Monday, July 10, 2006

United 93 Debunked

The genius who brought us the rabbit cage experiment to recreate the World Trade Center fires, and tiny wooden planes being pushed into tiny wooden buildings is back for entertainment value. He now has a detailed scientific analysis of the crash of United Flight 93, which he titles, "Hopefully, My Last Analysis of the Flight 93 Crash". Yeah, we can only hope.

Little Green Footballs even called it the Hilarious Lefty Post of the Day. I must say, the ruled paper was such a classy touch. You can read it here. H/T Shawn in the comments.

40 Comments:

At 10 July, 2006 18:37, Blogger Unknown said...

Kevin Barrett's segment on Hannity and Colmes just wrapped up. Interesting. I have to give Barrett credit for keeping the focus on 9/11.

It would have be beneficial if Fox showed any WTC 7 video.

I have to say it was nice to hear Hannity silenced to some degree by Barrett's talking over him.

 
At 10 July, 2006 18:46, Blogger CHF said...

What about option C: bounce along the ground like my toy plastic airplane when I throw it out the window.

 
At 10 July, 2006 19:10, Blogger Alex said...

Your plane wasn't constructed out of rabbit wire, so it doesn't count.

 
At 10 July, 2006 19:19, Blogger default.xbe said...

anyone else notice in his B picture the tail is parallel to the wings? i wonder how his "scientific" analysis accounts for this twisting

 
At 10 July, 2006 19:28, Blogger James B. said...

i wonder how his "scientific" analysis accounts for this twisting


There must be some bug in the CAD software he was using.

 
At 10 July, 2006 19:34, Blogger Murdervillage said...

anyone else notice in his B picture the tail is parallel to the wings? i wonder how his "scientific" analysis accounts for this twisting

He forgot to explain that the plane burrowed into the ground by corkscrewing. I think it's entirely reasonable to state that the tail section should have been intact after the plane struck the ground at nearly 600 mph. To those of you who think the plane should have broken into tiny pieces, do you think the earth is covered with explosives? By that logic, when a tree falls, it should explode into tiny pieces!

 
At 10 July, 2006 20:05, Blogger Chad said...

Honestly.... Are we to take serious a man who can't even draw a straight horizon on lined notebook paper?

This guy reminds me of my sister when she was a toddler. Mom would always go out and buy these expensive toys proven to make children happy, but she was just pleased as punch to chill with some Tupperware and a wooden spoon.

It's like, why waste money on things like computer models, engineering degrees, forensic analysis, etc... when all you really need is some chickenwire, a mechanical pencil, and the remnants of your 3rd grade TrapperKeeper.

 
At 10 July, 2006 20:18, Blogger shawn said...

I hope this guy never stops, the comments people are leaving on his blog are wicked hilarious.

 
At 10 July, 2006 20:35, Blogger Avery Dylan said...

Like, hey man, you can learn a lot I men from this stuff, I even have a friend who is in charge of a Gorilla Group of Monkeys and Penguins, but like I'm not sure if Gorrilla's are monkeys or not, cause, like you know if a chimp isn't a monkey, like what is a monkey - it's just common sense, you know, I mean if it looks like a monkey, and well, it smells like a monkey, well then, there's no way its not a monkey, but its just disinformation about being a monkey, hey like you know, I'll put my man Jason on that cause if there's anyone who know monkeys, its like I mean, my man Jason.

Even if its only secondary.

 
At 10 July, 2006 20:39, Blogger undense said...

LOL. Proof that the CT kids get their physics knowledge from Roadrunner cartoons.

 
At 10 July, 2006 20:39, Blogger Killtown said...

What is halarious is those who think a 155ft plane disappeared underground, wings and tail section included, with 1,000's of gals of fuel still on board then it managed to spit out a little bit of scrap parts, human remains, and fuel up and over the little service road and into the forest which was at a very odd angle for it to do that.

And don't forget that the entire plane that went underground burrowed further than one of it's engine! Ya know, the one that even shocked "bg".

