Plume in Flight 93 photo is different

Is the plume in this photo from Flight 93 crashing?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 129 90.8%
  • No.

    Votes: 13 9.2%

  • Total voters
    142
Status
Not open for further replies.
He seems to not get the whole heat rises thing !
Does this mean it's over? I just ordered lunch!

The grass is UNBURNT right around the crater's RIM
SO.....does that make you claim there was no plane,..... again? Or just that Val's pic is fake? You are such a trip!
 
and KNOW that unburned grass at that spot would be an impossibility.
I agree Buck, I agree! It would be IMPOSSIBLE for the grass to be UNBURNT around the crater if the fireball was even the min size and temp you guys claimed!!!

Fireball temp: 240C(464F)
Peak fireball width: 50m(164ft)

:D
 
So, I guess these trees aren't smoldering from the crash.

And this higher res image of the one you're using doesn't show that the side of the crater showing the least fire damage is the side that the plane impacted from and therefore would be the least damage/disturbed.

And this one doesn't show fire damage to the trees beyond the crater

And this one from further back doesn't show the orientation of your new favorite pic.

Arkan,

the 911research redirects links to the front page. You links won't go right to the pic.

Thought you shoudl know :)
 
I agree Buck, I agree! It would be IMPOSSIBLE for the grass to be UNBURNT around the crater if the fireball was even the min size and temp you guys claimed!!!

Fireball temp: 240C(464F)
Peak fireball width: 50m

:D

Don't cherry-pick quotes. The full quote was "unburned grass doesn't prove anything unless you're an expert in explosion dynamics and KNOW that unburned grass at that spot would be an impossibility"
 
Here, doughboy. Flt. 298 CrossAir jan. 2000. Crashed at Zurich. Big pile of wreckage, smoke, right next to lots of nice green grass. No scorching, no burning. It happens.

Go check the wreck database at www.airdisaster.com. Lots more where this came from. We win. You lose.

Move on. Everybody else agree?
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    69.5 KB · Views: 3
I agree Buck, I agree! It would be IMPOSSIBLE for the grass to be UNBURNT around the crater if the fireball was even the min size and temp you guys claimed!!!

Fireball temp: 240C(464F)
Peak fireball width: 50m

:D

Killtown, explain to me why my model of inrushing air under the fireball keeping the grass unburnt is incorrect. Remember, this is just an informed guess on my part, so a real expert on the nature of fuel air explosions such as yourself will naturally be able to point out the flaw in the argument immediately. Why am I wrong to assume that it is not surprising that grass remains unburnt around the rim of the crater? Just one reason will suffice, thank you.

P.S. "ha ha ha" is not a reason, neither is "you must be joking" and neither is sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la la la la la la la." In fact, all of those things serve to confirm that you don't actually have any reasons whatsoever, and have simply, once again, humiliated yourself.
 
Arkan,

the 911research redirects links to the front page. You links won't go right to the pic.

Thought you shoudl know :)

Hrm, I can click on them, and I found them via google. I'll upload local here. Stand by.

eta:
758344ecae1a37670.jpg

758344ecae1a5b09c.jpg
 
Last edited:
56 pages for THIS! Damn KC you are slip'en! Right down the slope of hysterical. What's your encore? Telling us how Val dug the whole and lit the fuse on your imagined bomb? Craaaaazzzzzeeeee, man crazy!
 
SO.....does that make you claim there was no plane,..... again? Or just that Val's pic is fake?
No, it BLOWS TO BITS your guy's claim the crash made a monsterous hot fireball that made a monsterious plume that is seen in Val's photo.

Please guys, save yourself anymore embarrasment and just admit there is no way Val's plume could have been caused by 93 crashing!
 
I agree Buck, I agree! It would be IMPOSSIBLE for the grass to be UNBURNT around the crater if the fireball was even the min size and temp you guys claimed!!!

Fireball temp: 240C(464F)
Peak fireball width: 50m(164ft)

:D

Interesting, Killtown.

So, let me ask you something. If ytou put your hand into something that was 450 degrees, would you get burned?

If you put a piece of paper inside/against something that was 450 degrees, would it catch fire?

If you touched a blade of dry grass with something at, say, 600 degrees, would it always catch fire?
 
Last edited:
No, it BLOWS TO BITS your guy's claim the crash made a monsterous hot fireball that made a monsterious plume that is seen in Val's photo.

Please guys, save yourself anymore embarrasment and just admit there is no way Val's plume could have been caused by 93 crashing!

Explain, and remember, show your math.
 
It's always a grass thing w/KC! He thinks the Pentagon lawn was super dooper
secret turff! I think you smoke too much bad grass! You are consistant! I will give ya that. Are you a gardener by chance?
 
Of course he shows you a photo where vegetation isn't burned.

At the angle the plane impacted the fuel would have been scattered in the direction the plane was flying.

http://usinfo.state.gov/photogaller...um_name=/nineeleven/penn&obj_name=5987206.jpg

Note the area of charred trees and grass, thats where the fireball would have occured.
Yeah that's interesting how this "crash caused" that SMALL section of forest to get burnt, but NO GRASS between the crater and that section was burnt!!!

And strange trajectory. It's like you running a 100 mph into a brick wall and your guts flying out only from your right side!
 
Killtown,

Can you answer these questions, please?

If you put your hand into something that was 450 degrees, would you get burned?

If you put a piece of paper inside/against something that was 450 degrees, would it catch fire?

If you touched a blade of dry grass with something at, say, 600 degrees, would it always catch fire?
 
56 pages for THIS!!

That's exactly what I was thinking. I kind of thought that Killtown might have have been building up to something a tiny bit more substantial than "it looks wrong", but I guess I was giving him too much credit.

I can't quite believe what an utter fool he's made himself look like.

Oh wait - yes I can.
 
Here, doughboy. Flt. 298 CrossAir jan. 2000. Crashed at Zurich. Big pile of wreckage, smoke, right next to lots of nice green grass. No scorching, no burning. It happens.

Go check the wreck database at www.airdisaster.com. Lots more where this came from. We win. You lose.

Move on. Everybody else agree?
Funny, I showed you guys a B-52 crash and you said, "oh, that's nothing like the Flight 93 crash," but now you guys are starting to compare the same kinds of "UNRELATED" crashes!!!

LoL!!!


Maybe somebody would like to explain their Flight 93 crash theory again?!
 
Say, how about this? Mar. 2000 Vologda Air in Snowy Russia.

That's right. Snowy Russia. Why isn't the snow melted? Because it snowed after the crash? Wrong. No snow on the wreck itself shows it crashed while snow on the ground. Gee. Didn't melt. Why is that? How could it be that in certain cases fires burn, but grass nearby doesn't burn and snow doesn't melt?

Why? Because the dynamics of fire is uncharted territory for most of us and while it may seem as though things "should" be burned, or "ought" to be melted, it doesn't always happen according to common sensical observations. However. Ample photographic evidence does show that these things do happen. And that's why any serious attempt at this discussion has to know it's limitations. Particularly yours. Your understanding of fire science is rebutted by photographic evidence, unless you want to claim that all of these photos being thrown your way are fakes.
 

Attachments

  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    74.6 KB · Views: 4
Killtown,

Can you answer these questions, please?

If you put your hand into something that was 450 degrees, would you get burned?

If you put a piece of paper inside/against something that was 450 degrees, would it catch fire?

If you touched a blade of dry grass with something at, say, 600 degrees, would it always catch fire?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom