PDA

View Full Version : Why Was There No Jet Fuel at the Flight 93 Crash Site?



Galileo
09-14-2010, 02:19 PM
Why Was There No Jet Fuel at the Flight 93 Crash Site?

Six days after 9/11, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) began taking soil samples around the Flight 93 crash site, to test for jet fuel, hydraulic fluids, and other hazardous materials. At least three test wells were sunk to monitor groundwater for signs of contamination.

According to the National Transportation Safety Board, Flight 93 had about 37,500 pounds of fuel remaining when it crashed, which was around 77 percent of its fuel load on takeoff. Yet the DEP tests found no evidence of this huge volume of jet fuel at the crash site. Two weeks after the tests began, DEP spokeswoman Betsy Mallison reported that "no contamination has been discovered." She said that, "whether it burned away or evaporated," much of the jet fuel assumed to have spilled at the site "seems to have dissipated."

MORE:

http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-was-there-no-jet-fuel-at-flight-93.html

:lmao

coyotes_geek
09-14-2010, 02:40 PM
It burned away or evaporated. Just like she said. What's the problem?

FromWayDowntown
09-14-2010, 02:42 PM
It burned away or evaporated. Just like she said. What's the problem?

Duh, it's because the plane was flown to a super-secret location, had its passengers offloaded and executed on the spot, and now sits in a hangar there at the location; the lack of jet fuel at the site is conclusive proof that it wasn't destroyed upon impact in a remote field in Western Pennsylvania when the terrorists who hijacked it were ambushed by passengers whose attack was overheard by their loved ones.

johnsmith
09-14-2010, 02:43 PM
I like how you think this lady answering your question merits a :lmao

Wild Cobra
09-14-2010, 02:44 PM
Duh, it's because the plane was flown to a super-secret location, had its passengers offloaded and executed on the spot, and now sits in a hangar there at the location and wasn't destroyed upon impact in a remote field in Western Pennsylvania.
Don't you know. they found thermite instead.

Galileo
09-14-2010, 02:44 PM
It burned away or evaporated. Just like she said. What's the problem?

Really?


According to Jere Longman, "The pungency of unburned jet fuel was so strong that it blistered the lips of investigators." [20]


[20] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 261.

:blah

Wild Cobra
09-14-2010, 02:49 PM
It burned away or evaporated. Just like she said. What's the problem?

Really?



According to Jere Longman, "The pungency of unburned jet fuel was so strong that it blistered the lips of investigators." [20]

Vapors in the air? That has nothing to do with ground testing. If it all evaporated from the intense immediate short term heat, you wouldn't expect it to be in the ground. The heat would go as deep as the fuel could.

There would be quite a bit in the air...

coyotes_geek
09-14-2010, 02:49 PM
Really?





:blah

Nicely done. You've just confirmed that there was jet fuel at the site.

Wild Cobra
09-14-2010, 02:50 PM
Nicely done. You've just confirmed that there was jet fuel at the site.
LOL...

No shit. Why didn't I see that.

Galileo
09-14-2010, 02:58 PM
Nicely done. You've just confirmed that there was jet fuel at the site.

According to the official scientific reports, there wasn't any jet fuel. Jet fuel is always found in the soil after plane crashes. But remember, things are different on 9/11. On that day, the laws of physics don't apply.

Wild Cobra
09-14-2010, 03:03 PM
According to the official scientific reports, there wasn't any jet fuel. Jet fuel is always found in the soil after plane crashes. But remember, things are different on 9/11. On that day, the laws of physics don't apply.
No, laws of physics apply. As the speed of collision increases and vector angles change, so do the results.

coyotes_geek
09-14-2010, 03:06 PM
According to the official scientific reports, there wasn't any jet fuel. Jet fuel is always found in the soil after plane crashes. But remember, things are different on 9/11. On that day, the laws of physics don't apply.

According to you, Jere Longman said there was jet fuel.

Galileo
09-14-2010, 03:33 PM
According to you, Jere Longman said there was jet fuel.

Longman smelled jet fuel, he didn't see it. The jet fuel smell was simulated. Longman is not a qualified expert on jet fuel, but his testimony proves that a fire didn't burn it all up.

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 03:44 PM
Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.

Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.

“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair. Source


"It was low enough, I thought you could probably count the rivets. You could see more of the roof of the plane than you could the belly. It was on its side. There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud." Source


Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.

Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.

"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning. Source


The ensuing firestorm lasted five or 10 minutes and reached several hundred yards into the sky, said Joe Wilt, 63, who also lives a quarter-mile from the crash site. "Jetliner Was Diverted Toward Washington Before Crash in Pa." The Washington Post September 12, 2001


"I just watched with my mouth open as this yellow mushroom cloud rose up just like an atomic bomb over the hill where I like to go hunting," said 72- year-old John Walsh

Barefoot and in his bathrobe, he drove up the dirt road to rescue anyone he could find. There would be nothing he could do.