 
At 10 July, 2006 20:57, Blogger Murdervillage said...

Killtown, I'm glad you're here. People are harrassing me about where your interviews with the on-scene people are. You said you did 30 or 40 of them. Please tell me where to find them!

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:04, Blogger shawn said...

What is halarious is those who think a 155ft plane disappeared underground, wings and tail section included, with 1,000's of gals of fuel still on board then it managed to spit out a little bit of scrap parts, human remains, and fuel up and over the little service road and into the forest which was at a very odd angle for it to do that.

That's not exactly how it happened, Killtown, but I'm not surprised you got it totally wrong once again.

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:09, Blogger Killtown said...

Shawn said...That's not exactly how it happened

Well please, what did I say that wasn't accurate.

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:21, Blogger shawn said...

Well, first, the plane didn't "disappear".

Of course you don't understand how explosions work - wonder where the Flight 77 tail went, do we?

Hell, that's more "scrap" then we find on the Pentagon lawn

That doesn't look like a lot of metal to you? I've seen pictures of crash sites with less.

And how was the angle odd?

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:24, Blogger shawn said...

than*

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:29, Blogger debunking911 said...

This is what killtown calls evidence. As if airliners can ONLY hit the ground one way. It can't come in at an angle, no, that has to be man made. Yeah, the MIB placing small parts around in a massive cover up is more believable. And what happened to the actual airliner then? Who cares? LOOK AT THE HOLE!!! Heh! And you wonder why people laugh.

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:48, Blogger Murdervillage said...

I believe killtown. He said he actually talked to the first responders and investigators in Shanksville, and they denied that any evidence of the plane or people were found.

I think most of you critics are new at thisl Killtown has been researching for a long time.

Killtown, when you get a chance, can you throw me those links to your interviews? Please?

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:53, Blogger Murdervillage said...

This government pdf is full of faked evidence about flight 93.
http://www.epa.gov/region7/news_events/events/proceedings/lepc-terc_conference_august2005/Plenary/flight93.pdf

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:55, Blogger Killtown said...

1) Shawn said...Well, first, the plane didn't "disappear".
2) Of course you don't understand how explosions work - wonder where the Flight 77 tail went, do we?
3) Hell, that's more "scrap" then we find on the Pentagon lawn
4) That doesn't look like a lot of metal to you? I've seen pictures of crash sites with less.
5) And how was the angle odd?


1) It disappeared underground (allegedly).
2) UA 93 didn't explode if is disappeared underground.
3) That obvious planted scrap? Again, found in the forest.
4) Yes, just like the Coroner described..."the smoking crater looked, he says, 'like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it.'"
5)It's like you running straight and your backpack flies off to your right.

 
At 10 July, 2006 21:58, Blogger Pat said...

James, there is apparently a post out there where Spooky911 does his rabbit fencing experiment, but this time he tries shooting little plane-like objects with a slingshot. I came across mention of it at DU today.

 
At 10 July, 2006 22:02, Blogger Killtown said...

debunking911, what angle did 93 crash at, 45 or nearly 90? Those are the two reports given.

And aren't you the one who said there were 2 craters?

 
At 10 July, 2006 22:07, Blogger Murdervillage said...

Killtown, I hate to be a bother, but can you at least give us a summary of who you talked to from the flight 93 site and what they said?

 
At 11 July, 2006 02:46, Blogger JPSlovjanski said...

I am holding out for when these "scientists" start writing their theories down on bar napkins or with crayons. Maybe someone here with publishing skills can make a fun cut-and-paste worksheet that would allow them to construct their theories. Let them use some gliter and elbow macaroni too.

 
At 11 July, 2006 03:24, Blogger apathoid said...

killtown,

In case you dont see my post in the forum, I'll duplicate it here.

United 93 Crater

United 585 Crater

United 93 Debris

United 585 Debris

How come only a few pieces of debris survived the impact of UA 585s "crash"? Isnt that suspicious? Why didnt that one section get burned if there was an explosion, its clearly white with UAs cheatline visible..

