Split Thread What happened to Flight 93?

RedIbis said:
Where did I say there were no hijackers?
Click to expand...

Well since you don't believe a plane crashed in the Pentagon and in Shanksville, those two flights had to go somewhere.

Please, at least show a little consistency in your theories.
 
Pardalis said:
Well since you don't believe a plane crashed in the Pentagon and in Shanksville, those two flights had to go somewhere.

Please, at least show a little consistency in your theories.
Click to expand...

Contesting whether Flight 93 crashed into that ditch in Shanksville has little to do with whether or not terrorists hijacked those planes. You understand that right?
 
RedIbis said:
Contesting whether Flight 93 crashed into that ditch in Shanksville has little to do with whether or not terrorists hijacked those planes. You understand that right?
Click to expand...

No, actually I don't.

Please explain.

They hijacked the planes and flew them where? There were no other plane crashes that day.
 
Last edited:
Pardalis said:
No, actually I don't.

Please explain.

They hijacked the planes and flew them where? There were no other plane crashes that day.
Click to expand...

Are you that much of an absolutist that you can't conjure up any other possibilities if Flight 93 does not crash into that ditch?
 
RedIbis said:
Are you that much of an absolutist that you can't conjure up any other possibilities if Flight 93 does not crash into that ditch?
Click to expand...

Since UA93 did "crash into that ditch," there is no need to think of any other possibilities.
 
Red, it's not really absolutism, but what we have here is a finite number of planes, and a finite number of passengers.

If we both agree that the laws of physics can't be broken, you have to account for where they went.
 
RedIbis said:
Are you that much of an absolutist that you can't conjure up any other possibilities if Flight 93 does not crash into that ditch?
Click to expand...

It may have become self-aware and set up a kiosk on Canal Street making balloon animals.

It didn't, so I'm not bloody well going to look for it there.

Given that no evidence of any kind exists to suggest it did anything but plow into the ground at Shanksville, looking for it in other places seems like a bit of a wasted effort, wouldn't you agree?
 
So we have Saudi patsy hijackers, who hijacked the planes (so therefore not patsies, since they really are hijackers :boggled:), but they didn't crash the planes and instead flew them somewhere never to be found again.

Is that pretty much it, Red?

And why did they hijack the planes to begin with?
 
Last edited:
Pardalis said:
So we have Saudi patsy hijackers, who hijacked the planes (so therefore not patsies, since they really are hijackers :boggled:), but they didn't crash the planes and instead flew them somewhere never to be found again.

Is that pretty much it, Red?

And why did they hijack the planes to begin with?
Click to expand...

the hijackers only thought they were flying the planes
you know
like those cute lil NASA monkeys :D
 
RedIbis said:
Are you that much of an absolutist that you can't conjure up any other possibilities if Flight 93 does not crash into that ditch?
Click to expand...

Please Red, here is another direct question, which you say you always answer...

Please provide us with your best description of what happened on 9/11, howit was done, and who carried it out.

I think it would be interesting to see your ideas, your "conjurings" that put all the pieces in place...since you do not believe the official account, which fits so nicely.

TAM:)
 
RedIbis said:
Are you that much of an absolutist that you can't conjure up any other possibilities if Flight 93 does not crash into that ditch?
Click to expand...

What you are looking for would be in the fiction section, over there ---------->.
 
RedIbis said:
Contesting whether Flight 93 crashed into that ditch in Shanksville has little to do with whether or not terrorists hijacked those planes. You understand that right?
Click to expand...


What is your point given that we know that 19 hijackers grabbed 4 planes . One of them was Flight 93 and they crashed it into Shanksville.
 
BigAl said:
What is your point given that we know that 19 hijackers grabbed 4 planes . One of them was Flight 93 and they crashed it into Shanksville.
Click to expand...

If you concider the 360 degree of twooferism then RedIbis is at about 290 again. Should be back to 2005 in just under a week or so then start all over again.
 
RedIbis said:
Are you that much of an absolutist that you can't conjure up any other possibilities if Flight 93 does not crash into that ditch?
Click to expand...

Hang on a sec...are we supposed to use our imaginations to determine what happened in Shanksville, or to figure out what YOU BELIEVE happened in Shanksville?

Why don't you just tell us what you believe, and we'll decide if it's reasonable.
 
T.A.M. said:
Please Red, here is another direct question, which you say you always answer...

Please provide us with your best description of what happened on 9/11, howit was done, and who carried it out.

I think it would be interesting to see your ideas, your "conjurings" that put all the pieces in place...since you do not believe the official account, which fits so nicely.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

I answer sincere, direct questions, not unrealistic requests for hundreds of pages of speculation. As you guys say, "that's so 2006."
 
