Plume in Flight 93 photo is different

[LashL]

apples and oranges.

give it up. I blew away your "magic explosion" theory. admit defeat and ask questions to our gov't where did the plume come from because we all know now it didn't come from the crash.

I see we are back at page one again, with still not a single scrap of facts or evidence from Killtown.

 

[SezMe]

I second someone else's analysis several pages ago. KillTown has no analytical skills, no knowledge of physics, no mathematical (even arithmetical) skills and, worst of all, no idea of his own limitations. So he looks at a picture and thinks "that looks funny - it can't be right". That's it. That is the sum total of his analysis. And, as noted, the worst part is that he cannot see how utterly pathetic the whole thing is.

I hope he goes away soon.

 

[Killtown]

I second someone else's analysis several pages ago. KillTown has no analytical skills, no knowledge of physics, no mathematical (even arithmetical) skills and, worst of all, no idea of his own limitations. So he looks at a picture and thinks "that looks funny - it can't be right". That's it. That is the sum total of his analysis. And, as noted, the worst part is that he cannot see how utterly pathetic the whole thing is.

I hope he goes away soon.

Earlier:

Yeah, I would have expected more fire damage around the impact site itself.

 

[Killtown]

5) The FBI said the photo is authentic.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

What did you expect them to say, "Yep, we doctored it"?!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/879044ecf837e692b.jpg


Cabin East of crash site (NW corner of building) PT A
40 02 59.66 N
78 54 13.46 W
elev 2381 ft

Cabin East of crash site (SW corner of building) PT B
40 02 59.40 N
78 54 13.44 W
elev 2378 ft

Whitish circular impression in NW corner of pic (southern most point)
40 03 04.65 N
78 54 20.08 W
elev 2378 ft

Whitish circular impression in NW corner of pic (eastern most point)
40 03 04.85 N
78 54 19.61 W
elev 2382 ft

Approx center of crater PT C
40 03 02.80 N
78 54 17.56 W
elev 2388 ft

Approx distance from A to C: 136.91 m
Approx distance from B to C: 143.10 m
Approx distance from A to B: 8.16 m
Approx distance from C, due south, to be perpendicular with B: 104.77 m
Approx distance from C, due south, to be perpendicular with A: 96.67 m

Ms. McClatchey's house (NW corner) PT D
40 03 00.29 N, 78 52 28.16 W


Distance from D to C: 2591.37 m


White barn (SW tip) PT E
40 03 00.41 N
78 52 34.66 W

Distance from D to E: 153.96 m
Distance from E to C: 2437.44 m

Red barn (NE tip) PT F
40 02 58.24 N
78 52 41.97 W

Distance from D to F: 333.05 m
Distance from F to C: 2267.62 m
Distance from E to F: 185.55 m

Extend a vector from D, through E, ending perpendicular to C. The end point is PT G, the vector is V1.
Extend a vector from D, through F, ending perpendicular to C. The end point is PT H, the vector is V2.
Extend a vector from G to H. This vector is V3.

Length V1: 2593.18 m
Length V2: 2631.18 m
Length V3: 606.33 m

NE tip of Burn crater from jpg: 40 03 02.58N, 78 54 14.05 W elev 2393 ft PT J

Approx distance from C to J: 83.23 m
Approx distance from H to J: 122.68 m

Approx area of C-H-J: 1/2(b*h) => 1/2(96.67*122.68) = 5935.26 m^2
This is the approx burn area visible in the jpg. This area is all south and east of the crater. This is consistent with the impact direction of NW->SE

Crater area in picture and Google Earth has a diameter of ~23.5 m.
Approx area of crater = 2pi*r^2 => 2*pi*(1/2*23.5)^2 => 2*pi*11.75^2 = 2*pi*138.0625 = 867.47 m^2

Given a maximum estimated plume horizontal diameter of 606.33 m, the approx area the plume would cover = 2pi*r^2 => 2*pi*(1/2*303.16)^2 => 2*pi*151.58^2 => 2*pi*22976.4964 = 144365.58 m^2

Now. We have an aircraft coming from the NWN impacting at a 40 degree angle. The crater expands S-SE-E from the point of impact to do the angle of attack; damaging an area ~867.47 m^2 in size. Continuing outward on a S-SE-E direction is an area of burning covering an additional 5067.79 m^2 (burn area of 5935.26 m^2 - crater area of 867.47 m^2)

Now, KT, what you utterly fail to do on your diagram (well, besides show any work) is highlight what the burn area was, for a sense of scale. I've taken the liberty of doing so for you:

