recovered at the crash site recorded a 40 degree angle. Are you going to dodge the question?

So which was it and why did you choose the one that suited you more?

David Wong · 17th December 2006, 01:15 PM

Host: "Now, many critics have accused the Bush administration of ignoring warnings prior to the 9/11 attacks about Islamic terrorism. Do you think that's fair?"

Bermas and Dylan: "Oh, absolutely, absolutely."

Does somebody have a gif of a smiley's head exploding? Because I need it here. Talking about wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

"Bush ignored warning signs that the 9/11 attacks were coming from Islamic terrorists! Also, Bush performed the attacks! And the Islamic terrorists didn't attack! So he ignored the warnings about the attacks that didn't happen and that he actually performed himself!!!!!"

beachnut · 17th December 2006, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?

I have seen bullets in flight! You do not shoot guns much!

You need to research stuff more!

The plane hit fast and got buried, like many Air Force accidents. Better research may help you understand what others are talking about.

But Bermas is so bad at research. Many accidents look like flight 93 when the hit at high speed. Sorry, but you are wrong.

beachnut · 17th December 2006, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions.

Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases?

I have seen other plane crashes. Flight 93 looks like a high speed crash, it is hard to tell if it was 40 or 90 degrees, either has the same effect in general!

Now you find the crashes. Good luck, with your research capabilities we may never see you (based on your statements here so far) again.

Wizard · 17th December 2006, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by beachnut

I have seen bullets in flight! You do not shoot guns much!

You need to research stuff more!

The plane hit fast and got buried, like many Air Force accidents. Better research may help you understand what others are talking about.

But Bermas is so bad at research. Many accidents look like flight 93 when the hit at high speed. Sorry, but you are wrong.

Could you find me a case where a plane buries itself underground like Flight 93 is supposed to have done?

Pardalis · 17th December 2006, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by David Wong

Host: "Now, many critics have accused the Bush administration of ignoring warnings prior to the 9/11 attacks about Islamic terrorism. Do you think that's fair?"

Bermas and Dylan: "Oh, absolutely, absolutely."

Does somebody have a gif of a smiley's head exploding? Because I need it here. Talking about wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

"Bush ignored warning signs that the 9/11 attacks were coming from Islamic terrorists! Also, Bush performed the attacks! And the Islamic terrorists didn't attack! So he ignored the warnings about the attacks that didn't happen and that he actually performed himself!!!!!"

Troofers are a little racist. They claim Muslim extremists aren't capable of carrying out a plan like 9/11. According to them, they're too stupid, "low IQ" as Bermas said, so they need help from the big US of A...

geni · 17th December 2006, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep.

The britsh tallboy couldn't break Mach 2 but it could penitrate 16 ft of concrete or at least 60 feet of soil. The plane wasn't designed for quite the same ground penetrating performance so only bits of it managed 25 feet.

Quad4_72 · 17th December 2006, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by Wizard

Could you find me a case where a plane buries itself underground like Flight 93 is supposed to have done?

Find a case where a plane crashed into the ground at 500+ mph and you will have your answer. Most plane crashes are at much lower speeds.

Pardalis · 17th December 2006, 01:32 PM

Also note that plane crashes are usually accidental, often due to technical failures or pilot error. When in such a situation, pilots try to avoid as much as they can the damage, they try to stear the plane until the last seconds.

Flight 93 voluntarily rammed into the ground at full speed, head on.

17th December 2006, 12:16 PM	#43
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress Wow, your confirmation bias is really funny, folks. No wonder Bermas gets the most insults thrown at him - he dominated the show. This guy is a natural. Dominates? Do you hear what he is actually saying? He's a loud mouth, that's for sure, but what he's saying is total crap.
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817

17th December 2006, 12:16 PM	#44
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,204	Originally Posted by Wizard Are you serious? Gravy compared the crashing of a plane to a bullet. He was comparing the SPEED of the plane. Do you know how much damage can be caused by soemthing traveling at 800 feet per second? Quote: Bermas was totally convincing Give a liar something to lie about, and he can be convincing enough to look to be telling ot truth. The only thing is, its still a lie. Bermas can be convincing, but he wasn't stating any sort of facts.
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,204	__________________ Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato. “Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.” “Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”

17th December 2006, 12:19 PM	#45
Mancman Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,008
Mancman Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,008	__________________ R.I.P Dr. Adequate