Why don't you just tell us what you believe, and we'll decide if it's reasonable.
Click to expand...

Sounds like fun. Then we get to ask the questions.

Have it ever been like that? In the early days of thrutherism?
 
RedIbis said:
I answer sincere, direct questions, not unrealistic requests for hundreds of pages of speculation. As you guys say, "that's so 2006."
Click to expand...

Do you accept the fact that Flight 93 was hijacked and flown into the ground at Shanksville?

YES [ ]
No [ ]

It's a sincere and direct.
 
RedIbis said:
I answer sincere, direct questions, not unrealistic requests for hundreds of pages of speculation. As you guys say, "that's so 2006."
Click to expand...

No no no no no Red. You use the same tactic as all twoofers.

You Pose a question or conspiracy conundrum.

You Pause for awhile to see what response you get.

Then your supposed to Pounce with a diffinitive 'smoking gun' answer to convince us.

Unfortunately, all twoofers fail at the Pounce stage because you have nothing. Never will.
 
BigAl said:
Do you accept the fact that Flight 93 was hijacked and flown into the ground at Shanksville?

YES [ ]
No [ ]

It's a sincere and direct.
Click to expand...

False choice fallacy. There are other possibilities, this being just one:

C - Flight 93 was hijacked but wasn't flown into the ditch
 
RedIbis said:
False choice fallacy.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. The question is whether you accept that the flight was hijacked and flown into the ground. Either (a) you accept that as a correct summary of events, in which case the answer is "Yes", or you doubt or question it, in which case the answer is "No", or you believe it to be incorrect, in which case the answer is again "No". If, for example, you believe that the aircraft was hijacked but may not have been flown into the ground, then the answer is "No", because you do not accept that the plane was both hijacked and flown into the ground.

It's interesting, by the way, that you've substituted the word "ditch" for the word "ground", thereby giving a false impression that the impact crater was a pre-existing feature.

Dave
 
RedIbis said:
False choice fallacy. There are other possibilities, this being just one:

C - Flight 93 was hijacked but wasn't flown into the ditch
Click to expand...

Question/conundrum posed.

Pause...............................................................................:rolleyes:
 
RedIbis said:
False choice fallacy. There are other possibilities, this being just one:

C - Flight 93 was hijacked but wasn't flown into the ditch
Click to expand...

But it did crash in Shanksville. 100% of the evidence points to this.

Anyway here are some questions that you will no doubt ignore:

Did UA 93 crash in Shanksville?

If no, then:

How did remains from every person aboard get at the scene?

How did the FDR and CVR get there?

Why does RADAR data track the plane from Newark to Shanksville?

Why do eyewitnesses report a plane crashing in the area?

Why does nobody who was at the scene investigating express any doubts as to what happened?

Why doesn't United Airlines question what happened?

How many people do you think would be required to be in on it in order to pull off, and keep covered up such an insane stunt as faking the crash of a jetliner?
 
Dave Rogers said:
No, it isn't. The question is whether you accept that the flight was hijacked and flown into the ground. Either (a) you accept that as a correct summary of events, in which case the answer is "Yes", or you doubt or question it, in which case the answer is "No", or you believe it to be incorrect, in which case the answer is again "No". If, for example, you believe that the aircraft was hijacked but may not have been flown into the ground, then the answer is "No", because you do not accept that the plane was both hijacked and flown into the ground.

It's interesting, by the way, that you've substituted the word "ditch" for the word "ground", thereby giving a false impression that the impact crater was a pre-existing feature.

Dave
Click to expand...

If I had answered no, there would be no way to determine which part of his proposition I disagreed with, thus the need for at least a third choice.

Your tedious semantics aside, what's happening here is an attempt to say that if it can be proven Flight 93 was hijacked, then it must have been crashed into the ditch. This is simply not the case. There are many possibilities between hijacking and crashing that absolutists choose to ignore.
 
RedIbis said:
There are many possibilities between hijacking and crashing that absolutists choose to ignore.
Click to expand...

Please name these possibilities.

After you're done coming up with those, please narrow that list down to the ones that have supporting evidence and don't contradict existing evidence.
 
RedIbis said:
If I had answered no, there would be no way to determine which part of his proposition I disagreed with, thus the need for at least a third choice.
Click to expand...

Wrong. There would be the option for you to state which part of the proposition you did not accept, after answering yes or no. Nobody is preventing you from explaining your answer.

RedIbis said:
Your tedious semantics aside, what's happening here is an attempt to say that if it can be proven Flight 93 was hijacked, then it must have been crashed into the ditch.
Click to expand...

