http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?7.1161

A description of the crash site of UA 93

Several analyses of issues of Flight 93 have casted strong doubts that a plane could have caused the crater. First of all the low altitude seems to make a 90° downward turn impossible (which is needed to explain the crash site).
http://www.team8plus.org/content.php?article.19
Second the size of the crater seems to be too small for a Boeing 757.
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?7.196
And the analysis of phenomena witnessed east and northwest of the crash site seems unexplainable with one plane nor with a simple shoot down scenario:
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?7.168

And another issues concerning the crater strengthen the suspicion that it wasn’t caused by a plane.


The depth of the crater
One official who saw the crash site soon after the crash estimated its depth:

Capt. Frank Monaco:
“The gouge was 8 to 10 feet deep and 15 to 20 feet long, said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police. “
(AP, 9/12/01 e)
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2...91201s69779.htm

Other early accounts about the depth are:
The plane left a crater 20 feet wide and 15 feet deep.
(Plain Dealer, 9/12/01 B)

Reporters said the crater was about 40 feet wide and more than 8 feet deep.
(Los Angeles Times, 9/12/01)

The impact of the crash left a crater estimated by authorities to be about 10 feet deep and 20 feet wide. [/b]
(Cox, 9/12/01 B)

Only one early estimation is higher:
[I]“Pittsburgh's WTAE-TV reporter Michelle Wright toured the crash scene and said that a crater of about 30 to 40 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide and 18 feet deep was created by the crash.”
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/956371/detail.html


So, all in all the estimations of the depth of the crater are 8 – 18 feet.

This is surprising and might be in contradiction to the following facts:
[Human remains were 50 feet deep according to coroner Wallace Miller.
(Edmonton Journal, 3/28/04)

And “much of the wreckage was found buried 20-25 feet below the large crater.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20011116093836/.../15/SHOT15c.htm


And “the cockpit data recorder, one of the so-called black boxes would be excavated fifteen feet into the crater and the cockpit voice recorder at twenty-five feet.”
(Jere Longman: Among the Heroes, 303)

The CDR and the CVR are in the tail of the plane.
Why the are the CDR and the CVR found in to different locations if originally they are both at the same place in the plane?

Let’s resume:
The nose crashed up to 50 feet into the ground.
The tail up to 25 feet.
With the most conservative guess the crater is 18 feet deep.
Therefore we can conclude that at least 7 feet of ground are covering the plane.
How is this possible?
How is it possible that the plane crashed with a big explosion that rose 200 feet into the air and at the same time the plane is covered by no less than at least 7 feet of ground?

See also:
http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/showpost...484&postcount=1


The absence of any big fire
UA 93 was fuelled for a cross country flight. Therefore we can assume that it had still plenty of fuel aboard when it crashed. If you have a look at any photo of the crash site you’ll realize that the crash site is in the middle of a huge meadow that looks pretty dry and next to a forest. All in all an area that is predestined to catch fire easily.



The crash created an explosion that rose 200 feet high.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scene0914p2.asp



But on the photos you see no trace of any important fire.
Even the grass surrounding the crater seems to be as untouched as the Pentalawn.






There are two witnesses who mention raging fire which somehow didn’t leave any traces.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning. There were pieces of fuselage and clothing all over the area, burning, said Peterson. He said he didn't see any debris longer than a couple of feet long.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...erset0911p4.asp

Michael R. Merringer: “Everything was on fire and there was trees knocked down and there was a big hole in the ground”.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/911.call/


Other eyewitnesses support the impression that there was no fire of any importance:
The only witness of the crash tells this:
Lee Purbaugh “ran three hundred yards to the place where the plane had crashed. The field reeked of jet fuel. Trees had been signed, branches were smoldering and underbrush aflame. One of the plane’s tires burned. There was a smoking hole in the ground. But why wasn’t there more fire?”
(Jere Longman: Among the Heroes, 299)

“People who rushed to the smoldering crash site said it smelled of burning fuel and rubber. Several said they could not believe that such a huge plane would leave such an apparently small crater in the ground. John Fleegle, service manager of the Indian Lake Marina, said he noticed bits of clothing, a shirt, underwear, pieces of paper, wiring and a four-foot piece of what appeared to be the aluminum skin of the plane. He said he climbed the roof of a nearby cabin and snuffed out the fire caused by the remnants of a seat cushion.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/national...943e5d9&ei=5070

“Barron and Phillips drove to the crash scene and found a smoky hole in the ground. A few firefighters had already begun pouring water onto the debris.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

And this even happens the next day:
“The site was still smoldering Wednesday afternoon and investigators said "hot spots" caused by jet fuel had flared up in the early morning hours.”
(Cox News Service, 9/12/01 c)

The question is simple:
Why didn’t the jet fuel cause a much heavier fire?
And if there was no fire how could the plane have basically vaporized?