17th December 2006, 12:20 PM	#46
sat556 Guest Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 550	Originally Posted by Oliver It´s LTW´s account at Google-Video. So it's their own take? I do hope that's the explanation for the dodgy audio
sat556 Guest Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 550

17th December 2006, 12:28 PM	#47
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479	Originally Posted by Arkan_Wolfshade No, he used the .45 ACP round's velocity as an aid to help people visualize the speed of Flight 93 at impact. How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight?
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479

17th December 2006, 12:10 PM	#41
Oliver Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,396

17th December 2006, 12:11 PM	#42
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 26,120	Originally Posted by Wizard Are you serious? Gravy compared the crashing of a plane to a bullet. Bermas was totally convincing It was like a bullet; only someone as dumb as Alex Jones would disagree! Bermas was spewing lies and being corrected by Dylan. Both liars look kind of weak on facts (Dylan/Bermas for the mentally challenged)

17th December 2006, 12:32 PM	#48
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154	Originally Posted by Wizard How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight? They'll find a video on youtube, silly.
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154

17th December 2006, 12:35 PM	#49
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154	Quote: Roxdog whines: I think you nailed it right there. I know I can come off as pretty abrasive but I'm am normally very polite and nice until my intelligence or sanity is questioned. Once that happens I have no problem taking off the gloves. Gravy is a grade A piece of trash and deep down I believe he knows that. http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...showtopic=1637 Pssssst roxy? You forgot to mention marxists and degenerates.....
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154

17th December 2006, 12:36 PM	#50
ConspiRaider Writer of Nothingnesses Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 11,156	Originally Posted by Wizard How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight? Try this one then. Go to an Indy car race. Get down to track level, about halfway down the straightaway. Stand as close to the fence as you can. Feel the sound, power and *SPEED* of those cars roaring down the straightaway as they pass your position. Awesome. When Flight 93 hit the ground, it was travelling at more than twice the speed of the fastest Indy car on the longest straightaway.

17th December 2006, 12:40 PM	#51
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479	Originally Posted by ConspiRaider Try this one then. Go to an Indy car race. Get down to track level, about halfway down the straightaway. Stand as close to the fence as you can. Feel the sound, power and *SPEED* of those cars roaring down the straightaway as they pass your position. Awesome. When Flight 93 hit the ground, it was travelling at more than twice the speed of the fastest Indy car on the longest straightaway. I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep. Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93.
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479

17th December 2006, 12:43 PM	#52
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Central New Jersey Posts: 7,032	Originally Posted by ConspiRaider Try this one then. Go to an Indy car race. Get down to track level, about halfway down the straightaway. Stand as close to the fence as you can. Feel the sound, power and *SPEED* of those cars roaring down the straightaway as they pass your position. Awesome. When Flight 93 hit the ground, it was travelling at more than twice the speed of the fastest Indy car on the longest straightaway. ok heres a video of a car going 267MPH as viewed from behind. imagine twice this speed hitting the ground. its towards the end of the video but i think you will get the picture. I know shameles plug i crew on such a car.
	Last edited by A W Smith; 17th December 2006 at 12:59 PM.

17th December 2006, 12:44 PM	#53
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817	Originally Posted by Wizard I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep. Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93. Start your own thread about it.
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817

17th December 2006, 12:44 PM	#55
Levantine Student Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 29	Originally Posted by Wizard Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93. No you wont. Experience tells you will find another way to "question" the evidence. Evidence only means something to you folk if it happens to support your position. That's why you cling to the conspiracy theory - the preponderance evidence is against you, but you cherry pick anyway.
Levantine Student Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 29

17th December 2006, 12:45 PM	#56
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817	Originally Posted by Wizard How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight? It took me 5 seconds to find one on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkrsDpW6ly4
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817

17th December 2006, 12:46 PM	#57
Arkan_Wolfshade Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 7,154	Originally Posted by Wizard I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep. ... Show your work supporting this statement, or retract it as being nothing more than your non-authoritative opinion.