Debris, including photographs and other papers that survived the fireball, was strewn over a wide area. Residents have spent days collecting it. Source


"When the plane hit, it sounded like something just fell on the roof. Everybody sort of panicked," she said. "I went to the window and saw all this smoke coming up and I just pointed and screamed."-Source


Charles Sturtz, 53, who lives just over the hillside from the crash site, said a fireball 200 feet high shot up over the hill. He got to the crash scene even before the firefighters. Source


Tim Lensbouer, 300 yards away: "I heard it for 10 or 15 seconds and it sounded like it was going full bore." [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01]


Rob Kimmel, several miles from the crash site: He sees it fly overhead, banking hard to the right. It is 200 feet or less off the ground as it crests a hill to the southeast. "I saw the top of the plane, not the bottom." [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, p. 210-211]


Tom Fritz, about a quarter-mile from the crash site: He hears a sound that "wasn't quite right" and looks up in the sky. "It dropped all of a sudden, like a stone," going "so fast that you couldn't even make out what color it was." [St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]


Terry Butler "It dropped out of the clouds." The plane rose slightly, trying to gain altitude, then "it just went flip to the right and then straight down." [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01]

Terry Butler: He sees the plane come out of the clouds, low to the ground. "It was moving like you wouldn't believe. Next thing I knew it makes a heck of a sharp, right-hand turn." It banks to the right and appears to be trying to climb to clear one of the ridges, but it continues to turn to the right and then veers behind a ridge. About a second later it crashes. [St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]


Lee Purbaugh, 300 yards away: "There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head – maybe 50 feet up.... I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived." [Independent, 8/13/02]


Linda Shepley: She hears a loud bang and sees the plane bank to the side. [ABC News, 9/11/01] She sees the plane wobbling right and left, at a low altitude of roughly 2,500 feet, when suddenly the right wing dips straight down, and the plane plunges into the earth. [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01]


Kelly Leverknight in Stony Creek Township of Shanksville: "There was no smoke, it just went straight down. I saw the belly of the plane." It sounds like it is flying low, and it's heading east. [Daily American, 9/12/01, St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]


A witness told WTAE-TV's Paul Van Osdol that she saw the plane overhead. It made a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then made a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashed. Source


Tim Thornsberg, working in a nearby strip mine: "It came in low over the trees and started wobbling. Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees." [WPIX Channel 11, 9/13/01]


Paula Pluta of Stonycreek Township was watching a television rerun of “Little House on the Prairie” when the plane went down about 1,500 yards from her home along Lambertsville Road at Little Prairie Lane.

“I looked out the window and saw the plane nose-dive right into the ground,” she said, barefoot and shaken just 45 minutes after the crash.

The explosion buckled her garage doors and blasted open a latched window on her home, she said.

“It was just a streak of silver. Then a fireball shot up as high as the clouds. There was no way anybody could have survived. I called 911 right away.

“There was no way anything was left,” Pluta added. “There was just charred pieces of metal and a big hole. The plane didn’t slide into the crash. It went straight into the ground. Wings out. Nose down.” Source


Anna R. Fisher: After the crash, another jet went near over to look.
Anna B. Fisher: Yes, we saw it.
Anna R.: I think they knew this plane was not right.
Anna B: We were looking at the smoke cloud when we saw the jets circling up there. Source: Courage After the Crash: Flight 93" by Glenn J. Kashurba. SAJ Publishing, 2002. P. 27

All links to original sources available here:

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 03:46 PM
This is where most of the fuel probably went:

http://bp1.blogger.com/_Zq8c09d5k3c/Rixd8SmeJpI/AAAAAAAAAB0/ayRfxBYbZQk/s400/Shanksville.jpg

coyotes_geek
09-14-2010, 03:49 PM
Longman smelled jet fuel, he didn't see it.

Which only makes sense considering how jet fuel vapor is invisible.


The jet fuel smell was simulated.

Let me guess, there were a bunch of government operatives hiding in the nearby woods hopped up on greasy mexican food and cheap beer taking turns pulling each others fingers.


Longman is not a qualified expert on jet fuel, but his testimony proves that a fire didn't burn it all up.

Which brings us full circle to your original post where you quoted the DEP's spokeperson stating that the jet fuel burned away or evaporated.

Drachen
09-14-2010, 04:03 PM
Longman smelled jet fuel, he didn't see it. The jet fuel smell was simulated. Longman is not a qualified expert on jet fuel, but his testimony proves that a fire didn't burn it all up.