Jet fuel that should have been at the crash site en masse if a plane caused the crater has the characteristic of a very strong smell. It is certainly not a proof but noteworthy that no eyewitness mentioned the strong smell (in their direct accounts). Only a general description by Jere Longman:
“People who rushed to the smoldering crash site said it smelled of burning fuel and rubber.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/national...943e5d9&ei=5070

Tim Lambert visited the crash site as a journalist one month after 911 and he remarks:
“The smell of jet fuel fills my nostrils.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20031231103158/...groundzero.html

Why does nobody remark this on 911 ?


Another physical problem:
The normal physical assumption would be that:
If the plane crashed into a soft ground it would enter deeply but not break up completely.
If the plane crashed into hard ground it would not enter deeply and break apart completely.
But what happened with UA 93 is that it managed to enter 50 feet deep into the ground but at the same time break completely apart.
How can this be explained?

So all in all we now have several indicators that question that a plane possibly could have caused the crater. Therefore it’s time how to have a close look at this crater.
This article will try to establish as close as possible how the crash site of UA 93 actually looked like. This will be done by relaying on eyewitness’ accounts and media accounts.
Every detail later added that doesn’t show up in the eyewitnesses’ accounts nor in the articles of the days right after 911 has of course be seen with suspicion.
Remark this article only deals with the crash site and not with the secondary debris fields at Indian Lake and New Baltimore.


Photos of the crash site:
The lack of photos from the crash site that actually give any idea how the site looked like is very strange. Especially the absence of aerial shots. Helicopters were used to search the site (Pittsburgh Tribune, 9/13/01), yet the only aerial shot we have is the one below.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/emergency/p...img/091201i.jpg

http://home.alamedanet.net/~vajra/sept11/f...93crashsite.jpg

http://hometown.aol.de/rkinet/assets/image...hole3_muell.jpg

http://hometown.aol.de/rkinet/assets/images/noairplane.jpg

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/emergency/p...img/091601a.jpg

(from September 16)

http://usaattacked.com/shank-092201c.jpg

(from September 22)

http://hometown.aol.de/rkinet/assets/images/WDR_Krater.jpg


What witnesses DIDN’T see:

A. A plane

The first thing that catches the reader’s attention is the complete agreement of the eyewitnesses that none of them actually believed that a plane had crashed.

“If they hadn’t told us a plane had wrecked, you wouldn’t have known. It looked like it hit and disintegrated,” Delano said.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12942.html

"It didn't look like a plane crash because there was nothing that looked like a plane …. Just like a big pile of charcoal,” Barron said.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

John Walsh: "When I got there, the plane was obliterated. You couldn't see the cockpit or the wings or nothing."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

Lee Purbaugh: “There was nothing there. Everything was shredded.”
(Among the Heroes, 299)

Nick Tweardy : “You couldn’t see nothing,” said Nick Tweardy, 20, of Stonycreek Township. “We couldn’t tell what we were looking at. There’s just a huge crater in the woods.”
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12940.html

Nina Lensbouer: "But I got there and there was nothing, nothing there but charcoal. Instantly, it was charcoal."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

And also officials state the same:
"We haven't seen anything bigger than a phone book, certainly nothing that would resemble a part of a plane," said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police.
(Cox News Service, 9/12/01 B)

Lyle Szupinka, State Police Major : "If you were to go down there, you wouldn't know that was a plane crash”.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

There is one statement that seems to imply the contrary:
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning. There were pieces of fuselage and clothing all over the area, burning, said Peterson. He said he didn't see any debris longer than a couple of feet long.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...erset0911p4.asp

I have to doubt that Peterson is actually capable of identifying pieces not longer than a couple of feet long as belonging to the plane’s fuselage. This might be more a conclusion a posteriori. My doubts are supported by all other witnesses’ accounts and statements by officials.


