Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: How did United 93 supposedly crash? [View all]William Seger
(10,923 posts)... your stupid "official story" game, when you're just going to start with the assumption that UA 93 didn't crash in that field, regardless of the details or the source of the details, but all you've got are denials and personal incredulity. I told you why I don't believe Miller is correct, but his is not the "official story" anyway, so who cares what someone told him. I have no idea what specific pieces of the plane were above ground except for that identifiable fuselage piece with windows. Other than that, all the pictures I've seen were mostly pieces too small to identify or pieces I wouldn't recognize. If you think it matters, you might ask some of the 1100 or so people who participated in the clean-up, but I wasn't one of them nor do I see any reason to speculate. But since you've already announced that evidence plays no actual part in your conclusions, there's nothing to be gained by arguing about the evidence or the details with you, much less doing your research for you.
It appears that you don't quite grasp the concept of "debunking." You're supposed to pick a claim that you think is not true and try to refute it with either contradictory evidence or at least a rational argument. If you can't do that, then you should have let this thread die rather than embarrassing yourself further.