Setting Up The Flight 93 Crash Scene (Loose Change Forum)

This may be a matter of opinion, but just use your good judgement here. How long do you think it would take to set up a crash scene like the scene of Flight 93? How many man hours would be spent planting all of the debris, burning the trees, and burying stuff up to 30 ft underground? How much time do you think this would take?

I don't know, how long?

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 2 2007, 07:07 PM)

I don't know, how long?

I'm the one asking the question. Use your good judgement and answer it.

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 2 2007, 07:37 PM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 2 2007, 07:07 PM)

I don't know, how long?

I'm the one asking the question. Use your good judgement and answer it.

What part of "I don't know" did you not understand?

Okay, then I have a question:

Which is the more plausible conclusion to be drawn from a site where an airpalne has appeared to crash?

1) That an airplane actually crashed there.

2) That an airplane did not crash there, but instead the site was made to appear as if one did.

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 2 2007, 07:46 PM)

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 2 2007, 07:37 PM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 2 2007, 07:07 PM)

I don't know, how long?

I'm the one asking the question. Use your good judgement and answer it.

What part of "I don't know" did you not understand?

Calm down, Killtown.

QUOTE (johnny karate @ Jan 2 2007, 07:59 PM)

Okay, then I have a question:

Which is the more plausible conclusion to be drawn from a site where an airpalne has appeared to crash?

1) That an airplane actually crashed there.

2) That an airplane did not crash there, but instead the site was made to appear as if one did.

Don't change the subject.

QUOTE (johnny karate @ Jan 2 2007, 07:59 PM)

Okay, then I have a question:

Which is the more plausible conclusion to be drawn from a site where an airpalne has appeared to crash?

1) That an airplane actually crashed there.

2) That an airplane did not crash there, but instead the site was made to appear as if one did.

Do I answer that without seeing the crash scene pics?

So as to not further hijack CharacterZero's thread, this tangent continued here.

The point I'm trying to make here is that a hell of a lot of time was actually spent on the clean-up. The Salvation Army alone states that it dedicated more than 12,000 work hours to cleaning up the scene. And according to Mark Roberts, more than 70 different agencies were involved in the clean-up. Knowing that so much time was spent cleaning up stuff, you'd have to assume that weeks, if not months, had to have been spent setting this scene up.

QUOTE (johnny karate @ Jan 2 2007, 10:57 PM)

So as to not further hijack CharacterZero's thread, this tangent continued here.

Thanks...I didn't mean to sound rude before. Sorry about that.

No problem. ;)

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 02:11 PM)

The point I'm trying to make here is that a hell of a lot of time was actually spent on the clean-up. The Salvation Army alone states that it dedicated more than 12,000 work hours to cleaning up the scene. And according to Mark Roberts, more than 70 different agencies were involved in the clean-up. Knowing that so much time was spent cleaning up stuff, you'd have to assume that weeks, if not months, had to have been spent setting this scene up.

You base this assumption on anything certain? Dumping trash is easy, collecting them back takes a lot of work.

QUOTE (tower @ Jan 3 2007, 05:23 PM)

You base this assumption on anything certain? Dumping trash is easy, collecting them back takes a lot of work.

You know that they found debris up to 30 feet underground, right? Think of that as more than two stories of a building. You can't just dump a bunch of stuff 30 feet underground...there is a considerable amount of digging and work that would need to be done!

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 07:20 PM)

You know that they found debris up to 30 feet underground, right? Think of that as more than two stories of a building. You can't just dump a bunch of stuff 30 feet underground...there is a considerable amount of digging and work that would need to be done!

Prove it without talking someone's word for it. I'll save you the trouble, you can't. You can only take the govt's word for it.

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 3 2007, 09:42 PM)

Prove it without talking someone's word for it. I'll save you the trouble, you can't. You can only take the govt's word for it.

Then why do you talk about debris being buried 30 ft underground on your web page?

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 09:48 PM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 3 2007, 09:42 PM)

Prove it without talking someone's word for it. I'll save you the trouble, you can't. You can only take the govt's word for it.

Then why do you talk about debris being buried 30 ft underground on your web page?

:blink:

Um, cause it's the official story.

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 3 2007, 10:06 PM)

:blink:

Um, cause it's the official story.

You know what I could do? I could ask the people who worked there and find out from them if it actually was 30 feet deep.

But I won't. And you know why? Because none of this matters. I am not about to devote my life to debunking a cause that will never accomplish anything, much like the JFK conspiracy has accomplished nothing. I am a firm believer that JFK's assassination was NOT solely the work of Lee Harvey Oswald, and I strongly believe there was a conspiracy. There is PLENTY of solid evidence there to prove the conspiracy, and yet nobody has been arrested, indicted, or has gotten into any trouble whatsoever for planning the conspiracy. The evidence there is much better than it is here, and hell, there was even a movie (a GOOD movie, mind you) made about it. And still nothing.

I do my research because I think this stuff is interesting. I am a conspiracy buff and I like to read up on conspiracies. In this case, however, I'm an anti-conspiracy buff. It is, at the very most, a hobby. I don't need to work any harder because I know what will become of all of this conspiracy talk, and that is absolutely nothing.