B. Bodies

“Peterson said he saw no bodies at the scene, but saw no signs of life, either.”
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/News/957434/index.html

Somebody who saw slightly more:
“He (Dave Fox) saw three chunks of torn human tissue.”
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-re...er/s_90823.html

and somebody with a very trained eye agrees with the above mentioned observation:
“Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy: that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing. "There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling." It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...8¬Found=true

And:
"This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-re...er/s_90823.html


Let us summarize for a second:
Not only the photos fail to show any plane parts or human remains also the eyewitnesses first arriving at the crash site (and officials) fail to see anything that indicates that a plane crashed and that passengers were aboard this plane.


II. What they actually saw:

Let’s now turn to analyse what witnesses actually saw.
Two statements of officials underline that not only a plane was not visible but that actually what was visible inside the crater wasn’t really clear neither:

“He (Coroner Wallace Miller) was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, ‘like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...8¬Found=true

"If you would go down there, it would look like a trash heap," said state police Capt. Frank Monaco. "There's nothing but tiny pieces of debris. It's just littered with small pieces."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

And a very rare close up supports this impression:


"We haven't seen anything bigger than a phone book, certainly nothing that would resemble a part of a plane,” said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police.
(Cox, 9/12/01 B)


Concerning the length of the debris:
“Bits of metal were thrown against a tree line like shrapnel, said state police spokesman Trooper Thomas Spallone of Troop A in Greensburg.
“Once it hit, everything just disintegrated,” he said. “There are just shreds of metal. The longest piece I saw was 2 feet long.””
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12940.html

Charles Sturtz: "The biggest pieces you could find were probably four feet (long). Most of the pieces you could put into a shopping bag, and there were clothes hanging from the trees."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp


Here now a list of things that witnesses managed to identify:

"There was one part of a seat burning up there," Phillips said. "That was something you could recognize."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scenenat4p3.asp

“Jeff Phillips, a salvage yard worker, said he was one of the first to arrive at the crash scene and found, among the shattered debris, a burned shoe and a backless chair from the plane sitting upright on its aluminum track.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/national...943e5d9&ei=5070

“John Fleegle, service manager of the Indian Lake Marina, said he noticed bits of clothing, a shirt, underwear, pieces of paper, wiring and a four-foot piece of what appeared to be the aluminum skin of the plane. He said he climbed the roof of a nearby cabin and snuffed out the fire caused by the remnants of a seat cushion.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/national...943e5d9&ei=5070

“He (Coroner Wallace Miller) couldn't believe the scene. He saw the burnt trees, and some debris smoking in the dirt. He saw half a window frame. He saw shreds of that white cloth they put over the headrests.”
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-re...er/s_90823.html

“The hemlocks caught fire. The jet fuel pooled. The wind played with paper scraps: a Bible page, some bank-machine receipts, the corner of a business card.
(Dave) Fox stepped over a seat back. He saw a wiring harness, and a piston. None of the other pieces was bigger than a TV remote.
He saw three chunks of torn human tissue. He swallowed hard.
(…)
He'd assumed it was an accident. A Cessna, maybe. A spark in the fuel tank. A stuck rudder. He didn't connect it to the other planes, still crashing on cable TV.”
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-re...er/s_90823.html

Most of the debris parts were easily victim to the blowing wind and therefore very small:
“At the same time, the high winds that buffeted the area over the last few days have dislodged additional airplane parts -- seat cushions, wiring, carpet fragments and pieces of metal -- from trees near the crash site.
"It's all aircraft parts, no human remains," Miller said. "We've collected them in 10 recycling bin-sized containers and eventually we'll turn them all over to United."”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...ght931027p5.asp


Let’s stop for a second:
Also the list of debris that was identified by the eyewitnesses is surprisingly small.



We can add to the list of identified objects the evidence that were officially found at the crash site:
Jarrah’s passport.
The hijacker’s letter.
A paper with the phone number of Jarrah’s cousin.


Here now a few statements talking about the bigger debris.

“The tail was a short distance from the rest of the wreckage,” said would-be rescuer Brad Reiman, 19, who lives near Berlin in Somerset County. “It looked like the plane hit once and flopped down into the woods.” The largest piece of wreckage he could identify looked like a section of the plane’s tail, he said.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12940.html

This description is strange for two reasons:
First of all nobody else (Reiman’s account is from September 12) mentioned the tail. And his explanation though convincing it is on the first hand for the presence of the tail a short distance away from the crater has the problem that no photo indicates that the plane actually slided or hit once and flopped down. The grass surrounding the crater full of charcoal is green as the Pentalawn.