Longman smelled jet fuel vapors? As in evaporation?

mouse
09-14-2010, 04:16 PM
This is where most of the fuel probably went:

So your saying there should still be some left on the soil?

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 04:18 PM
So your saying there should still be some left on the soil?Maybe, maybe not. There's a good chance there wouldn't be measurable amounts in the locations they took samples. In fact, that's exactly what they found.

TeyshaBlue
09-14-2010, 04:20 PM
Maybe, maybe not. There's a good chance there wouldn't be measurable amounts in the locations they took samples. In fact, that's exactly what they found.

I know. Shocking, huh?

Galileo
09-14-2010, 04:22 PM
Maybe, maybe not. There's a good chance there wouldn't be measurable amounts in the locations they took samples. In fact, that's exactly what they found.

Jet fuel is always found at airplane crash sites on land; except on 9/11. On 9/11, it was MAGIC jet fuel.

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 04:24 PM
Jet fuel is always found at airplane crash sites on land.Prove it.

Thanks in advance.

Galileo
09-14-2010, 05:08 PM
Prove it.

Thanks in advance.

You prove it. I have the scientific reports on my side. All you have is magical jet fuel and bogus junk science.

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 05:12 PM
You prove it. I have the scientific reports on my side.Then show us the scientific reports proving there is always liquid jet fuel at every airplane crash site.

TinTin
09-14-2010, 05:17 PM
If they fabricated the crash then why would they put paper there? Wouldn't there be a list of items they would consider putting which can burn off in jet-fueled fire?

Galileo
09-14-2010, 05:19 PM
Then show us the scientific reports proving there is always liquid jet fuel at every airplane crash site.

Show us another crash site without jet fuel traces.

MannyIsGod
09-14-2010, 05:21 PM
Show us another crash site without jet fuel traces.

You used this as proof therefor the burden is on you to show how it is relevant. You saying so doesn't make it so.

TinTin
09-14-2010, 05:22 PM
Show us another crash site without jet fuel traces.

You could settle the debate right now by showing us the scientific reports

u2sarajevo
09-14-2010, 05:22 PM
Was there jet fuel traces at the Pentagon? Oh wait, that's supposedly false too.... what about the WTC buildings? Did they find jet fuel traces there?

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 05:25 PM
Show us another crash site without jet fuel traces.So you can't back up your claim.

Again.

Why do you constantly lie, Rolf?

Wild Cobra
09-14-2010, 05:26 PM
Show us another crash site without jet fuel traces.
There's another possibility. That flight 93 was shot down. This has been my untested hypothesis for some time. maybe both wings were shot off, and heat seeking missiles might do. The remaining plane would have no large volume of fuel left, and drop very well.

I think the government chose to make heroes out of the situation rather than acknowledging they shot it down.

Just a hypothesis though.

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 05:28 PM
There's another possibility. That flight 93 was shot down. This has been my untested hypothesis for some time. maybe both wings were shot off, and heat seeking missiles might do. The remaining plane would have no large volume of fuel left, and drop very well.

I think the government chose to make heroes out of the situation rather than acknowledging they shot it down.

Just a hypothesis though.lol untested

coyotes_geek
09-14-2010, 05:34 PM
Here's another possibility. The plane crashed and the jet fuel burned off or evaporated.

MannyIsGod
09-14-2010, 05:34 PM
Jesus Christ. That is all.

DarrinS
09-14-2010, 05:43 PM
Duh! Everyone knows that Dick Cheney's death ray doesn't leave behind jet fuel.

word
09-14-2010, 05:50 PM
911 truthers are the worst.

Galileo
09-14-2010, 06:09 PM
You used this as proof therefor the burden is on you to show how it is relevant. You saying so doesn't make it so.

Idiots have the burden of proof.

Galileo
09-14-2010, 06:11 PM
Was there jet fuel traces at the Pentagon? Oh wait, that's supposedly false too.... what about the WTC buildings? Did they find jet fuel traces there?

A plane flew over over the Pentagon at low altitude, and a bomb went off at the same time. Military planes hit the towers.

ChumpDumper
09-14-2010, 06:17 PM
Idiots have the burden of proof.Yes, you have the burden of proof. Good to see you finally understand.


A plane flew over over the Pentagon at low altitude, and a bomb went off at the same time. Military planes hit the towers.:lmao

Why would the NWO do that when they already had four passenger jets?

Galileo
09-14-2010, 06:24 PM
Yes, you have the burden of proof. Good to see you finally understand.

:lmao

Why would the NWO do that when they already had four passenger jets?

You believe everything the government says, don't you?

TinTin
09-14-2010, 06:27 PM
You believe everything the government says, don't you?

I believe scientific reports

Galileo
09-14-2010, 06:30 PM
I believe scientific reports

What about press releases by the government? Do you believe them?

