NTSB Data Dissected : Flight 93 was shot down!


If you look at the graphs provided by the NTSB from Flight 93s FDR, you will notice that at the purported crash time, the altitude is a MINIMUM of 2000ft.

Next thing we need to do is figure out what happened in the next 3 minutes? All bets are on it being shot down.

ALSO, can someone look at the graph and confirm I am reading it correctly?

Blogger Joe


Check page 20
Altitude graph goes from 0 to 40000 feet
Its ends a few millimeters above the x-axis.
This turns out to correspond to 2000 ft when you check the legend.

Actually, I looked at it

Actually, I looked at it again. The rate descent is very rapid. When extrapolating, their time might be accurate. Still it makes no sense compared to the seismic records ...

another thing to note is CVR

another thing to note is CVR matches the FDR. i.e. when they say pull it down, it corresponds to decline in altitude. It also does not explain the seismic record time diff.

To explain seismic diff you gotta therefore conclude:

CVR was forged (parts of it at least)
CVR, FDR time has been skewed for a while
USAF shot down the plane.
It crashed at 10:06

A LOT of assumptions. Almost pushing it too far. I don't know. I'm confused. This doesn't add up either.

Does anyone know if a plane has its engine shot off, how long it will take to land? Can it cruise for a while?
Were their perhaps two shots? One at 9:58 when the guy in the bathroom (Edward Felt) reported it and another one later that brought it down. Am I losing you guys? Any ideas?

another thing to note is

another thing to note is some numbers like accel go wild at 10:58 this is when felt reported the smoke. This doesn't seem to correspond to the altitude. could altitude have been forged?

its obvious for the accel

its obvious for the accel that a major event happened at 9:58. However the CVR script makes no mention of this. Something fishy.

Shot down, shmot down - it's just a distraction

Nothing crashed in shanksville...


Here is what a REAL plane crash looks like:





Shanksville is about 2,000 feet above sea level, that's why it stops there.

Hey, it's Kevin "The Daftest" Fenton!


Now, what in the hell are you talking about now?

Also, what happened to the 5,500 gals of fuel on board 93 at impact?


The altitude line on the FDR ends at about 2,000 feet above sea level. That's Shanksville's elevation. I think it's a fairly simple concept. So, even if it is faked, it's faked properly.

what happened to the fuel ???

DAMN good question !!!
in all the other flights, there were HUGE explosions,
this one burned about 12 blades of grass !


This is taken from the Flight recorder ( black box)
and released recently by our Government..
Notice the blue line which indicates ZERO altitude.
Notice the black line going down in that direction, but never reaching there?
This is the altitude.
It Doesnt drop below 100ft or so.
Until I learn more, I must expect that this is the elevation of the ground,
though, my suspicions tell me its not, and that this is taken into consideration,
but I am not sure at this time.
any comments appreciated
email me at
brad @ 911review.org
(remove spaces).


Also seen.
an overspeed alert , this is about the time it turns at Cleveland,
which does correspond to the FE data showing it at 509mph
but the black box airspeed
another overspeed alert at 10:02-10:03
(actual crash time is 10:03 according to the black box)
if I am reading this right, and the airspeed is in KNOTS,
the converting to MPH tells me the plane crashed at 560 MPH !!

Airspeed VERY erratic after takeoff as well.

Dont just think outside the box.
Think like there never was one.


Heres a suggestion

May I try and be helpful here in this debate about flight 93? Can i suggest that you all get a copy of the documentry "Loose Change 911" and pay particular attention to the part about flight 93. I found 2 quotes intreresting, 1 from one of the coroners at the site was quoted as saying "I gave up being a coroner after 20 minutes as there was no bodies to be found." and words to this effect 'And I never saw a drop of blood either'. The other quote was from one of the rescue crew out there and he was reported to have said that it 'looked like someone had dug a huge hole and dumped a truckload of scrap metal in it'. Then look at the comparision of a recent plane crash in Nigeria I think, and the Flight 93 crash site. BIG DIFFERENCE! Anyway I hope that clears up any debate.

here's why I dont like the

here's why I dont like the no plane theory.

What good does it do to the people planning the attack to not have a real plane crash? Nothing!

In fact by doing this they got to:

- involve the cleanup crew in the conspiracy (not feasable, many are local police)

- involve the coroners in the conspiracy (apparently, some bodies were identified)

- get rid of the real plane and pasengers in some other manner

- fake the CVR (remember there was communication with this plane to FAA)

- fake the FDR

ok, maybe they could do it. but why? what does it buy them? More work that's all. They don't get brownie points for faking a crash.

no plane theory is bogus

if you were planning the attack, what would you get by not using a plane. I can't think of any benifit.

What do you lose? A lot!

Now you gotta

- plant evidence
- involve more poeple in the plot
- get rid of a plane and its passengers

You wouldn't do it if you were smart. And whoever did this was very smart.


this wasnt a terrorist act CREATED by our government.
it was one that was TAKEN OVER by select people.
Some Hijackers were probably really there,
really hijacking a plane,
but the whole plan was HIJACKED itself.

so to make it go as planned, they had to swap planes.
I for one, dont beleive that NO planes were invloved.
certianly some had to be, to fool the radar etc...
but, the planes were swapped with war games planes.

Dont let people tell you that you are either
a PLANE HUGGER, or NO-Planer.
Think for yourself.
those names paralyze the movement.