Especially important is the following official statement from September 13:
“One of the Boeing 757's engines, nearly intact, was recovered, but aside from that, the largest piece of debris was no larger than a briefcase, Szupinka said.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac3/ContentS...28603-2001Sep14

“The heaviest piece, he said, was a half-ton section of engine fan.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scene0925p2.asp

This of course is an important finding.
Yet, this famous engine was never presented in the media as other small debris was. No photo. This is unfortunate.

First of all it has to be noted that there are many conflicting stories about the details of this finding.

The distance to the crash site:
It was found 2000 yards away. http://web.archive.org/web/20021113183810/...sp?story=323958

But Trooper John F. Marshall said himself:
"The biggest part I found was one of the plane's engines. It was about 600 yards from the crash site itself. I think they took it out with a winch on a bulldozer."
http://www.sharon-herald.com/localnews/rec.../ln100801c.html

And the FBI is quoted stating vaguely that the engine “was found "a considerable distance" from the crater.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20011116093836/.../15/SHOT15c.htm

And was it a part of an engine or the whole engine?
“Among the items was what seemed to be part of an engine, said Lt. Col. Robert Hickes of the state police.”
(Philadelphia Inquirer, 9/13/01)

Yet, Trooper Marshall was convinced:
"The biggest part I found was one of the plane's engines."
http://www.sharon-herald.com/localnews/rec.../ln100801c.html

The Independent called it a “sector of an engine”.
http://web.archive.org/web/20021113183810/...sp?story=323958

and “Philadelphia Daily News” quoted the FBI vaguely:
“the FBI and other authorities have said (…) an engine -- or at least a 1,000-pound piece of one -- was found "a considerable distance" from the crater.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20011116093836/.../15/SHOT15c.htm

Given the fact that the investigators looked through the crash site shoulder to shoulder should the engine not have been found earlier? Why was it never photographed for the public? And especially: Why so much confusion about what was found and how far it was away from the crash site?

On September 15 we have the following news:
“They’ve found the four corners of the plane here, and the thinking is if a projectile had brought it down, there would have been parts of the plane in some other locations,” said Specter.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12952.html

But this seems quite unlikely given the complete destruction of the plane described by numerous first hand accounts. If the pieces of the plane aren’t bigger than a phone book how likely then is it that one can managed to find the corners of the wings not to mention the nose of the plane?

And finally the official statement from September 25:
“FBI spokesman Bill Crowley said that the largest piece of plane recovered was a shred of fuselage skin that covered four windows -- a piece seven feet long from a jetliner that was 155 feet long.
The heaviest piece, he said, was a half-ton section of engine fan.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scene0925p2.asp

First of all: Why did no eyewitness see this piece seven foot long? Moreover this statement contradicts Szupinka’s statement from September 14. How can it be possible that the investigators who looked shoulder to shoulder and with the help of helicopters through the field of the crash site didn’t find this big piece within three days?

The explanation might be that the fuselage was found in the pond that was drained on September 22.
http://web.archive.org/web/20031231103158/...groundzero.html

Though the finding is not mentioned in the news of the draining.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...ronernat3p3.asp

And where exactly is this pound?
It is not visible on any photo.
Apparently the 7 feet long fuselage flew quite far away from the crash site and by coincidence landed in the pound.
So, the strange fact is that the only two bigger part that have been found raise many questions instead of answering them.


The final statement of the FBI:
“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.”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...scene0925p2.asp

To be noted as well:
Strange security measures for the UA 93’s debris were witnessed. Paul Falavolito wrote: “I was told that a team of Navy Seals came in yesterday heavily armed and escorted a truck full of debris out of here.”
http://www.emsmagazine.com/issues/article0017d.html

This is a quit surprising statement given the complete destruction of the plane. And given that coroner Wallace Miller later told a completely different story!
“Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.”
(Edmonton Journal, 3/28/04)
article reprinted here:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/280304_crash.html

To summarize :
Not many recognizable debris parts have been found or seen on the crash site of UA 93.


Human remains:
The first human remains were recovered on September 12 (late):
“Evidence collection teams [ b]late Wednesday recovered the first recognizable human remains [/b]from the crash of United Airlines Flight 93 in Somerset County.”
(Pittsburgh Tribune, 9/13/01)

We don’t know where most of human remains were found. But apparently most of it was outside the crater although it was so small that witnesses didn’t see it.

