Plume in Flight 93 photo is different

[Yoink]

You are indeed less educated than a yellow-handled screwdriver...
Volume of a sphere=4/3*pi*r^3
50% reduction in volume =25% reduction in radius
reduction in mass= little reduction in energy, since energy =1/2 *M*v^2, and v (velocity) is still 51480 ft/sec (so energy is still 41152024.84 ft-lb, or 5555523J per piund of airplane weight)
lower volume+ large energy=more aerosol=larger fireball, probably

Don't worry KT, I've got this one for you--you don't have to waste time while you go ahead and earn my $100: "Dude, you're making this waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too complicated. You just need to use forensics. The volume of fuel is less than we thought: I said the cloud was less big than McClatchey's photograph shows. QED!"

Oh, and "look at my blog."

 

[Yoink]

give it to charity.

You seem to have forgotten to post your "substantive" evidence. I'm sure it was just an oversight. Go ahead, and then nominate a charity and the check will be in the mail before the end of the day.

 

[Killtown]

so here are your current figures...


-------------------------------

Known constants:

Crash angle: 40 deg
Wingspan: 38m(125ft)
Fuel upon impact: 5,482 gals
Impact Speed: 580mph

-------------------------------

Variables:

Fuel % burned upon impact: 30-70%
Fireball temp: 240C(464F) - 1,316C(2,400F)
Peak fireball width: >>> 50m - 860m <<< old estimates
Windspeed: 9kt W - 25kt NW
Plume size: 600m - 700m
Elapsed time from crash to photo: 5.3 - 90 sec

-------------------------------

Size perspective:

Football field (no endzone) = 100yds

100yds = 300ft = 91.44m

-------------------------------


What do you want your plumes sizes at?

 

[Dr Richard]

You are indeed less educated than a yellow-handled screwdriver...
Volume of a sphere=4/3*pi*r^3
50% reduction in volume =25% reduction in radius
reduction in mass= little reduction in energy, since energy =1/2 *M*v^2, and v (velocity) is still 51480 ft/sec (so energy is still 41152024.84 ft-lb, or 5555523J per piund of airplane weight)
lower volume+ large energy=more aerosol=larger fireball, probably

Awww, you went and told him...

20.6% smaller radius, makes his case even worse.

 

[Yoink]

You're running out of time Killtown. Quick, post that evidence. Believe me, I will consider this money well spent!

You're not are you?

 

[Yoink]

so here are your current figures...


-------------------------------

Known constants:

Crash angle: 40 deg
Wingspan: 38m(125ft)
Fuel upon impact: 5,482 gals
Impact Speed: 580mph

-------------------------------

Variables:

Fuel % burned upon impact: 30-70%
Fireball temp: 240C(464F) - 1,316C(2,400F)
Peak fireball width: >>> 50m - 860m <<< old estimates
Windspeed: 9kt W - 25kt NW
Plume size: 600m - 700m
Elapsed time from crash to photo: 5.3 - 90 sec

-------------------------------

Size perspective:

Football field (no endzone) = 100yds

100yds = 300ft = 91.44m

-------------------------------


What do you want your plumes sizes at?

You're still confused about the difference between "variables" and "observartions." Your "plume size" is roughly the observed plume size--not the range of possible plume sizes that could be produced by a crash with these characteristics.

The "elapsed time" before the photo was taken is irrelevant to your calculation. Given that the time is unknown (other than McClatchey's vague estimate of "five seconds") these figures in no way contribute to or constrain the equation you seem to be trying to perform. In other words, if the crash can be shown to have been able to generate a plume of the observed size and position in McClatchey's photo then our null hypothesis stands--regardless of when the model would place that cloud in that position.

Please show me you can follow at least this simple point. Throw me a bone. I've been so desperately trying to instill a semblance of coherent argument into your farrago of non-sequiturs. Just give me this much!

 

[Yoink]

Killtown? I can see that you're still logged in, and that you're not posting anywhere else. Are you just waiting for the clock to run down so you can pretend you were busy with something else rather than posting your "evidence" and earning the $100?

That's not cool, dude.

That's

 

[Hutch]

eta: I don't think I've ever seen Hutch snap before. *stands back in awe*

snap? Snap? Nay, good Arkan, I was merely Irritated, much as a dog with a flea or a cat with a tick or a human with a bacterium...

Now I might yet end up very, very Grumpy before this thread ends...and you wouldn't like seeing me Grumpy...

One last point. Using the Kirk quote I did was slightly unfair, I must admit, to the protagainists it was orignally addressed to.

Klingons, after all, do have a sense of honor...

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

snap? Snap? Nay, good Arkan, I was merely Irritated, much as a dog with a flea or a cat with a tick or a human with a bacterium...

Now I might yet end up very, very Grumpy before this thread ends...and you wouldn't like seeing me Grumpy...

One last point. Using the Kirk quote I did was slightly unfair, I must admit, to the protagainists it was orignally addressed to.

Klingons, after all, do have a sense of honor...

Unless there are tribbles involved.

 

[Pardalis]

CTists do spawn like tribbles don't they?

 

[Killtown]

Let me know when you guys come up with your Peak fireball widths. After that and nobody objects with your estimates, I'll begin drawing up diagrams of your min/max estimates.

