Plume in Flight 93 photo is different

[The_Fire]

DING! DING! DING! DING! We have a winner,folks. KluelessTown has no math and no physics and has no idea how fluids react when they hit the ground at 550MPH+ in a disintegrating tank assembly. I at least know enough to say I do not have the higher-level physics to determine the exact pattern, but I have enough brains to know that when you drive fluids into the ground at high speeds, much of it will splatter into the air, at a vector away from the ground, and the ignition/heat will also be driven upwards by the vector and intake of Oxygen. And this was a complex reaction.

But not to ol'KT, nosiree. He's got pictures! Hes got opinions! He's got "I don't thing so"! I mean, what are Math and Physics next to those formidable tools?

Incredible. KT, you might as well start a thread on your 'No-planes at the WTC' therory, you cannot possibly reclaim the slightest shread of plausability on this topic.

Ignorance is often seen on the surface; but stupidity goes right to the Frontal Lobes...

On drop behaviour in regards to dirt;

Here

5 minutes of google,....

 

[Gravy]

For about the tenth time...

You mean the green grass that wasn't engulfed by the fireball like all the grass around the Shanksville crater?

I want to be sure I have this right. You claim that nothing was singed or charred on the south/southeast area beyond the crater. Is that correct?

And you haven't answered my two simple questions about the McClatchey photo:

1) Your only stated criterion for her possible guilt was if the photo was Photoshopped. True or false?

2) You had no access to the original file, memory card, or any high-res version of the photo. True or false?

Stop running and answer these simple questions.

 

[gumboot]

Killtown,

I know you have trouble dealing with things that are not pictures, so I have a present for you. I apologise for the poor quality, but I had limited resources, and even more limited skills.

Before you read any further, please be aware....

30 minutes ago I stepped out of the cinema after watching United 93. The significance of Val's photo is thus fresh on my mind.

Please consider the two following photos. I have one question to ask you for each one. Please answer honestly and promptly, without unecessary additional commentary.

Photo One:



Now. Killtown.

1.) Do the dimensions for this crash look realistic to you?
a) Yes
b) No

Photo Two:



Again,

1.) Do the dimensions for this crash look realistic to you?
a) Yes
b) No

Please provide an answer for both questions. Then we can proceed.

-Andrew

ETA. If you find the pictures a little small KT, click on them to load larger versions.

 

[Hellbound]

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

And you've yet to show it was engulfed, which is pretty much the point at this time.

ETA:

GReat pics, gumboot. I was thinking of doing something similar, but hadn't gotten to it yet

 

[gumboot]

GReat pics, gumboot. I was thinking of doing something similar, but hadn't gotten to it yet

For everyone else... just so you know what my point is...

The original photo is taken at about the same altitude as Val's photo was taken, in very similar weather conditions, at the same time of year (though obviously in entirely different countries!).

In both instances the "crash site" is 2.5km from the photo origin point - the same distance as from Val's house to the crash site of UA93.

The fireballs, smoke, and aircraft in each photograph are to scale (as much as realistically possible).

The smoke cloud for UA93 is adjusted to 575m, and the fireball (taken from the impact fireball of UA175) is roughly 150m across. Obviously the fireball will continue to expand well past this size.

For the UA93 photo I have also placed the aircraft at the approximate angle of impact, and as indicated, shown it's position at 1 second before impact (to give an idea of its speed).

The B-52 smoke plume and fireball scale are based on the wingspan of the B-52. I calculated a maximum fireball width of 4x the aircraft's wingspan, however as this is a maximum, for the sake of this exercise I have gone with roughly 3x wingspan - or 170m.

Pay particular attention to three aspects of this photo:
1) Notice how near in the photograph the impact is located - because Val's photo is on flat ground the event appears "over the horizon" and this distorts the apparant distance.
2) Note that both mushroom clouds are approximately the same size.
3) Note the deceptive appearance of the fireballs - UA93 has an "airbourne" fireball, and as such appears to be much smaller, although it is only 16% narrower than the B-52 fireball.