17th December 2006, 12:46 PM	#58
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by sat556 So it's their own take? I do hope that's the explanation for the dodgy audio i was wondering why ron showed th ePM book to the wrong camera, lol Originally Posted by Wizard How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight? whats the point of saying superman is "faster than a speeding bullet" even if people havent SEEN a bullet they still have an idea that its pretty darn fast Originally Posted by Wizard I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep. im sure you have some sort of proof to back that up Quote: Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93. whats the point? it wont convince the truthers, they look at all the evidence out there, dismiss it all as fake, then say theres no evidence they couldnt pull their logic into a tighter circle if they tried
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

17th December 2006, 12:47 PM	#59
ConspiRaider Writer of Nothingnesses Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 11,156	Originally Posted by Wizard I don't care if the plane was doing Mach 3, it couldn't bury itself 25 feet ondergound and leave a crater about 10 feet deep. Show us the 95% of the plane that was recovered and we will shut up about flight 93. Oh? Are you making that statement based on your storehouse of knowledge gained as an onsite jet crash investigator? Or, is this just what you "feel"? Reassembling a crashed jet is a very painstaking, time-consuming, labor-intensive undertaking. Expensive too. Such an activity proceeds when, all things considered, it is deemed a worthy venture. Despite the difficulty. To determine WHY an aircraft crashed when there is no other reliable methodology to draw upon. But we KNOW why Flight 93 crashed. No mystery.
	Last edited by ConspiRaider; 17th December 2006 at 12:55 PM.

17th December 2006, 12:52 PM	#61
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,986	Originally Posted by Pardalis It took me 5 seconds to find one on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkrsDpW6ly4 Of all those shots, the apple at the beginning is most like the ground. Pay attention to the size of the entry wound. Flight 93 could not penetrate the ground, so all of that expulsive force was contained in the ground.
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,986

17th December 2006, 12:54 PM	#62
ConspiRaider Writer of Nothingnesses Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 11,156	Originally Posted by A W Smith ok heres a video of a car going 287MPH as viewed from behind. imagine twice this speed hitting the ground. its towards the end of the video but i think you will get the picture. I know shameles plug i crew on such a car. Nice find, Smitty, that's pretty awesome. I think it was 267 MPH? Wow. And to think that Flight 93 was moving more than twice as fast when it impacted...

17th December 2006, 12:56 PM	#63
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Central New Jersey Posts: 7,032	you are aware that the crash site was a landfill correct? Its not like the plane hit shale or as we call it in the industry "undisturbed earth" You do know that not all the dirt will be ejected from the crater correct? even if you shoot a 22 rifle into the ground the bullet is well below any crater that is formed. Unless your thinking.. well the wings should certainly prop it up over the hole as it hits the ground. Wizard Tell me your not that foolish.

17th December 2006, 12:58 PM	#64
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479	Originally Posted by uk_dave You're an expert on plane crashes? Why should they show you ANY of the wreckage? You wouldn't understand it even if they did, unless you are an expert on plane crashes. Do you never trust experts? Do you always argue with your doctor? Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions. Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases?
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479

17th December 2006, 01:01 PM	#66
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Central New Jersey Posts: 7,032	Originally Posted by ConspiRaider Nice find, Smitty, that's pretty awesome. I think it was 267 MPH? Wow. And to think that Flight 93 was moving more than twice as fast when it impacted... yes i just now fixed my typo it was in fact 267mph

17th December 2006, 01:02 PM	#67
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154	Originally Posted by Wizard Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions. Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases? So, do you keep on arguing with doctors until you find one who says what you want to hear? And in other plane crashes the reasons for the crash are unknown and need to be investigated. Finding voice recordings and witness testimony regarding telephone conversations from those on the plane gives a pretty good explanation of what happened. Why recreate the plane from wreckage if it is not considered possible that a bomb or mechanical fault caused the crash? You just want the plane recreated because you don't believe it was that plane. Well, tough. Your personally incredulity does not outweigh other peoples professional and investigative integrity.
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154

17th December 2006, 01:05 PM	#68
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by Wizard Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions. Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases? unlike other plane crashes this one was known to be a criminal act from the beginning, so it was under FBI juridiction from the beginning
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

17th December 2006, 01:10 PM	#69
Spins Muse Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 702	Originally Posted by Wizard Gravy said 40 degrees didn't he? One of the eye-witnesses said an almost 90 degree angle, the FDR recovered at the crash site recorded a 40 degree angle. Are you going to dodge the question?
Spins Muse Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 702	__________________ "One shouldn't be surprised that the results of the calculations don't square with reality." - M. Magnan