TinTin
09-14-2010, 06:33 PM
What about press releases by the government? Do you believe them?

Most times yes because there really is no other choice until someone else offers a different perspective backed by proofs such as scientific reports.

Are you offering such perspective?

DarrinS
09-14-2010, 08:05 PM
911 truthers are the worst.


It's just leftist thinking running its natural course.

baseline bum
09-14-2010, 08:06 PM
It's just leftist thinking running its natural course.

Congrats on passing Rolf for the stupidest thing said in the thread.

DarrinS
09-14-2010, 08:12 PM
Congrats on passing Rolf for the stupidest thing said in the thread.


1 part, Islam = religion of peace +
1 part, America sucks +
1 part, Republican president (evil of highest order) +
1 part, lack of common sense =
==========================
9/11 Twoofer

baseline bum
09-14-2010, 08:42 PM
LOL that you can seriously type that garbage when the biggest truther here is a Ron Paul wingnut. How can you function in this world looking through such rose-colored glasses all the time? If I wanted to play the DarrinS game, I guess I could call Trurtherism the natural conclusion to teabagger anti-government paranoia.

Blake
09-14-2010, 08:48 PM
Nicely done. You've just confirmed that there was jet fuel at the site.

:lmao

Blake
09-14-2010, 08:56 PM
You believe everything the government says, don't you?

Are we supposed to believe everything a conspiracy hack on a San Antonio Spurs/politics sub-forum says about the Flight 93 crash instead?

Nbadan
09-14-2010, 09:05 PM
It's possible that the jet fuel was (accidentally) dumped before the fight that lead to it crashing to the ground...

Wild Cobra
09-14-2010, 09:07 PM
It's possible that the jet fuel was (accidentally) dumped before the fight that lead to it crashing to the ground...
Is it possible that the pilots had knowledge of the first tower and purposely hit the dump switch at the first sign of being taken over?

Good thought Dan.

Nbadan
09-14-2010, 09:09 PM
Remember, these 'pilots' had not flown these types of planes....they trained in single and double prop planes..

Drachen
09-14-2010, 10:27 PM
Remember, these 'pilots' had not flown these types of planes....they trained in single and double prop planes..

and didn't the passengers overpower them and they were likely not trained on any plane at all.

Nbadan
09-14-2010, 10:40 PM
and didn't the passengers overpower them and they were likely not trained on any plane at all.

According to the open mic during the fight, the passengers never actually took control of the plane...

RandomGuy
09-15-2010, 09:24 AM
It burned away or evaporated. Just like she said. What's the problem?


Really?
According to Jere Longman, "The pungency of unburned jet fuel was so strong that it blistered the lips of investigators." [20]


So let me see if I get this straight.

"pungency". Interesting word.
Affecting the organs of taste or smell with a sharp acrid sensation.

To smell something, it must, by definition, be gaseous. You cannot "smell" solids, without shoving something physically up your nose.

We can also safely assume that the investigators weren't putting their lips on the ground.

Therefore, if a LIQUID, such as jet fuel, was SMELLED, and burned the lips of investigators, some portion of that liquid MUST have evaporated. Generally at earth normal tempuratures and pressures, liquid hydrocarbons, such as jet fuel, have a high volatility (chemical term for tendency to EVAPORATE (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/volatility)).

SO:

You claim that the "official" explaination that the fuel either burned or EVAPORATED, is ridiculous, then attempt to show how ridiculous it is by introducing a quote that proves that the jet fuel had evaporated and produced a high local gaseous concentration.

:lmao

Seriously?

Stop it man, yer killin' me. :rollin

RandomGuy
09-15-2010, 09:30 AM
According to the open mic during the fight, the passengers never actually took control of the plane...

Which means?

Could a physical scuffle in the confined area of a jet cockpit possibly involve unintended movement of the flight controls?

Is it reasonable that a poorly trained pilot bent on suicide and killing, might place a plane in a death dive if that pilot realizes that he is about to lose control of the plane?

Would such a death dive then product large G-forces that would make it impossible to recover the aircraft, even if control was wrested away?

Drachen
09-15-2010, 12:05 PM
Which means?

Could a physical scuffle in the confined area of a jet cockpit possibly involve unintended movement of the flight controls?

Is it reasonable that a poorly trained pilot bent on suicide and killing, might place a plane in a death dive if that pilot realizes that he is about to lose control of the plane?

Would such a death dive then product large G-forces that would make it impossible to recover the aircraft, even if control was wrested away?

I am not sure that NBAdan was trying to argue a point that was counter to mine. I think that he was just correcting my mistake, especially since he was essentially arguing a very similar point just two posts earlier (thanks dan).