Also note the deception you get with a thin-air photograph - the mountain peaks are almost 3x as far away as the Chateau (visible as three small white dots just appearing above the ridge beneath the arrow).

-Andrew

 

[stickin_damud]

Killtown, you're on this AGAIN?

What part of 580 mph at a 40 degree angle don't you understand?

Oh, I forgot. You don't understand any part of that.

Why do you keep showing a photo of the area near the wingtip, and not all the other photos that show scorch marks and debris in the direction of travel?

Your methods are, once again, dishonest.

Yes, how many times now has he/she/it referenced the part of the crater where the part of the wing which carries no fuel some how miraculously has no burning effect as a result. Killtown, the angle of impact and speed have everything to do with how the crater was formed and how the fuel behaved, but you incessantly keep trying to draw equal conclusions from completely unequal crash conditions of other planes. That's intellectually dishonest or just plain ignorant. You really should apologize to Val. She has done NOTHING to you.

 

[stickin_damud]

Well, KT, I see your No votes have been stuck on 8 for days and days. Seems you've convinced no one after thousands of posts that you 'theory' has any merit. Your 8 believers seem to have given up supporting you, if they really exist at all. Telling, no?

 

[Gravy]

K, since you don't understand it, let me walk you through it.

You guys said 93's fireball was 4-15x wider than the crater.

Crash scene photos show no fire damage immediately outside the crater. Only a small section of forest at an awkward angle got singed.

The crash scene photos show that the fireball didn't exceed the crater, but somehow part of the fireball jump out of the crater, over some grass and a road, and landed in some trees at an awkward angle.

I.E. totally inconsistent with a fireball of the size you guys suggested.

Killtown, why do you lie about the events of 9/11?

Notice that because of the peculiar color cast of the photo, the charred areas appear in shades of purple. If we select a mid-range purple in that area and convert to black & white, here's what we get:

Killtown, you got some 'splainin to do!

 

[Wyn]

Let's not forget Killtwn's version of events...

 

[Belz...]

Killtown, why do you lie about the events of 9/11?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/879044ef003c49c05.jpg[/qimg]​

Honestly, I don't know how why Killtown doesn't see the obvious fireball patten on that picture.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Honestly, I don't know how why Killtown doesn't see the obvious fireball patten on that picture.

Now, now, that was 911spook. KT just decided to host it on his site.

 

[stickin_damud]

Hiya, Wyn! Yeah, that one cracks me up big time. I love the words "should be" and "probably". Some real expert opinion there. Notice all the math and physics he uses to support his assertions in the diagrams? Er, wait. There isn't any. It's amazing that the fact that a mostly hollow airplane weighing at least, what 25 tons?, traveling about 580 mph laden with around 5500 gallons of fuel will likely behave escapes his superior mind. Earth to Killtown, come in Killtown. This is your brain speaking. Please come home, I miss you.

 

[KingMerv00]

Hiya, Wyn! Yeah, that one cracks me up big time. I love the words "should be" and "probably". Some real expert opinion there. Notice all the math and physics he uses to support his assertions in the diagrams? Er, wait. There isn't any. It's amazing that the fact that a mostly hollow airplane weighing at least, what 25 tons?, traveling about 580 mph laden with around 5500 gallons of fuel will likely behave escapes his superior mind. Earth to Killtown, come in Killtown. This is your brain speaking. Please come home, I miss you.

Worse than that. I'm not sure of the exact weight but I think it was something like 70 tons. When empty.

Edit: Looked it up.

http://www.zap16.com/civ fact/civ Boeing 757-200.htm

Empty = about 68-69 tons
Maximum takeoff weight = about 127 tons

 

[Hellbound]

From Boeing:

Maximum Takeoff Weight 255,000 lb (115,680 kg)

THey don't give empty weigh there. But you can go into the detailed info found here to find it (page 3).

Spec Operating Empty Weight: 128,380 lbs to 136,940 lbs. (64 to 68 tons).

 

[stickin_damud]

Worse than that. I'm not sure of the exact weight but I think it was something like 70 tons. When empty.