 

[Yoink]

O.K., Killtown. So we all know now that you have nothing at all. Well, not nothing: you've got some irrelevant photographs, some meaningless videos, and a broken calculator.

You know, and we know, that you made this public accusation against Val McClatchey based on some Sunday-afternoon noodling around with Google-earth and Photoshop. You were just clever enough to find something that "looked wrong" to your completely untrained and uninformed eye, and because it fit in with your preconceptions about 9/11 you decided to run with it and you published it on your blog.

Now, so far you're being childish and thoughtless, but not actually irredeemably evil.

Once the question came over here, though, and people who weren't predisposed to look at this and say "yes, this supports my preconceptions, it must be true!" pointed out to you that you didn't know anything useful about plane crashes, fuel/air explosions, mushroom cloud formation, photography, basic logic, or mathematics (you know, everything you would have needed to actually make a plausible case against the authenticity of the McClatchey photograph), you just decided to do the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "la la la la la la la la la la la."

Your little plan has clearly been to just keep trying to get us to perform the basic calculations for you in the hopes that someone at some point would generate some kind of outcome that you could--by not thinking about it too clearly or by distorting it in some way--take to be evidence for "your side." At which point you would declare victory and run away back to people who don't care whether your evidence and reasoning are sound or not.

At this point, I'm sad to say, your behaviour has become simply embarrassing and shameful. You know you have made a false accusation against Ms. McClatchey. You know that you had no valid evidence whatsoever against her photograph, and yet you continue to leave your filthy, lying blog up because you like the fact that it gets you pats on the head from the CT boys. You like being "famous on the Internet" for your 15 minutes, and you think the reputation and peace of mind of a poor unfortunate woman who has had a really hard life since 9/11 is less important than the size of your ego.

That is simply beneath contempt. One day--I feel sure--you will realize just how contemptible your behaviour has been. The fact that those who point it out to you get put on "ignore" shows that you are already beginning to feel that hot prick of shame even though you struggle to shout it down. For your own sake, Killtown, apologize to Val McClatchey now. Turn your site into a dedicated apology page and do your best to make amends.

 

[Dr Richard]

Let me know when you guys come up with your Peak fireball widths. After that and nobody objects with your estimates, I'll begin drawing up diagrams of your min/max estimates.

Bored now, very bored.

Same as the old estimates. For the reasons given above. Get on with it.

 

[Pardalis]

You know, and we know, that you made this public accusation against Val McClatchey based on some Sunday-afternoon noodling around with Google-earth and Photoshop. You were just clever enough to find something that "looked wrong" to your completely untrained and uninformed eye, and because it fit in with your preconceptions about 9/11 you decided to run with it and you published it on your blog.

Wow, that sums up Killtown's scientific approach extremely well.

ETA: Your entire post is great Yoink, I wish I could write in English that well some day.

 

[Killtown]

Why isn't apathoid weighing in on this?

 

[Dr Richard]

Why isn't apathoid weighing in on this?

Lapsed into a coma waiting for you to post the info we have been asking for?

 

[Killtown]

Lapsed into a coma waiting for you to post the info we have been asking for?

ya know, I'm thinking it's because he disagrees with you guys. Ask him (I tried).

 

[T.A.M.]

What is amazing is how a thread on one photo in the grand scheme of 9/11 has spawned 50+ pages of posting....

 

[Yoink]

Wow, that sums up Killtown's scientific approach extremely well.

Thanks. I recognize the type partially because it could just about have been me, once. Not that I ever got into the conspiracy theory stuff, but I had a phase in my early teens as a pretty keen "Erich Von Daniken" type. I can remember spending a rainy day with a friend "conclusively proving" on the basis of an Oxford World Atlas and an Encyclopedia Brittanica (along with a calculator and some numbers we pulled out of our asses) that the pyramids could not have been made by man (something to do with the extent of the forest coverage in Egypt and the number of trees that would be needed to roll the stones into place and how quickly they'd wear etc. etc. etc. ). We thought we were pretty smart, I can tell you! Why, we had "proof"--with numbers and everything! Had there been an internet in those days, you can be pretty sure we'd have made fools of ourselves on some Egyptologist discussion board. And no doubt we'd have been pretty thrilled at getting told our calculations were "unanswerable" on some whack-job Von Daniken site.

That's why I think Killtown is about 13 or 14 years old. It's why I have some hope that he will recognize how appallingly badly he's behaved. It would be pretty heady for a 14 year old to think that he'd "proven" a government conspiracy (or even "proven" that some random person photoshopped a photograph for profit--Killtown seems to want to cling to both incompatible conclusions). Having lots of people tell him he's terribly clever and that he has us all "scared" of his forensics and so forth--all that would be hard for a kid to give up. At that age (at least, judging by embarrassed recollections of myself) your powers of empathy are not fully developed. He's the center of his world--why should he care what happens to Val McClatchey (no doubt in another state altogether from him) if his abuse of her makes him feel important?

Of course, if he's much older than 14 he's probably a lost cause.

 

[Killtown]

I think we are going to have to wait until the following people concur on the plume size estimates after Gravy found the new fuel total since they did a lost of the calculations of your guy's estimates for this experiment:

Buckwheatjones
gumboot
Hutch
R.Mackey