To summarize:
1) a) The burn area is consistent with relation to the crater, the direction of impact, and the wind direction.
1) b) Given that the impact was at a 40 degree angle, it is reasonable to expect the burn area to be non-symmetric. This is consistent with the evidence.
1) c) Unless there was fuel on the surface of the grass, and thus igniting the grass via direct flame; the temperature of the fireball is insufficient to spontaneously ignite the grass.
1) d) Given 1c, we would expect grass to be burnt in the direction that the fuel from the ruptured tanks would travel, from NW to SE. This is consistent with the evidence.
1) e) Examples have been provided earlier in this thread showing that, even a jet fuel fire, burning on a stationary fuselage, will not necessarily damage vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the wreckage.
2) The debris field is consistent with relation to the creater, the direction of impact, and the wind direction.
3) The crater, burn area, and debris field are within the angle of view of the picture.

If you choose to address these points, do so using the same level of transparency and detail. If, instead you want to use pictures and your opinion on said pictures, then let me preemptively say stfu.

 

[Gravy]

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

What did you expect them to say, "Yep, we doctored it"?!!!!!!!!!!

No, Killtown, they could have said, "We found evidence that the photo is not authentic."

It is deeply disturbing that you find the events of 9/11 so amusing.

Please answer my questions. Unless you're not man enough.

 

[ghost707]

Arkan_Wolfshade, that is one of the best posts I have seen on this site.

Just Excellent!

 

[Killtown]

No, Killtown, they could have said, "We found evidence that the photo is not authentic."

Yeah, they come in her house, give her a load of bull that they see debris shooting out of the plume, take her memory card (and her hard drive as the video dipicts) back with them. You really believe if the photo is ever found out to be a fake that the FBI didn't have a hand in it?

I hope you are not THAT stupid.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Killtown:

Do you have one of those shepherd's crooks? I think they're badass.

 

[Killtown]

1) Now, KT, what you utterly fail to do on your diagram (well, besides show any work)
2) is highlight what the burn area was, for a sense of scale.

To summarize:
1) a) The burn area is consistent with relation to the crater, the direction of impact, and the wind direction.
1) b) Given that the impact was at a 40 degree angle, it is reasonable to expect the burn area to be non-symmetric. This is consistent with the evidence.
1) c) Unless there was fuel on the surface of the grass, and thus igniting the grass via direct flame; the temperature of the fireball is insufficient to spontaneously ignite the grass.
1) d) Given 1c, we would expect grass to be burnt in the direction that the fuel from the ruptured tanks would travel, from NW to SE. This is consistent with the evidence.
1) e) Examples have been provided earlier in this thread showing that, even a jet fuel fire, burning on a stationary fuselage, will not necessarily damage vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the wreckage.
2) The debris field is consistent with relation to the creater, the direction of impact, and the wind direction.
3) The crater, burn area, and debris field are within the angle of view of the picture.

1) Lie #1
2) Lie #2 (I showed you the burn area on my other diagrams marked with the orange "explosion" icon.)
1 a) Wrong, the burnt forest section is at an inconsistent angle.
b) "40 deg" is reported. they can report anything, doctor graphs, etc. the crater looks as if it was a "nearly 90 deg" dive than a 40 deg, or there would be "ripples" of dirt around the SE part of the crater where the plane moved the dirt underneath.
c) fuel SHOULD HAVE BEEN on the grass outside the crater unless it went underground
d) the grass is not burnt there. get some glasses...

(lower left corner is where the jet fuel should have scorched if the fuel spilled in the trajectory direction.)
e) if the fireball engulfed it, it should have, especially as "hot" as you guys claimed 93 could have been.
2) wrong, debris was thrown off to the plane's right side.

3)

 

[Taarkin]

If the crater and plume were caused by government-planted ordinance, why didn't it burn the grass? Unless not all explosions burn all nearby grass.

 

[gumboot]

Cabin East of crash site (NW corner of building) PT A
40 02 59.66 N
78 54 13.46 W
elev 2381 ft

Cabin East of crash site (SW corner of building) PT B
40 02 59.40 N
78 54 13.44 W
elev 2378 ft

Whitish circular impression in NW corner of pic (southern most point)
40 03 04.65 N
78 54 20.08 W
elev 2378 ft

Whitish circular impression in NW corner of pic (eastern most point)
40 03 04.85 N
78 54 19.61 W
elev 2382 ft

Approx center of crater PT C
40 03 02.80 N
78 54 17.56 W
elev 2388 ft

Excellent post! The elevation is very interesting - I didn't realise the photo was taken at such high altitude. That actually changes things a lot!

-Andrew

 

[Killtown]

If the crater and plume were caused by government-planted ordinance, why didn't it burn the grass? Unless not all explosions burn all nearby grass.

Who said the crater was caused by an ordnance?