I think it was planted. Where is the rest of the plane??

You need to start explaining why these crash scenes are so similar if one is real and one is obviously a fake.
Also, where is the tail from UA 585. I want to see that tail. No tail = no plane = no crash. So, lets see it...

Also, I'd like to hear the reason they planted debris several miles away. Care to explain that, in detail?
Did they rent a boat and then go out onto a lake 2 miles away from the crash site just to distribute a few aluminum scraps ??
Explain...

 
At 11 July, 2006 03:49, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

I'm with murdervillage (whose tenacity is quite devestatingly Speaking Truth to killtown).

Where are those 30-40 incriminating and Truther vindicating eyewitness interviews we were told about?

They don't exist - that's where. They never happened. "killtown" made this assertion up, and continues studiously to ignore all requests to substantiate it.

And another 9-11 CT whackjob bites the dust.

 
At 11 July, 2006 04:01, Blogger Murdervillage said...

I don't want to seem to be criticizing Killtown! His research is awesome! I just think he's shy or something. There is absolutely no reason to think he's not telling the truth.

The flight 93 site was by far the smallest in terms of the number of people on the scene, and still there were over 1100 people there from 74 agencies and organizations, from the Shanksville Volunteer Fire Department to coroner Wally Miller to hundreds of FBI investigators. Just look at the list of first responders from that PDF I listed earlier!

So, it's not as if there's a shortage of witnesses to communicate with, and if Killtown says he's done that, and that if they say there was no plane or human remains there, I believe him 100%. I wonder if he has a book deal or something that precludes him from sharing this info.

Killtown?

 
At 11 July, 2006 05:28, Blogger Good Lieutenant said...

Bwahaha!

 
At 11 July, 2006 06:39, Blogger debunking911 said...

1) It disappeared underground (allegedly).

It what any other airliner would do hitting loose earth. Heavy pieces dug in.

2) UA 93 didn't explode if is disappeared underground.

An out and out LIE. What do you think took out an acre of Forrest!

http://www.september11news.com/AftermathReuters6FieldPenn.jpg

http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/flight93crash.jpg

http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/db_images/db_P200057-11.jpg

3) That obvious planted scrap?

Why make the suggestion unless your purposely coning people. You either have evidence of you don't. And you DON'T. First you say it's obvious then you put '?', obviousy like a con man?

Again, found in the forest.

Imagine that? An airliner cashes and debris spreads... How sinister...

4) Yes, just like the Coroner described..."the smoking crater looked, he says, 'like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it.'"

Again, just like the fireman, someone says "It's like" and you jump to "Must be". People describe things all the time which aren't what they were. Case in point, how many people say "It's like" or "As if" when describing a tornado. It's as if a freight train ran through my living room." Did a freight train run through their living room? According to you the quote is evidence it did... Heh!

5)It's like you running straight and your backpack flies off to your right.

Show me evidence the plane was Flying straight. Everyone said the plane was behaving erratic. If you can't produce evidence it was flying straight then stop the lie.

People like you sicken me. People DIED on that fight and you grab on to every web site with every claim as if you KNOW what happened. You cheapen their death because you hate Bush and the war. I hate Bush and the war too but I don't insult the families of the dead by saying they didn't die they way they did.

You didn't do you're own research. I can tell because you have so many easily uncovered lies on your site which are basically rips from other sites. Take McIntyre's report for instance. The question he was asked was if the plane actually hit the building or close to it. Then he replied about the plane not hitting near the building. Why? Because a plane DIDN'T HIT NEAR the building. It HIT the building. McIntyre cleared this up but people like you continue the lie.

You make good peoples lives a living hell with your quote mining politics.

 
At 11 July, 2006 06:41, Blogger Chad said...

I'd be curious to read those interviews as well, KT. It's a slow day here at work.

 
At 11 July, 2006 07:06, Blogger Manny said...

You cheapen their death because you hate Bush and the war.

