United 93

Thanks Mvpel

The flite dynamics you quoted 600mph for an aircraft rated for 590 peeling off an engine strikes me as unlikely. Still thats why I would like to see the video. Interesting thats unavailable. You wondered why people tend to believe wacky theories. The answer is simple, when the .gov hides info for poorly explained reasons or out right lies about them, conspiracy theories tend to spring up. Solution, apply sunlight. I was surprised you didn't question my assertion about FL800 with rocket fuel consistent with an antiaircraft missile embedded in the aircraft interior or the FBIs lab conclusion about fuel detonation at that altitude.
 
The use of scientific FACTS, such as the laws of physics and common sense has never appealed to those who are incapable of believing that there's not a mysterious government/commie conspiracy behind every event.

An engine's shearing off in an uncontrolled dive just isn't as "exciting" for the John Birch types as fantasizing about the actions of the Trilateral Commission in their efforts to rule the world. Gimme a break!

The internet airheads also are convinced that the flight that hit the Pentagon didn't hit the Pentagon.
 
I'm glad were getting into Science and Physics

I think if we were to check with an aeronautical engineer, we would find that engine mounts are stressed for an uncontrolled dive. The video I am looking for should show actual velocities and directions on the recording. If there was a good analysis that showed the engine having sheered off, no problem. Thats the way to deal with wacko conspiracy theories.
Somebody once said," When you think you've found the truth, you stop looking for it"
Still no takers on the rocket fuel embedded in interior of FL-800, come one folks thats a fairly wild accusation isn't it? So why hasn't at least one person asked for a cite? Must be painful shifting your paradigm. But I thought thats what science and physics was about.
 
Ok, first thing, the whole"bush blew up the towers and flight 93 landed safely" is a totally seperate topic from flight 93 being shot down. If you watch "loose change" and belive what a stoned college student tells you I'm not going to argue.

Now, A NG airwing out of DC got approval from chain of command (VP Cheney) to take out what was at that time a terrorist weapon headed for the capital. The VP gave that approval according to HIS OWN STATEMENTS. This is stuff that is not disputed, it's not "nut job ranting" and it's in the 9/11 commission report. (BTW I think personal attacks on anyone in this forum no matter their views are out of line). He was also, for sometime, apparently under the impression that flight 93 had been shot down, again according to his own statements. He later stated that he had been mistaken or misinformed, which of course is entirely possible. All of this is public knowlege, what is not is what went on in the Military District of Washington Emergency Command Center on 9/11 where any order to take out big jet would have come through. And that's classified:cool:
 
Blackwater, thank you. I was hoping not to have to shut this down because of thread veer.

Regarding what you posted, I don't have a single problem if in fact Flaight 93 was shot down. It doesn't detract from the actions of the civilians aboard the plane in the least.

My personal thoughts were always the the plane was shot down. It makes much more sense to me, when considering the crash site. It is probably something that we may never know for sure.
 
Keeping a secret such as the shooting down of Flight 93 isn't nearly as likely as the "accepted" scenario that the plane just crashed while there was an attempt being made to commandeer the cockpit.

In order to logically answer the assertion that there was "rocket fuel embedded....blah, blah, blah," we'd have to first believe the assertion, which I don't. I'm perfectly willing to accept that Flight 93 wasn't shot down and that the problems with the central fuel tank that were discovered in the flight that crashed in the ocean, with the resultant recalls and modifications by the plane's manufacturer.

Believe what you wish. All we're doing is making taps on a keyboard and vibrations in the air...not amounting to anything much at all. ;)
 
Thanks Ausse

I do indeed need to provide some cites for my assertions re: rocket fuel and central fuel tank. I'm going to have to go back and find them manually since my laptop died on me. I'll get back to you on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top