Did A&E crash a loaded 757 to make this crater for there movie?...

http://www.aetv.com/flight_93/f93_photo_gallery.jsp

 

[Killtown]

That actually changes things a lot!
-Andrew

Yeah, like NO WAY IN HELL a plane crash from that spot could have caused Val's ENORMOUS plume when NO ENORMOUS fireball was created at the crash spot!

 

[gumboot]

Yeah, like NO WAY IN HELL a plane crash from that spot could have caused Val's ENORMOUS plume when NO ENORMOUS fireball was created at the crash spot!

No.

Higher altitude means thinner air. Thinner air means distant features (especially large ones) appear much closer.

-Andrew

 

[Belz...]

Yeah, nice unburnt grass there! Sure held up nice to your guy's MONSTEROUS HOT FIREBALL!!!

Well, I suppose ignorance is a good shield in your case, Killclown. I guess admitting your mistake was too much for you. Something snapped and you've convinced yourself using yet another hole in your knowledge.

Please stop using personal attacks by altering Killtown's username.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson

 

[Brainache]

Hmm if this was the LC forum how long would the mods have put up with KT's "disruptive" behaviour?

I notice since he has been banned at LC a few of them have said that the real Killtown was replaced with a government agent several months ago and that's why he wouldn't give them his home number and address.

Do they really think that the evil gubmint agent couldn't give them a number and just pretend to be Killtown?

If Killtown actually showed any signs of being a reasonable human being I might feel sorry for him, but unfortunately that doesn't seem likely.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

1) Lie #1

Provide evidence and/or logical reasoning or retract this claim.

2) Lie #2 (I showed you the burn area on my other diagrams marked with the orange "explosion" icon.)

I made it very clear with image I was dealing with, but since you brought it up.
1) You explosion icon is centered on the crater and is symmetrical around it. Please provide evidence that this is representative of the crash and that my assertion that it would assymetrical is wrong.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7508/1605/1600/shanks-plume-1000ft.gif

1 a) Wrong, the burnt forest section is at an inconsistent angle.

Saying "[w]rong" is not evidence. Provide evidence or retract this claim.

b) "40 deg" is reported. they can report anything, doctor graphs, etc.
the crater looks as if it was a "nearly 90 deg" dive than a 40 deg, or there would be "ripples" of dirt around the SE part of the crater where the plane moved the dirt underneath.

If you feel the 40 degree is erroneous then provide evidence showing such. Saying "looks as if" or "there would be" (without substantiating evidence) is not evidence supporting your claim. Provide evidence or retract this claim.

c) fuel SHOULD HAVE BEEN on the grass outside the crater unless it went underground

The ground in my area marked as burned shows this. For the other areas around the crater where the fuel would not have spilled, the fireball itself would have likely been insufficient to spontaneously ignite the grass.

d) the grass is not burnt there. get some glasses...

You have intentionally chosen the lowest resolution picture available to support your claim. Allow me to report other pictures that show this one to be of sufficiently low resolution so as to cause loss of image quality:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/879044ecf837e692b.jpg
http://usinfo.state.gov/photogaller...um_name=/nineeleven/penn&obj_name=5987206.jpg
http://eur.news1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/xp/reuters_molt/3132233352.jpg
http://www.bartcop.com/fl93-2.jpg

[qimg]http://killtown.911review.org/images/flight93/gallery/aerial_wf.jpg[/qimg]
(lower left corner is where the jet fuel should have scorched if the fuel spilled in the trajectory direction.)

It has already been determined from the FDR that the plane impacted from a NWN direction, which means the ejected material would travel SES. The picture you provide has no indication of orientation. This makes it quite difficult to assertain if it is consistent with our expectations. Additionally, the low-res quality of the image will cause data loss.

e) if the fireball engulfed it, it should have, especially as "hot" as you guys claimed 93 could have been.

Please show where the other examples provided had to occur at a lower temperature.

2) wrong, debris was thrown off to the plane's right side.
[qimg]http://killtown.911review.org/images/flight93/debris-path.jpg[/qimg]

Please provide corroborating evidence beyond a graphic to support this assertion.

3)

It means, based upon my revised image, that the smoke plume didn't have to drift off of the crater, only that it had to form asymmetrically to appear as it does in the picture. Given the wind direction that day, it is consistent with the picture.

As an aside, I would also recommend looking here http://usaattacked.com/flight_93.htm

 

[Gravy]

Killtown has this posted on the flight 93 photos/maps/graphics page of his website. If this had been posted on page 1 of this thread, we would have known just what we were up against.

 

[Matthew Best]

I know it's not right to laugh when we're discussing something so dreadful, but that is hilarious.

I may have to revise my estimation of Killtown's age down a few years after seeing that.