No, what's happening here is your usual modus operandi: a statement that you will answer any reasonable question put to you, followed immediately by your evasion of such a question.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Wrong. There would be the option for you to state which part of the proposition you did not accept, after answering yes or no. Nobody is preventing you from explaining your answer.



No, what's happening here is your usual modus operandi: a statement that you will answer any reasonable question put to you, followed immediately by your evasion of such a question.

Dave
Click to expand...

Yep

Pose - Pause.................................................................

Cant Pounce because has nothing
 
dtugg said:
Please name these possibilities.

After you're done coming up with those, please narrow that list down to the ones that have supporting evidence and don't contradict existing evidence.
Click to expand...

The point you're failing to comprehend is that Flight 93 being in the ditch is not contingent upon the hijacking. The hijacking could have occurred but the plane did not have to end up in the ditch. This is the last time I'm going to restate this rather obvious situation. I'm not responsible for the density of obstinate posters.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Wrong. There would be the option for you to state which part of the proposition you did not accept, after answering yes or no. Nobody is preventing you from explaining your answer.



Dave
Click to expand...

Uh, there was no option, that's why I created one.
 
RedIbis said:
The point you're failing to comprehend is that Flight 93 being in the ditch is not contingent upon the hijacking. The hijacking could have occurred but the plane did not have to end up in the ditch. This is the last time I'm going to restate this rather obvious situation. I'm not responsible for the density of obstinate posters.
Click to expand...

Please attempt to take that extra step Red.

Please Pounce with your end game theory with your evidence.
 
RedIbis said:
The point you're failing to comprehend is that Flight 93 being in the ditch is not contingent upon the hijacking. The hijacking could have occurred but the plane did not have to end up in the ditch. This is the last time I'm going to restate this rather obvious situation. I'm not responsible for the density of obstinate posters.
Click to expand...

The start more simply:

Do you believe that UA93 was hijacked? Yes or no?
 
RedIbis said:
The point you're failing to comprehend is that Flight 93 being in the ditch is not contingent upon the hijacking. The hijacking could have occurred but the plane did not have to end up in the ditch. This is the last time I'm going to restate this rather obvious situation. I'm not responsible for the density of obstinate posters.
Click to expand...


What I would like are other possibilities for what ultimately happened to the plane. I will not hold my breath waiting for you to supply them however.

And I am also completely shocked to see that you totally ignored my other questions.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Yes, there was the option, in the sense that you were free to do so. What you didn't do was answer the question, despite your assurance that you would.

Dave
Click to expand...

So when I created a third choice, that wasn't good enough for you. Or do you think that Flight 93's hijacking automatically means that it crashed in the ditch in Shanksville?

You appear smarter than that to me, but I could be wrong.
 
RedIbis said:
Uh, there was no option, that's why I created one.
Click to expand...

Always creating another option.

Given that you clearly ignore the FDR, Radar, DNA etc can you explain where it went or what crashed at Shankville or how and which aircraft took off from Shankville to imitate 93 (given that 93 clearly ended at Shankville).

Its your mind and how it unravels this stuff that interests me Red.
 
RedIbis said:
So when I created a third choice, that wasn't good enough for you. Or do you think that Flight 93's hijacking automatically means that it crashed in the ditch in Shanksville?

You appear smarter than that to me, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

Red, a plane does not automatically end up in a ditch because it has been hijacked. Something between the hijacking and the crashing happened.

Now what do YOU think that something was?
 
RedIbis said:
So when I created a third choice, that wasn't good enough for you. Or do you think that Flight 93's hijacking automatically means that it crashed in the ditch in Shanksville?
Click to expand...

No one anywhere, ever has made a cause and effect argument regarding the hijacking and crash site. Both are supported independently by the body of evidence.

It's incredibly stupid to believe otherwise.

But then again, you believe the Shanksville crash site was staged for some reason, so I guess believing incredibly stupid things is a matter of routine.
 
RedIbis said:
So when I created a third choice, that wasn't good enough for you.
Click to expand...

No, because you didn't indicate which choice was your answer.

Let's try a worked example, shall we? Suppose you ask me whether kinetic energy is conserved or is not conserved in a collision. I reply, "You're ignoring a third possibility, which is that it is conserved in some collisions but not in others." That's all I say. Have I answered the question?

RedIbis said:
You appear smarter than that to me, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

Smart enough to be able to tell that you still haven't answered the question, at least.

Dave
 
stateofgrace said:
Red, a plane does not automatically end up in a ditch because it has been hijacked. Something between the hijacking and the crashing happened.

Now what do YOU think that something was?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. My main concern is that the Shanksville ditch does not appear to contain a 100 ton commercial airliner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom