Originally Posted by RichardPON
Well?
How do you refute things like saying 93 footage was found 6.9 miles away from the crash site, when they showed that the 6.9 miles is the measurement given when taking the most passable road between both sites, rather than the distance as the crow flies?
It's that kind of diabolical research that explains why you lot have no credibility!
You lot? Which lot?
Talk about a strawman argument.
If stuff was found a mile away, where was it? They couldn't find it. Did something fall off while it was diving? Or was it shot down? Nothing was answered. How much do you actually know about the Flight 93 crash sight, witnesses interviewed etc.
PON, show me some tail sections, wing bits, engines.... or do you agree that planes can simply be "absorbed" into the ground?
If you throw a person into the ground at 500 mph, do they simply get absorbed in?
Gets confusing when you listen to eyewitnesses. This guy was at the lake.
"Jim Stop of Somerset was fishing at the Indian Lake marina, about three miles from the crash site, when he looked up and saw the plane overhead.
“I heard the engine whine and scream,” Stop said.
He then heard an explosion and saw a fireball."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt...b/s_12942.html