Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Case in point from the LC forum. Killtown thinks photoshopped photos of feces on the graves of murder victims is funny.
Last edited by a moderator:
Plume in Flight 93 photo is different
- Thread starter Killtown
- Start date
- Status
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Okay, so; from the video mentioned above; we have Val stating that it was "timed" to "about five seconds after the crash". She does not cite who timed it. In the video she also states that she (1) took the picture then (2) tried the cell phone then (3) tried the landline in the sawmill.
Given that we have estimated the speed of sound in air that day to be ~
and a rough estimate of speed of sound in the ground to be ~
Assuming that this range represents the conditions at Shanksville, at the time of the crash, the P wave in the ground would have reached her in ~0.32-0.43 seconds after impact.
So, we have the following questions to answer:
1) a) Were the conditions and geological makeup at Shanksville, on that day, such that the sound wave could reach her house through the ground?
1) b) If yes, then is the time estimate of 0.32-0.43 correct?
2) a) Was her reaction to that of the P-wave in the crust of the Earth, or to that of the sound wave in the atmosphere?
2) b) If she reacted to the P-wave, then we can base our analysis on a time lapse of 5.3-5.4 seconds after the crash.
2) c) If she reacted to the sound wave, then we can base our analysis on a time lapse of 12.5 seconds after the crash.
Given that we have estimated the speed of sound in air that day to be ~
and a rough estimate of speed of sound in the ground to be ~
source: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/PamelaSpiegel.shtml
Assuming that this range represents the conditions at Shanksville, at the time of the crash, the P wave in the ground would have reached her in ~0.32-0.43 seconds after impact.
So, we have the following questions to answer:
1) a) Were the conditions and geological makeup at Shanksville, on that day, such that the sound wave could reach her house through the ground?
1) b) If yes, then is the time estimate of 0.32-0.43 correct?
2) a) Was her reaction to that of the P-wave in the crust of the Earth, or to that of the sound wave in the atmosphere?
2) b) If she reacted to the P-wave, then we can base our analysis on a time lapse of 5.3-5.4 seconds after the crash.
2) c) If she reacted to the sound wave, then we can base our analysis on a time lapse of 12.5 seconds after the crash.
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2001
- Messages
- 21,829
I have addressed the issue of it being authentic above. If it is authentic, then it is most certainly relevant to the overall scheme of things.
If it is not authentic, then it doesn't really say anything about a CT, but it does constitute a strong personal indictment against McClatchy, and moreso against the picture, which has even been purchased by the Smithsonian. If nothing else, you would admit that you would be opposed to the Smithsonian displaying a forgery, right?
So if you folks can't see the significance of the discussion of this picture, you aren't thinking very hard.
I think you make a big mistake trying to downplay the significance of the picture. It's far better to address the meat of the issue: Killtown's claims about what the picture actually shows are baseless. As I mentioned early on, and Gravy succinctly summarized just a bit ago:
Similarly, the analysis posted by BuckwheatJones has gone right at it, showing that nothing in the picture is inconsistent with the conventional picture. These actually address the problem.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Based on everything discussed so far, my layman's SWAG is that her "about five seconds" is wrong. *shrug* It's the one anomalous data point so far.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
BTW Killtown, did you really say on the LC forum that mentioning some so-called "conspiracy of silence" article/video in this forum will get you "banned in 5 minutes"?
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2001
- Messages
- 21,829
It's very likely. As has been pointed out, people's perception of time without a clock isn't very good. Basically, the timing of the picture is completely unknown. Makes any detailed assertions about it shows pretty tough.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Some interesting information...
According to the Flight Data Recorder from UA93, it impacted the ground at about 500kts (575 MPH) in a 40 degree nose down attitude, with a 150 degree roll angle to starboard.
In addition:
1. Cabin pressure - NORMAL
2. Hydraulics - NORMAL
3. Cargo fire - NORMAL
4. Smoke - NORMAL
5. Engines - RUNNING
6. Engine RPM (N1) 70%
7. Fuel pressure - NORMAL
8. Engine vibration - LO
9. Wind direction - WEST
10. Wind speed - 25 kts
To my way of thinking, this means a number of things:
A) UA93 was involved in a controlled flight collision with the ground - the entire airframe was intact at impact
i.e. it wasn't shot down.
B) The wind speed was almost twice previously reported, and would have moved the mushroom cloud CLOSER to Val as well as lateral to Val.
