December 22, 2006

Shanksville forest mostly burned after 9/11?

(Updated: 12/30/06)

“The trees beyond were still faintly smoldering but largely intact.” – Post-Gazette

Take a look again at the scope of the burnt forest section next to the fake crater in this FBI aerial taken on Sept. 12 that looks like it was taken sometime in the morning based on the shadows casted towards the west:

(Red dotted oval = fake crater. Blue dotted line = alleged flight path. Orange dotted line = small road. Green dotted line = forest damage)

I had previously speculated that all this fire damage resulted from something the military launched to crash on to the fake crater to simulate fire damage to it, but it accidentally bounced up off the ground and landed on this section of forest and that’s how some of the tops of the trees there got broken and how that section got burned even though it’s at a different trajectory from how we were told the alleged plane came in.

(Purple circle = left wingtip. Blue circle = vertical tail tip. Yellow circle = right wingtip. Red dotted line = trajectory of mystery object bouncing off fake crater and exploding into forest.)

However a couple things still stumped me about the burnt forest section:

1) How did that much of the forest catch on fire, but had reportedly stopped burning when the first people at the scene arrived 10-15 minutes after the explosion?

The only evidence of smoke still coming from above the forest is from this news clip.

2) How did that much of the forest catch fire without the ground below it catching fire?

See these photos that seem to illustrate this: photo 1, photo 2, photo 3

We never saw and there were no reports of any kind of forest fire like this even though a wall of jet fuel fire supposedly hit the forest from a plane crashing at a blistering 580mph:

Maybe there is an explanation to these anomalies. Maybe the section of burnt forest you see in the aerial photos did not initially have that much fire damage after whatever exploded there on 9/11, but perhaps was later set further on fire by the rescue crews (cover-up crews) at the scene, or burned some other way?

“Our goal right now is to preserve everything as it is for tonight,” Killeen said, adding that further investigation would continue in the morning.” - Daily Athenaeum (09/12/01)

Look again at that Sept. 12th aerial from the U.S. government’s site and look at how much of the forest was damaged and how some of the trees closest to the fake crater are thinned out and almost look removed:

Now look at this WTAE photo taken from a National Guard helicotper with PA's Gov. Tom Ridge on board that was taken after 6 p.m. on what looks like 9/11. See if you can see the extent of forest damage as in the above aerial or the proceeding aerials:

Gov. Tom Ridge arrived about 6:15 p.m., flying over the crash scene in a National Guard helicopter before being briefed on the ground by state police.” – Post-Gazette

(Photo enlarged 100%. Red dotted oval = fake crater. Blue dotted line = alleged flight path. Orange dotted line = small road)

(Photo from Moussaoui trial [Hi-res]. Date taken unknown.)

(Above and below photos from and said to be taken on Sept 22.)

Here is video of the scene on 9/11. Does the forest look very damaged to you?

To me, it looks unmistakable that the forest section seen in the early evening WTAE photo and the above video of the scene on the day of the attack looks no where as near as damaged as seen in all the other aerials taken after 9/11 which suggests the forest was further burned to give the illusion that there was more damage to the scene since the perps botched the crash scene up so bad on 9/11.

I don't know how the perps burned more of that section of forest, but it obviously had to be burned sometime during the night or early in the moring before that government's aerial was taken sometime on the morning of 9/12. I did notice that there seems to be no nighttime photos of the crash scene and FEMA didn’t even have any photos of Shanksville in their photo library where they have tons of photos of Ground Zero and the Pentagon.

Notice though that this photo that is supposedly taken on 9/12 is the first ground photo the shows the entire tree line and the sky! This one is weird because it doesn't look like the forest is very damaged (although it is hard to tell with the shadows) and there is still white smoldering at the same spot on 9/11 which the WTAE photo taken in the evening of 9/11 doesn't seem to show. Was this pic taken on 9/12?

(Photo from said to be taken on Sept 12.)

See here for all the photos of the Shanksville botched crash scene I could find and try to see if you can find any evidence that counters my theory that the burnt forest section received most of it's damage after 9/11.

In the current Google Earth aerial, notice how all of the burnt forest section was cleared out afterward:

(Forest cleared out to about 70yds deep according to Google Earth.)


spooked said...

Now THAT'S a great find! And it makes sense. I bet they burned the forest as part of the cover-up-- perhaps to keep people out of the forest until they had planted enough flight 93 appropriate stuff?

Anonymous said...

You 'think' that WTAE photo was taken before hand? On what grounds?

The original photo's URL indicates 9-12-2001.

Killtown said...

To the anonymous JREFer,

I think the WTAE aerial was taken before the other aerials. If the WTAE pic was taken on 9/12, it doesn't matter, it was obviously taken BEFORE the govt's aerial the shows much much more forest damage.

No where did I say the WTAE aerial was taken on 9/11.

Anonymous said...

Well, rather than speculate when you THINK it was taken, why don't you call the station and find out for sure?

spooked said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
spooked said...

It doesn't matter when that WTAE photo was taken, as the video KT shows is more informative and is CLEARLY from the morning of 9/11.

I'm wondering what exactly was actively smoking in the crater in the is not general smoke but rather something specific releasing concentrated smoke.

Anonymous said...

This is an argument from incredulity, Killtown. You are comparing a side-on view of trees with their foliage burnt off to an overhead view of the same trees and the burnt ground, and you can't believe your eyes.
The 3 photos you posted showing unburnt undergrowth are obviously from an unburnt section of forest - none of the trees are burnt at all.

spooked said...

this photo:
has very clear singe marks out to the south of the crater in a splayed out pattern going into the trees and onto the field.

These aren't there in the WTAE photo. Where the singe marks on the field added later too?

Anonymous said...

Sometimes when I look at clouds, I see animals. Other times, I just see clouds.

I hate it when I see birds.

G'nite Randy.

NIte Earl.

Anonymous said...

may be the world was old

zdux0012 said...

Wow, one more nail in the coffin. To me the heilocoper picture is the best evidance.

I'd suggest taking down the forrest fire image I found it confusing.

Killtown said...

To the person who just posted a comment for me to approve that had links related to this blogpost, I accidentally deleted your comment.

PLEASE repost it. Very interested in seeing what you had.