That's not his motivation. His motivation is that he shares the terrorists' aims of weakening and ultimately destroying the government and institutions of the United States. It is absolutely in his interest to divert attention and blame from the terrorists so that they can continue their work.

 
At 11 July, 2006 07:12, Blogger Unknown said...

Killtown?

Have you squirmed back under your rock? Questions have been asked of you. Do you have an answer?

 
At 11 July, 2006 07:41, Blogger Avery Dylan said...

Like hey man I mean, you have to make a video man, cause, I mean, that's how you turn like gossip into an accusation, I mean, that is as good as evidence.

I mean where would I be if I called it Loose Gossip? I can't spell innuendo without checking I mean it so I like don't like do that, and what would I call it like, pile of innuendoes? Man, like I mean my man Jason like he said that sounded like Italian suppositories, so like, no way, I mean, Loose Change, everybody knows what that is, I mean its like when you are in Seattle, and this kid with an Ipod, and new Rebocks says to you "got any loose change" and I mean you notice he's hangin out in front of the video arcade, not like the diner.

And so when you make a video, and like its not your video, but everybody else's stuff, I mean, you end up asking questions, like Where's the tail? and Where's the luggage, and since you didn't shoot it, you just lifted it, like, you know, Like maybe it was behind the guy who took the picture, or like maybe you only see 3 pictures of 200, or only 30 seconds of video when the guy shot hours, I mean, like the film guys who make films know that, but they don't teach you that at Friendly's

Man, I gotta go work on my image now - got that collar outside the collar thing goin' on I mean, it's exciting.

 
At 11 July, 2006 08:50, Blogger Cassiopeia said...

What's the general consensus amongst the CT crowd about this guy? Surely, surely he's got to be a bit of an embarrassment, no?

 
At 11 July, 2006 10:22, Blogger CHF said...

Cassiopeia,

don't you know the CT rules?

When a CTers says something so fucking stupid that not even fellow CTers can defend it...well that just means the CTer in question is a government spook sent to discredit the rest of the Truth movement.

Some have even said as much about Avery himself.

 
At 11 July, 2006 10:25, Blogger CHF said...

killtown isn't going to answer any of the questions posed here. That's not how CTers operate.

If they actually had to put together a logical narrative of 9/11 the whole story would collapse under the weight of its own absurdity.

Instead CTers just point out what they think are inconsistencies in order to cast doubt on the official story. Thus when wreckage is found they'll ask "where's the tail?" And if that's found they'll move on to a certain seat, etc, etc.

 
At 11 July, 2006 13:29, Blogger Killtown said...

Conspiracy Smasher said...
Killtown?
Have you squirmed back under your rock? Questions have been asked of you. Do you have an answer?


"squirmed back under your rock", LOL!!!

You guys are funny!

I told you "nutbars" (just using your guy's type of language) that I joined SLC's little forum. Feel free to ask me questions there.

 
At 11 July, 2006 14:07, Blogger Alex said...

Show me evidence the plane was Flying straight. Everyone said the plane was behaving erratic. If you can't produce evidence it was flying straight then stop the lie.

To be fair, I think he was suggesting that if the aircraft had gone "straight down", and the wreckage had shot off in any given distance for 2 miles, then the angle would be very, very strange. Which is absolutely correct. Ofcourse, I have no clue where got the idea that the aircraft flew straight down and burried itself in the ground. When you start off with a flawed premise, it's easy to make logical conclusions which are still totaly wrong.

 
At 11 July, 2006 17:06, Blogger shawn said...

I told you "nutbars" (just using your guy's type of language) that I joined SLC's little forum. Feel free to ask me questions there.

...we aren't the nutbars, though.

When you start off with a flawed premise, it's easy to make logical conclusions which are still totaly wrong.

Yes, he doesn't get that the plane didn't go straight down.

 
At 11 July, 2006 17:15, Blogger debunking911 said...

That was my point. It doesn't matter if he said straight down or flying straight. All we know is the plane was flying erratically. It rolled on it's back and plowed into the dirt. That doesn't sound like "Straight down". It was freakin spinning!!! Heh!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home