17th December 2006, 01:11 PM	#70
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154	Quote: Killtown further spews: QUOTE (thehighwaymanq @ Dec 17 2006, 07:28 PM) i wanna see KT vs. Mark Roberts in a flight 93 debate i would pay for that If he wasn't such a pr*ck, I would and I'd DESTROY him. Btw, he thinks Val McClatchey is a "9/11 victim"! :lol: :lol: :lol: I'd like to see killy and gravy in a videotaped debate...only condition being killy can't wear a mask or be filmed in silhouette.
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 8,154

17th December 2006, 01:14 PM	#71
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 28,209	Originally Posted by Brainster Wow, maybe Dylan really is humble! Starting at about 6:45: I'm starting to wounder if he is suffering from an attack of intellectual honestly. Or rather he's reaching the point where the doubethink is causeing him problems.

17th December 2006, 01:15 PM	#72
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479	Originally Posted by Spins One of the eye-witnesses said an almost 90 degree angle, the FDR recovered at the crash site recorded a 40 degree angle. Are you going to dodge the question? So which was it and why did you choose the one that suited you more?
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479

17th December 2006, 01:15 PM	#73
David Wong Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,773	Host: "Now, many critics have accused the Bush administration of ignoring warnings prior to the 9/11 attacks about Islamic terrorism. Do you think that's fair?" Bermas and Dylan: "Oh, absolutely, absolutely." Does somebody have a gif of a smiley's head exploding? Because I need it here. Talking about wanting to have your cake and eat it too. "Bush ignored warning signs that the 9/11 attacks were coming from Islamic terrorists! Also, Bush performed the attacks! And the Islamic terrorists didn't attack! So he ignored the warnings about the attacks that didn't happen and that he actually performed himself!!!!!"

17th December 2006, 01:17 PM	#74
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 26,120	Originally Posted by Wizard How is that going to help people visualise the speed of a plane when noone has ever SEEN a bullet in flight? I have seen bullets in flight! You do not shoot guns much! You need to research stuff more! The plane hit fast and got buried, like many Air Force accidents. Better research may help you understand what others are talking about. But Bermas is so bad at research. Many accidents look like flight 93 when the hit at high speed. Sorry, but you are wrong.

17th December 2006, 01:20 PM	#75
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 26,120	Originally Posted by Wizard Yes doctors are often wrong. Thats why people seek second opinions. Why not show us the wreckage? They showed us other plane wreckage in other cases? I have seen other plane crashes. Flight 93 looks like a high speed crash, it is hard to tell if it was 40 or 90 degrees, either has the same effect in general! Now you find the crashes. Good luck, with your research capabilities we may never see you (based on your statements here so far) again.

17th December 2006, 01:20 PM	#76
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479	Originally Posted by beachnut I have seen bullets in flight! You do not shoot guns much! You need to research stuff more! The plane hit fast and got buried, like many Air Force accidents. Better research may help you understand what others are talking about. But Bermas is so bad at research. Many accidents look like flight 93 when the hit at high speed. Sorry, but you are wrong. Could you find me a case where a plane buries itself underground like Flight 93 is supposed to have done?
Wizard Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 479

17th December 2006, 01:20 PM	#77
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817	Originally Posted by David Wong Host: "Now, many critics have accused the Bush administration of ignoring warnings prior to the 9/11 attacks about Islamic terrorism. Do you think that's fair?" Bermas and Dylan: "Oh, absolutely, absolutely." Does somebody have a gif of a smiley's head exploding? Because I need it here. Talking about wanting to have your cake and eat it too. "Bush ignored warning signs that the 9/11 attacks were coming from Islamic terrorists! Also, Bush performed the attacks! And the Islamic terrorists didn't attack! So he ignored the warnings about the attacks that didn't happen and that he actually performed himself!!!!!" Troofers are a little racist. They claim Muslim extremists aren't capable of carrying out a plan like 9/11. According to them, they're too stupid, "low IQ" as Bermas said, so they need help from the big US of A...
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 25,817

17th December 2006, 01:27 PM	#79
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 6,354	Originally Posted by Wizard Could you find me a case where a plane buries itself underground like Flight 93 is supposed to have done? Find a case where a plane crashed into the ground at 500+ mph and you will have your answer. Most plane crashes are at much lower speeds.
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 6,354