You do remember what this thread was about right? It was to prove or disprove Val's plume came from 93 crashing or something else.
Plume in Flight 93 photo is different
- Thread starter Killtown
- Start date
- Status
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
We can't concede to that, because you don't present an accurate argument.
Can you answer these questions, please? Not a photo, a simple yes or no answer...or a conditional answer if you feel it is needed.
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?
Are you familiar with a "grenade trench" inside a military bunker?
Or are you afraid because you don't understand where I'm going with this, because you don't have even a basic understanding of the dynamics of heat and temperature?
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
You do understand what a strawman is, right? Find me the place where anyone said it could only be a large, hot fireball.
and
Can you answer these questions, please? Not a photo, a simple yes or no answer...or a conditional answer if you feel it is needed.
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?
Are you familiar with a "grenade trench" inside a military bunker?
Or are you afraid because you don't understand where I'm going with this, because you don't have even a basic understanding of the dynamics of heat and temperature?
KT, I'd be happy to "concede to that" if you would mount an actual argument for your case. Show me your calculations about the size of the fireball. Show me a fireball of X minimum size is necessary to produce the cloud in the McClatchey photograph. Show me that it is impossible for a fireball of that size to form from an accident of this kind that does not burn the ground directly underneath it.
Please try to understand that a photograph of a B-52 crashing under completely different circumstances is about as useful to your argument as a photograph of a duck. Now: what evidence to you have for either of the two key elements in your argument above?
Last edited:
To bad that's not what I'm saying.
I'm saying YOUR plane crash theory that YOU GUYS say caused a HUGE FIREBALL that was EXTREMELY HOT couldn't have done what you guys claimed it did!
Not even your MINIMUM estimates would be consistent with the crater area and then be able to produce Val's MONSTEROUS plume!
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
You do understand what a strawman is, right? Find me the place where anyone said it could only be a large, hot fireball.
and
Can you answer these questions, please? Not a photo, a simple yes or no answer...or a conditional answer if you feel it is needed.
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?
Are you familiar with a "grenade trench" inside a military bunker?
Or are you afraid because you don't understand where I'm going with this, because you don't have even a basic understanding of the dynamics of heat and temperature?
2) No I haven't, YOU guys said it was wrong.
3) Unspecified point after the crash? LoL! Are suggesting burnt grass can "unburn" itself given time? LoL!!!!!
The photo was one of the FIRST photos take after the crash.
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
Can you answer these questions, please? Not a photo, a simple yes or no answer...or a conditional answer if you feel it is needed.
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?
Are you familiar with a "grenade trench" inside a military bunker?
Or are you afraid because you don't understand where I'm going with this, because you don't have even a basic understanding of the dynamics of heat and temperature?
Your MINIMUM fireball size would have burned a LARGE area of grass around the crater!!!
KT, why don't you answer Huntsman's questions? Why don't you tell him what your "gut" tells you about each of these things? You think that what your "gut" tells you is good enough evidence to permit you to make vile slanderous accusations against some poor woman who never did anything to hurt you--why isn't your "gut" good enough to give you the answers to Huntsman's questions?
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
Ladies and gentlemen,
Let us pause a moment, and contemplate the fact the Ignorance is a curable disease, if caught in the early stages.
We don't know why ignorance grows and chokes out the light of intellegence and promise, only that it happens. Someday, perhaps, we will know the answer, but that doesn't help us with this lost mind and soul.
Let us bow our heads and grieve at the los of Killtown to the cancerous stupidity that has engulfed him, and go in with our lives, hoping that we might save others who have not slipped down that slippery slope int pure insanity.
Amen.
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
So let's talk about that.
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?
Are you familiar with a "grenade trench" inside a military bunker?
Or are you afraid because you don't understand where I'm going with this, because you don't have even a basic understanding of the dynamics of heat and temperature?
Look, unburnt grass right up against the crater!
Kinda hard to explain that when the fireball YOU GUYS claim was BIGGER than the size of the crater!
BOOM!
1,2,3,4) And this has to do with a liquid jetfuel fire how?
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
Look, unburnt grass right up against the crater!
Kinda hard to explain that when the fireball YOU GUYS claim was BIGGER than the size of the crater!
BOOM!
Why are you afraid to talk about the crash? Why are you afraid to answer some questions?
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?
Are you familiar with a "grenade trench" inside a military bunker?
Or are you afraid because you don't understand where I'm going with this, because you don't have even a basic understanding of the dynamics of heat and temperature?
As to what it has to do with the crash, I'm getting there. The fact that you have to ask this shows me that the questions really need an answer and you really don't understand heat and temperature, or blast.
What is your proof of this claim? How have established that all fireballs always burn everything that is combustible directly beneath them?
I know that you think it's enoug to roll your eyes at this, KT, and to say "that's just obvious"--but think about this for a moment: weren't you just a teensy, weensy bit surprised to read that there was a lot of combustible material almost directly beneath the atom bomb at Hiroshima that wasn't burned? What would have seemed "obvious" to you about that? Wouldn't you have thought it "obvious" that the bomb would burn everything that was combustible close to ground zero? If you're wrong about that "obvious" thing, why aren't you wrong about this one?
Please note, I'm not saying that the Hiroshima case proves you wrong about the photo. Heck, for all I know the photo is proof that the McClatchey photograph is a fraud. The problem is that you're just pointing to the evidence and saying "see, it's obvious" without saying how you've arrived at your position. If all you've got is "my gut tells me its obvious" then all you've got is what you've always shown yourself to have throughout all these pages: nothing.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
False dichotomy. Please show where the grass must be burnt if a fireball is present. Remember, show your work.
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
answer the questions, Klown
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Answer the questions and you'll find out.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Look, unburnt grass right up against the crater!
[qimg]http://killtown.911review.org/images/flight93/gallery/crater_stahl.jpg[/qimg]
Kinda hard to explain that when the fireball YOU GUYS claim was BIGGER than the size of the crater!
BOOM!
[qimg]http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/5615/b52collagepx2.jpg[/qimg]
Please demonstrate conclusively that the above pictured explosion is the only viable fireball that could have occurred at the Flight 93 crashsite.
- Status