30-07-2015, 01:50 PM
I have kind of a problem with the idea that this wing washed ashore at the location in those photos. It's not a beach. The water looks smooth as a mirror. There are lines of stones over which the wing would have had to travel to arrive at this spot. It's in the grass. Grass doesn't typically grow where it would get regularly tidally soaked by seawater.
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=7304&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=7304&stc=1)
Also, I heard this yesterday on the CNN news, which you might not hear again: A talking head aviation expert says the visible damage on this part doesn't indicate a high speed collision event, but more like a "flaps-extended" (lower speed) attempt to land, as this part apparently was ripped from the plane prior to the main wing striking the water.
Also, I heard this yesterday on the CNN news, which you might not hear again: A talking head aviation expert says the visible damage on this part doesn't indicate a high speed collision event, but more like a "flaps-extended" (lower speed) attempt to land, as this part apparently was ripped from the plane prior to the main wing striking the water.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."