C) The angle of impact was shallower than I previously realised, resulting in a forward motion of light debris/fireball from the impact (explaining further the position of the mushroom cloud as WELL as the light debris scattered towards the lake)
D) The speed of impact was significantly higher than previously claimed - I had always heard about 500 MPH - it was actually 575 MPH. Combined with the shallower impact angle this further supports the movement of the mushroom cloud.
End result? The actual data from the Flight Data Recorder further supports the claim that Val's photo is accurate and genuine.
(Incidentally, the FBI have authenticated the photo, so it's not a fake - unless you believe the FBI is in on it, at which point you're lost to woo land).
The FDR report can be found here.
For laymen, someone on a professional pilot's forum has provided the key specs at impact here.
-Andrew
According to the Flight Data Recorder from UA93, it impacted the ground at about 500kts (575 MPH) in a 40 degree nose down attitude, with a 150 degree roll angle to starboard.
In addition:
1. Cabin pressure - NORMAL
2. Hydraulics - NORMAL
3. Cargo fire - NORMAL
4. Smoke - NORMAL
5. Engines - RUNNING
6. Engine RPM (N1) 70%
7. Fuel pressure - NORMAL
8. Engine vibration - LO
9. Wind direction - WEST
10. Wind speed - 25 kts
To my way of thinking, this means a number of things:
A) UA93 was involved in a controlled flight collision with the ground - the entire airframe was intact at impact
i.e. it wasn't shot down.
B) The wind speed was almost twice previously reported, and would have moved the mushroom cloud CLOSER to Val as well as lateral to Val.
C) The angle of impact was shallower than I previously realised, resulting in a forward motion of light debris/fireball from the impact (explaining further the position of the mushroom cloud as WELL as the light debris scattered towards the lake)
D) The speed of impact was significantly higher than previously claimed - I had always heard about 500 MPH - it was actually 575 MPH. Combined with the shallower impact angle this further supports the movement of the mushroom cloud.
End result? The actual data from the Flight Data Recorder further supports the claim that Val's photo is accurate and genuine.
(Incidentally, the FBI have authenticated the photo, so it's not a fake - unless you believe the FBI is in on it, at which point you're lost to woo land).
The FDR report can be found here.
For laymen, someone on a professional pilot's forum has provided the key specs at impact here.
-Andrew
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Wow, Gravy is sure on a major campaign to try to character assassinate me! I guess he got a little miffed when I showed the world what his character is all about.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
So that's how you feel about destroying someone's life and possibily putting them in harm's way, because they took a picture you don't like...you roll your eyes.
Classic.
You're quite a specimen, dude. I hope anyone out there who may be sitting on the fence, or possibly considering whether there might be something to this CT stuff, recognizes just what sort of people they're falling in with.
No.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
Wow, Gravy is sure on a major campaign to try to character assassinate me! I guess he got a little miffed when I showed the world what his character is all about.
You also showed the world that you're a first-class coward by running away from questions directed to you. Actions speak louder than words, my friend.
Last edited:
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
not to mention hiding behind an anonymous ID while publishing personal data and destroyiong a person's life, jeopardizing her life, and laughing about it.
Cowardly, lying weasel is an appropriate description.
No, I'm rolling my eyes at your claim that I "destroyed her life".
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
She says she's afraid for her safety, thanks to your comments about her and your posting her personal information. Tell me, would you like to be walking around afraid someone might kill you at any time? And that's not just some idle possibility; MarkyX has received more than one death threat from CTer's, and there have been others (for instance, johndoex threatening to shoot billzilla for making him look like an idiot). You, who won't even talk to a reporter anonymously on the phone, lest they discover some remote shred of information about you? Thinking it's no big deal to have your personal info exposed to a bunch of lunatics?
Tell you what...if it's no big deal, why don't you post your name and address and phone number right here? After all, even if people start harassing you, it's no big deal, right?
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
Minor nitpick -- if this was a deliberate CFIT event, I'd expect the engines to be at full throttle (N1 rotor speed = 100%). Seems more consistent with partial control of the aircraft, i.e. agrees perfectly with the official story of a battle in or near the cockpit.
But yeah, definitely not shot down, especially if the vibration sensor can be counted as accurate. Surprise surprise.
Absolutely correct. Predicting windspeeds at a single point, for the span of a few seconds, is hard enough when there isn't a huge jet and sudden fireball in the vicinity. There's quite a lot of room for error in estimating the path of the smokering created at impact. I don't understand why anyone would even suspect that Val's photo was anything other than genuine.
Good find!
- Status