Here two examples:
“But the shock wave from Flight 93, a few hundred yards away, spewed debris through the woods with such force that it blew out all the windows and doors and shook the foundation on Barry's place. It turned the whole Hoover property into a cemetery where human remains were still being found months later.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...8¬Found=true

And Wallace Miller also mentioned that human remains were found here:
“Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable human remains were in the treetops.”
(Edmonton Journal, 3/28/04)

Remark that as not a single eyewitness nor Wallace Miller himself saw theses human remains on 911 we can assume that the parts must have been very small.

But human remains were also found deep, very deep in the crater:
"We found remains 50 feet deep," he (Wallace Miller) said of the massive crater the plane left on impact.”
(Edmonton Journal, 3/28/04)

Btw not all remains were identified:

“Questions are asked about what to do with a two-kilogram box of unidentified remains.”
(Edmonton Journal, 3/28/04)

The way the human remains was treated deserves a special mentioning:
“The remains from the main crash site have been taken to a makeshift morgue at the Pennsylvania National Guard Armory near the Somerset County Airport. State police escorted a tractor-trailer truck into the back of the armory late yesterday evening, according to a resident wholives nearby.
The lights were turned off briefly as the truck was directed to the rear of the armory. A short time later, the lights were turned on as the police cars and the truck left, said the man who declined to be identified.”
(Pittsburgh Tribune, 9/13/01)

This is the final statement of how much human remains were found:
“As he clinically recounts to them, holding back very few details, the 33 passengers, seven crew and four hijackers together weighed roughly 7,000 pounds. They were essentially cremated together upon impact. 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.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...8¬Found=true

Conclusion:
The crater at Shanksville shows many strange feature:
- Eyewitnesses didn’t believe it was the crash site of a plane.
- Almost total absence of plane’s debris.
- Contradicting accounts concerning the only two bigger debris parts.
- Almost total absence of human remains.
- The almost total absence of fire.
- The extremely small size of the crater.
- The depth of the crater.
- That the plane at the same time entered very deeply into the ground yet broke apart completely.

I think we can draw the conclusion so far that it would have been possible to fake the crash site. There is only one eyewitness who actually saw the plane crashing into the ground: Lee Purbaugh who was on his second day of work.
Yet, before jumping to conclusions I also want to present the problems that would have occurred if the crash site was faked:
The DNA identification. Therefore I’ve written another article dealing with this issues.
The quantity of people being involved in the investigation of the crash site. Therefore see the article dealing with this topic.

You don't see a pic of this "2nd engine" because there was no 2nd engine. This was a small single engine plane. Wingspan of 50-70 (max) feet. The 15-20 crater descriptions are of the crater itself without taking into consideration the wingspan. The eyewitnesses I spoke to said the crater was 15'x10' and about 50' wingtip to wingtip.

Very good work (like always from you)

Once again the official story have it both ways.

The plane burried it selv many meters underground... but at the same time exploded it selv all over the place.

At this point, the flight 93 story is (to me) the most obvious lie of all the 9/11 story (it is even more obvious than Pentagon!)

In my opinion it is all about psychology. The key to the flight 93 part in 9/11... is the hero story of the people who fight back... striked the "terrorist"... and the Goverment did the same in the aftermath.

To me the official 93 story, makes absalout no sense... and I am surprised how unskeptikal the newspapers was (and is) for examble about how debris was found deep into the ground... even the black box in the tail was found many feet under the ground!

But about the DNA... (and I am no kind of expert)... but the words of A. K. Dewdney about Pentagon... makes sense to me.

...
In November of 2001, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) completed a massive study of the DNA of Pentagon victims (Kelly 2001), finding matches between remains and DNA samples allegedly retrieved from victims' homes (gleaned from hairbrushes and other articles of personal use). Although it may well have been the case that matches were expertly made, the weak link in the chain of evidence lies in the collection of samples. DNA technicians would have no way of knowing where all the samples came from. That would be the job of army and FBI personnel that did most of the collecting.

Few people realize how simple it is to obtain tissue samples or body parts clandestinely from morgues, medical school cadaver rooms, any place that dead bodies may be found. Such venues are easily entered by persons who identify the,selves as officials of one kind or another.
A piece of liver or arm tissue complemented by a few hairs, all from the same corpse would be all that's necessary to "identify" a particular person. Would DNA from these different sources match? Of course they would, since they're from the same individual. Hypnotized by the word "match," media types would probably not even realize that "match" does not mean "identify," unless there were independent verification of the source of the samples.
...
physics911.net

I mean ... there is no way to proove that the body parts... or human remains came from Shanksville etc etc.

Kick!

The debris could have been dumped anytime. A Letter from the hijacker? I doubt it.