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.
Killtown is in his backyard re-creating flight 93 with balsa wood and gasoline.
He should be back any minute with the results.......ie:

"The airplane only broke into 3 pieces!"

"The gasoline that I poured on the grass and lit on fire burned the grass!"

"I proved you guys wrong!"

Etc. etc. ad infinitum. ad nausium.
 
As soon as someone can tell me how your plane did this to form your monsterous plume:

b52collagepx2.jpg


And yet didn't burn the grass growing up against the crater:

crater_stahl.jpg


I'm all ears.



PS - "Peak fireball width: 50m(164ft) - 184m(200yrd)"

:D
 
Killtown: You have yet to show that the grass was burnt all around any crater in the case of the B52 crash...you haven't even shown any evidence of a crater in the case of the B52 crash. As far as you know the grass wasn't burnt then either.
 
It's amazing to me that JREFers don't think a jetfuel explosion that engulfs grass won't burn it!

:jaw-dropp
 
It's amazing to me that JREFers don't think a jetfuel explosion that engulfs grass won't burn it!

:jaw-dropp

Here is an experiment you can do at home. Take a candle. Light it. Snuff it out using your fingers. Now, the candle flame has a peak temperature of about 1400C, yet it is possible to do the above without burning your fingers. Can you think of any reason why that might be so?
 
Did you ever see one of those movies, where the previews looked so exciting and interesting, but then when you saw the movie, all the good parts were already in the previews, and the stuff in the middle was just a bunch of crap, like with stupid dialogue written by some hack, no plot, nothing but a bunch of cliches? Did you?

I hate that.
 
...and yet very nearby the impact site, there were charred trees. What caused the trees to burn, KT? Do you think it takes more energy to burn thick, living tree trunks down site from a plane crash or grass up site from it? Where did the grass go that was in the crater? Did it burn up or not and what proof do you have that it did or didn't? Did you ever visit the crash site of this or any other plane crash in person? (I know, that would mean you have to leave your mommy's basement, but I have to ask.)
 
Last edited:
Smoking gun pic.

Notice that not only the grass around the crater is not singed and is free of plane debris, but notice the dirt on the left side is not charred from any type of explosion/fire and notice the left side dirt looks older than the darker turned dirt on the right side where a 100 ton 757 supposedly burrowed down in with 5,500 gals of fuel on board:

crater-epa2.jpg

http://www.epa.gov/region7/news_eve...rc_conference_august2005/Plenary/flight93.pdf
 
Killtown, Can I ask how old are you, or in which age group you are. I can't believe any grownup could be so monumentally stupid as you. You are like a child who refuses to believe there's no santaclaus. So how old are you?

Thankyou
 
Killtown, Can I ask how old are you, or in which age group you are. I can't believe any grownup could be so monumentally stupid as you. You are like a child who refuses to believe there's no santaclaus. So how old are you?

Thankyou
You know you are winning a debate when others are forced to result to insults and personal attacks!

Ironic you ask me how old I am! :D
 
It would be funny, except those appear to be the only things to which you will respond. You have totally withdrawn from every other possible debate.

Ergo, you are losing the debate, by your own reasoning.

If you want a chance at "winning," which by the way escaped you over 40 pages ago, the least you can do is respond to the reasonable questions offered.

Or climb back up on your cross, if you prefer. Makes no difference at this point.
 
Post #2549..picture #4...green grass all around that aircraft.
Killtown, you really should look at your material before you post it.
You just disproved your own theory.
 
It would be funny, except those appear to be the only things to which you will respond. You have totally withdrawn from every other possible debate.

Ergo, you are losing the debate, by your own reasoning.

If you want a chance at "winning," which by the way escaped you over 40 pages ago, the least you can do is respond to the reasonable questions offered.

Or climb back up on your cross, if you prefer. Makes no difference at this point.
Hi, I'm R.Mackey. I think plane crashes that create huge explosions like this:

b52collagepx2.jpg


can do it without charring the immediate area outside its crater like this:

9301.jpg
 
Post #2549..picture #4...green grass all around that aircraft.
Killtown, you really should look at your material before you post it.
You just disproved your own theory.
Um, no it didn't. Notice the explosion and continuing fire there? You think the grass underneath that explosion will still be green when the fire burns out?
 
Um, no it didn't. Notice the explosion and continuing fire there? You think the grass underneath that explosion will still be green when the fire burns out?

Sorry killtown, doesn't change the fact that there is alot of green grass around that accident.

Bet you wished you hadn't posted that pic.
 
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