Thank you. I wasn't sure, but was GUESSING low to be safe. I ADMIT it. (Killtown, can you hear me?) I know some of the big airliners (777) can weigh over 500,000 pounds loaded and the 757 THAT CRASHED IN SHANKSVILLE THAT DAY had to be somewhat less. I don't think it takes away from my point: that's a whole lotta inertia and it would be practically impossible to predict EXACTLY how the impact would play out. What we can do is look at what happened and reason if it is possible and/or likely.

Can someone smarter than me perhaps explain all the vectors that are in play at the impact point. We have 3D position, then we have velocity vectors in 3 dimensions and also acceleration vectors in 3 dimensions, correct? It seems to me that UA93 was in the middle of a barrel roll at impact and that it is likely that one of the wing tips (the easterly one that KT keeps showing the unburnt grass around) hit first. IF this is the case (keeping in mind this all happens in less than a second) the plane would sort of roll as it disintegrates. When I look at where the trees burned up, it seems very likely the result of a roll component at impact combined with the aerosolization of the fuel which gave us the HUGE fireball. Some of the sprayed fuel sets the trees on fire, the rest ignites immediately and completely giving us Val's plume.

 

[stickin_damud]

I still want to know what KT believes happened that day...

Null hypothesis is: UA93 crashed in Shanksville field on 9/11/01
KT hypothesis: no, it didn't.

Fine and dandy. But it is not enough to say "it didn't happen that way". We would all like to know what you believe DID happen that day. How is the gov't involved? Any launching of missiles? How many people were involved in staging your version of events? Etc, etc.

I am DYING to know your version of events in Pennsylvania that day, KT.

 

[KingMerv00]

Thank you. I wasn't sure, but was GUESSING low to be safe. I ADMIT it. (Killtown, can you hear me?) I know some of the big airliners (777) can weigh over 500,000 pounds loaded and the 757 THAT CRASHED IN SHANKSVILLE THAT DAY had to be somewhat less. I don't think it takes away from my point: that's a whole lotta inertia and it would be practically impossible to predict EXACTLY how the impact would play out. What we can do is look at what happened and reason if it is possible and/or likely.

I knew you were guessing. You made that very clear. You said:

"... mostly hollow airplane weighing at least, what 25 tons?"

You made your inexperience clear, took a guess, and happened to be wrong. No big deal. Before I looked it up, I had no friggin clue what a Boeing 757-200 weighed. Now I do. I probably would have guessed wrong too.

This is just a good example of how human intuition can be wrong. Killtown does not understand that. He thinks if it sounds reasonable then it must be true. He doesn't do the work necessary to confirm or reject his ideas. Willful ignorance.

KT, the self proclaimed crash expert.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Killtown, why do you lie about the events of 9/11?


Notice that because of the peculiar color cast of the photo, the charred areas appear in shades of purple. If we select a mid-range purple in that area and convert to black & white, here's what we get:


Killtown, you got some 'splainin to do!​

Similarly, check it out under color inversion:

 

[Taarkin]

notice the left side dirt looks older than the darker turned dirt on the right side

There aren't enough laughing dogs in the world to respond to this.

 

[stickin_damud]

I knew you were guessing. You made that very clear. You said:

"... mostly hollow airplane weighing at least, what 25 tons?"

You made your inexperience clear, took a guess, and happened to be wrong. No big deal. Before I looked it up, I had no friggin clue what a Boeing 757-200 weighed. Now I do. I probably would have guessed wrong too.

This is just a good example of how human intuition can be wrong. Killtown does not understand that. He thinks if it sounds reasonable then it must be true. He doesn't do the work necessary to confirm or reject his ideas. Willful ignorance.

KT, the self proclaimed crash expert.

Thanks again, KingMerv and you too, Huntsman. Yeah, it's called keeping an open mind and knowing when you are making educated guesses and stating so, just plain guessing based on intuition, or just plain rectal extraction (credit to the author on that one). And then there's the just plain old ridiculous "I'm right, you're wrong, nanner, nanner" stuff my 6 and 4 year old kids use. I expect that from kids, not from adults having intelectual discussion.

Excuse me while I shamelessly pile up posts.