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 10:18 PM)

You know what I could do? I could ask the people who worked there and find out from them if it actually was 30 feet deep.

Please do.

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 4 2007, 02:47 AM)

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 10:18 PM)

You know what I could do? I could ask the people who worked there and find out from them if it actually was 30 feet deep.

Please do.

Why?

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 4 2007, 02:08 PM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 4 2007, 02:47 AM)

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 10:18 PM)

You know what I could do? I could ask the people who worked there and find out from them if it actually was 30 feet deep.

Please do.

Why?

Hey, you were offering it.

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 3 2007, 09:42 PM)

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 07:20 PM)

You know that they found debris up to 30 feet underground, right? Think of that as more than two stories of a building. You can't just dump a bunch of stuff 30 feet underground...there is a considerable amount of digging and work that would need to be done!

Prove it without talking someone's word for it. I'll save you the trouble, you can't. You can only take the govt's word for it.

Wikipedia says the crater is 115' deep.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 3 2007, 10:18 PM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 3 2007, 10:06 PM)

:blink:

Um, cause it's the official story.

You know what I could do? I could ask the people who worked there and find out from them if it actually was 30 feet deep.

But I won't. And you know why? Because none of this matters. I am not about to devote my life to debunking a cause that will never accomplish anything, much like the JFK conspiracy has accomplished nothing. I am a firm believer that JFK's assassination was NOT solely the work of Lee Harvey Oswald, and I strongly believe there was a conspiracy. There is PLENTY of solid evidence there to prove the conspiracy, and yet nobody has been arrested, indicted, or has gotten into any trouble whatsoever for planning the conspiracy. The evidence there is much better than it is here, and hell, there was even a movie (a GOOD movie, mind you) made about it. And still nothing.

I do my research because I think this stuff is interesting. I am a conspiracy buff and I like to read up on conspiracies. In this case, however, I'm an anti-conspiracy buff. It is, at the very most, a hobby. I don't need to work any harder because I know what will become of all of this conspiracy talk, and that is absolutely nothing.

LOL!!!!

I went to Shanksville on 9/11/6 believing the government shot down a 757 airliner and it crashed and burrowed itself into the ground.

By the time I left there that night, having met people that you're going to "choose" not to find and ask for yourself, not only did I know beyond all doubt that it didn't burrow itself into the ground, I knew it wasn't a 757 anymore either.........

If I had the time to go on vacation, I wouldn't spend it digging up information to debunk your arguments and traveling to remote parts of the US that would be no fun at all. You're pretty egotistical if you think I'd do this kind of thing for you.

You know I've never really looked into the flight 93 aspect of 9-11 that much.
I should do really. I really have no idea what to think, I know it wasnt hijacked and the Brave heroic passengers downed it, thats a load of flannel.

Any good sits of reccomendation you wanna throw my way, through PM preferably. as it might clog up this cry-babys thread :P

QUOTE (CharacterZero @ Jan 5 2007, 04:48 PM)

If I had the time to go on vacation, I wouldn't spend it digging up information to debunk your arguments and traveling to remote parts of the US that would be no fun at all. You're pretty egotistical if you think I'd do this kind of thing for you.

For me?

I don't do this for myself. I don't go to Shanksville for myself. I didn't seek out the truth for only myself. You just come here to argue. Neo-Con Nationalist.

QUOTE (mfavcd @ Jan 5 2007, 06:27 PM)

You know I've never really looked into the flight 93 aspect of 9-11 that much.......I know it wasnt hijacked and the Brave heroic passengers downed it, thats a load of flannel.

If you haven't looked into Flight 93 at all, how can you have any authority to say that it wasn't hijacked as the official story states?

Where are the marks in the soft soil where the engines hit?

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 9 2007, 01:12 AM)

Where are the marks in the soft soil where the engines hit?

And thats your evidence?

Because you dont see marks where you expect them to be?

How about providing some EVIDENCE about your theory (whatever that may be) instead of your usual rhetoric.

Oh, I know.

Just asking questions....LOL

QUOTE (TriedandTrue @ Jan 10 2007, 02:10 AM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 9 2007, 01:12 AM)

Where are the marks in the soft soil where the engines hit?

And thats your evidence?

Because you dont see marks where you expect them to be?

How about providing some EVIDENCE about your theory (whatever that may be) instead of your usual rhetoric.

Oh, I know.

Just asking questions....LOL

Don't plan on staying around here long, huh?

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 10 2007, 02:13 AM)

QUOTE (TriedandTrue @ Jan 10 2007, 02:10 AM)

QUOTE (Killtown @ Jan 9 2007, 01:12 AM)

Where are the marks in the soft soil where the engines hit?

And thats your evidence?

Because you dont see marks where you expect them to be?

How about providing some EVIDENCE about your theory (whatever that may be) instead of your usual rhetoric.

Oh, I know.

Just asking questions....LOL

Dont plan on staying around here long, huh?

Oh, you are going to have me banned for disagreeing with you?

Nice.

QUOTE (TriedandTrue @ Jan 10 2007, 02:21 AM)

Oh, you are going to have me banned for disagreeing with you?

Nice.

No, not for disagreeing.

View Full Version: Setting Up The Flight 93 Crash Scene