The truth is a bit more complicated than that
planes were SWAPPED.
now, i dont think 93, or anything else was shot down.
There is a hole, that is TOO small, with not enough burned grass around etc..

At some point, radar was fooled, either by someone hacking into a mainframe that controlled what the ATC guys saw,
or, the plane was swapped with a drone.
And, even then, that doesnt mean that it was really Flight 93 that took off from the airport.

All of the flights had their transponders change codes.
Hijackers wouldnt do that.
This is a BIG point i think people overlook.
Flight 175 changed its code 3 times.
planes do NOT do that, and hijackers CERTIANLY do not do that.
It would do nothing but give their position away, and put up a red flag saying that something is wrong.

Also, with 93, the flight plan was changed AFTER the plane was hijacked.
figure THAT ?

HI, I just hijacked your plane, and I want to land in D.C.
can you give me clearance please ???

Then you also have so many things that do not add up with the maps.


The estimated arrival times starting at 2:15pm
then it changes SOUTH of Pitt, well after it was hijacked and a new
flight plan was filed to 10:28
it stays around that time, until the last blip which indicates 9:34 as
the ETA, BUT it crashed much later than that.
How could the ETA show 9:34 when it was well after that at the time of
the crash?

As you can see here the map shows that the destination airport changes well south of Pitt. (as does the ETA). So did Flight 93 file the new flight plan after it was hijacked? Supossedly the hijackers were in control of the craft at this point.

At 40,700ft, this is about the time many of the cell calls were supposedly have been made. As a cell phone engineer, i find this quite hard to believe!


These top maps show the last 2 recorded "blips" from the flight explorer maps.

the problem is, they are at the same location, with different data. (last blip on the right)

The speeds are different, and the ETA is also different ! I thought they may be at 2 differnt point, so i did an overlay of the images.

They seem to match quite nicely. (perfectly in fact! )

The guy who runs Flight explorer
(that created these maps)
has deep ties with the DOD and Military !

He was involved with a company that did software for wargames !!!!

just another coincidence, nothing to see here,
move along...




Dont just think outside the box.
Think like there never was one.


here's my final

here's my final conclutions:

facts allowing for a 10:03 crash

1. CVR
2. FDR

facts allowing for a shoot down + 10:06 crash

1. Ed Felt
2. Debris
3. Seismic waves

There is a DIRECT contradiction between two information gathering instruments - i.e. (FDR,CVR) vs seismic. My conclusion therefore is that FDR,CVR have been forged. There is NO other possible conclutions. Seismic waves DO NOT lie.

last commment does not show

last commment does not show up immediately - bug in the system?


Why argue over stupid trivial matters as altiude vs speed vs blah blah blah blah. WAKE UP PEOPLE! I have a computer, its a middle of the range type one. I am really into music so I have a few music software programs on my PC. I have a program where I can type words and the program sings it in perfect harmnoy and pitch and sounds like a real women singing a beautiful song. This technology has been with the CIA, FBI since oh about 94'ish. I only obtained this software about 2-3 years ago when it became available to buy and the technology was good. Its an amazing piece of software. In my years of net-surfing etc I also know there are programs that can manipulate photographs, video images and goodness knows what else. Most of this technology is has been used by agencies like the FBI, CIA, NSA etc for years before it became commercially available. This tools as we all know would be useful in intelligence/spy industries. Now let me suggest something that maybe you all have overlooked. Suppose that to maintain the cover that 'supposed terrorists' really did try to take over Flight 93, to keep the dream alive, they manipulate radar images and flight data to what they want us to see. You see the NTSB is ultimately a govt agency, and Im afraid you cant trust the govt in this case. You and I will never have access to the raw data, its classified material. How can we prove that Yes it did happen the way the Govt tells us or NO that didnt happen at all it was manipulated and corrupted data. We can't. Going by past experiences I know of the US govt and it's various agencies Im inclined to take whatever anything the Govt says about 911 with a grain of salt. I distinctly remember Colin Powell standing up in front of the UN trying to convince us with manipulated satellite images that Iraq had a fleet of mobile chemical weapons labs all around Iraq ready to strike against the US. WHAT A JOKE! No one bought that crap. And then the US govt even admitted just recently that there was no weapons of mass destruction. Duuuuuuhhhhhh. I was saying that back in 2001, when the US govt was throwing around the BS story that Saddam Hussein had amassed a huge stockpile of weapons of mass destruction and was ready to strike and kill any invading armies. HAHAHA I still smile and chuckle when I hear this. In fact Im smiling right now. Now the US president just like days ago finally admitted that Iraq had nothing to do with 911. This is the tip of the iceberg of the lies and deciet and the length that the US govt will got to to try and manipulate US citizens as well as the rest of the world by making up BS stories like that and then later to say OH it was all false. Sheeessh if that sort of incompentency was displayed at my workplace I would have been fired years ago. Yet he still is in power. Sorry folks I dont buy this latest waffle from the NTSB. Think what you like. I seen too much evidence, I know the history of the US govt and its various agencies for me to believe what another US govt agency is trying to tell me is the truth. Time to smell the roses people, but I warn they stink real bad...REAL BAD!

Rumsfeld says Flight 93 was shot down! He mispoke???

Soft Ground

But the ground was soft.... and the plane was fast.... it was like dropping a stone in a bowl of pudding... it just swallowed er up... you know?