Well what do ya think of this....

[wildbilln864]

video? :popcorn:

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. that beats a crop circle!

more interesting are the other videos with it on Utube

[wildbilln864]

2. that beats a crop circle.

:rofl: :rofl:
other videos?

[jberryhill]

3. I think the field in Shanksville

was a STRIP MINE in 1994.

[Twist_U_Up]

4. but,but,but.........

nice find Willy.
Ill sit back and watch how the dinos spin this one.

but as always I wont be impressed.

[Bryan Sacks]

5. what spin? The video is flat wrong.

There were (and still ARE - that's the crazy part) plenty of parts of the plane at and around the crash site. In the trees, on the roof of the nearby house - everywhere. (Barry Hoover's house, a man I personally met and who took me onto his property in 2004). everyone who examined the site closely says so, too. I met two regular Joes who were second and third at the crash site - they heard and saw the plane roar over head seconds before impact. They were maybe a mile away, from memory.

I like you, Bill, but I know as best I can know anything that a plane crashed there. I actually found a piece of the fuselage, buried in the ground in 2004. It was the size of my hand. I dug it out of the ground with my own fingers. There were several other smaller pieces of plane all over the same ground, once you started to dig.

There really were. I would bet dollars to donuts they're STILL there, right now.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. until you have seen them with your own eyes?

[wildbilln864]

8. Ok...

It may well be wrong.I just thought it was interesting and wanted other's opinions. I don't know either way about the scar. Thanks for the civil feedback Bryan Sacks and everyone. :hi:

[jberryhill]

9. Bill

Why not look at an actual USGS map instead of the aerial photo - because it is labelled as a reclaimed strip mine.

In 1994, the site was an active strip mine.

Do you know how strip mining works, or why it is called "strip mining". Surface strip mining for coal works by essentially digging a long ditch - hence the word strip - extracting coal from one side of the ditch, and then filling in the other side of the ditch with tailings from what you are digging out of the active side of the ditch.

When you are done, you cover the entire project, which has now disturbed the firm earth and consists of a loose uncompacted soil, over with topsoil, plant seed, call it a "meadow", and sell it off to some sucker who doesn't understand that it was an industrial site for years.

But the "reclaimed" area is never really the same as it was before the strip mining operation - because relative to say, undisturbed prairie, the ground is spongy and looser than virgin soil and clay to the depth of the mining operation.

That simple historical fact about the site explains two things here. One - why was there a "scar" in 1994, and Two - why was the impact site different than it might have been if the plane had hit some other patch of ground.

LOOK AT A REAL USGS MAP:



Do you see where it says "reclaimed strip mine"

LOOK AT A LARGER SATELLITE PHOTO:



Do you see those striations in the field? It looks like that because your "scar" had been progressively moved and filled across that field during the strip mining operation.

Seriously, Bill, do you even read followups to your messages?

[eomer]

7. The way that crash video is overlaid over the USGS map is misleading.

The crash video is overlaid over the 1994 map in such a way as to imply that a particular scar on the map matches up with the scar attributed to the crash. But the problem is that that particular scar on the map (the one that gets overlaid in the video) is clearly not in the right position to be the crash site -- it is much farther from the road than where the crash site is.

Perhaps it is still true that there was a pre-existing scar at the time of 9/11 but, if so, it would have to be a different one than what is implied in the youtube video.

[jberryhill]

10. It's not even a map

A real USGS map makes it perfectly clear what the "scar" is, and why it was there in 1994



Western Pennsylvania is full of them - it used to be major coal country.

[eomer]

11. True -- it's an aerial photograph, not a map.

I'm not sure what your other point is. Whether there is a good explanation for it being there in 1994 is not really at issue. The question is rather whether all of the scar assumed to be caused by flight 93 was in fact caused by flight 93. If some part of the scar was already there on 9/10/2001 (from some totally innocent cause like earlier mining activity) then what part of the scar predated 9/11 and what part occurred on 9/11?

[jberryhill]

12. There was no scar on 9/10

...and that's why the video shows an aerial photograph of an active strip mine in 1994.

After the strip mining operation is over - which it was long over at Shanksville on 9/10 - the ditch is filled in and the area covered in topsoil.

There was never one static ditch in that field. A strip mining operation consists of moving a ditch across an area, and digging stuff out of one side of the ditch while filling in the other side.

[eomer]

13. You're probably right.

Additional photographs taken after 1994 but before 9/11 would be nice -- so we could know for sure rather than just assuming.

[AZCat]

14. Now Wyoming dominates coal production...

because of the Powder River Basin. Wyoming produced 38% of U.S. coal in 2006 (446,742 short tons out of 1,162,750) whereas Pennsylvania produced about 6% (66,029 short tons out of 1,162,750). The Wyodak mine produced 381,090 short tons all on its own (nearly a third of U.S. coal production).