Plume in Flight 93 photo is different

[CurtC]

Of course I don't wish to stifle discussion...especially not on this board, but I must ask who benefits from this discussion?

Well, most of us here enjoy this kind of thing, so we benefit.

Other than that, I think it would be satisfying if we manage to take the air out of his argument, so that even he realizes that he gains nothing by trying to make it. I was able to accomplish that to some degree with Sun Zoo over at LC, and his argument that photos of flight 175 proved that the plane could not have been a 767-200, therefore must have been a different flight/plane. I think he still argues that it was different, but I haven't seen him say that the photo proves it anymore.

Of course, Killtown's web page has 200 crappy arguments, so even if we make him abandon this one, we still have 199 more of these to look forward to.

 

[Killtown]

Pardalis, I doubt I have the "expertise" to satisfy you, so you probably shouldn't participate in this discussion anymore.

 

[Pardalis]

Pardalis, I doubt I have the "expertise" to satisfy you, so you probably shouldn't participate in this discussion anymore.

Then why should anyone bother with your claim?

 

[Killtown]

Then why should anyone bother with your claim?

They don't. I haven't forced anybody to participate on this thread.

So ba-bye!

 

[Pardalis]

Killtown, wouldn't you want to corroborate your "findings" with the proper authorities in the field?

 

[Killtown]

Killtown, wouldn't you want to corroborate your "findings" with the proper authorities in the field?

I'm not "qualified" enough for you, so ba-bye, thanks for playing!

 

[Pardalis]

You didn't answer my question.

If you are after the truth, wouldn't you want to ask the proper experts' opinion?

 

[Buckwheatjones]

Good, so apologize for calling me a "boy" and I'll respond to your questions.

No. Quit whining and grow a thick skin. You want to delve in hot button topics, learn to deal with the heat.

You estimate the size of the cloud at the hole, as shown in the photograph to be 2200 feet across. That's 600 meters. I posted a mathematical equation showing that 600 meters is possible, 1000 meters is even reasonable.

Do you have anything besides your own opinion that the cloud is just too big to be believable, or is that the best you have?

Answer it, don't answer it. Doesn't matter much to me. If you do then we all get to finally see your hand. If you don't, someone else on here will press you and you'll have to come up with something. Hurry up, boy! Start a-cipherin'!

 

[mortimer]

4) the plume looks like it's traveling straight up, thereby NOT affected by much wind

How the heck can you determine which way the plume is travelling by a still photo?

 

[CurtC]

4) the plume looks like it's traveling straight up, thereby NOT affected by much wind

The other points have been pretty well addressed already, so I'll take this one. How can you tell it's travelling straight up? A plume drifting in the wind would, at any snapshot in time, look like that, but over time it would simply appear farther and farther downwind. That seems to be what we're seeing in this photo.

 

[Killtown]

No.

Ok, ba-bye, thanks for playing!

 

[Killtown]

How the heck can you determine which way the plume is travelling by a still photo?

Which plume does NOT look like it's affected by wind:

 

[rwguinn]

Ok, ba-bye, thanks for playing!

oh, lookee!
Baby is taking his ball and going home...

 

[Pardalis]

Killtown, wouldn't you want to corroborate your findings with the proper authorities in the fields of physics, geomatics, meteorology, and the like?

Are you really interested in finding out what that plume of smoke is?

Are you willing to have your theory be falsified scientifically, as any theory should be?

Or do you want to hold on to your unprofessional layman analysis as the Gospel?

 

[twinstead]

I wonder how long it would have taken one of us, with the exact same posting style, no answers or brief, snippy answers to questions that just beg for more questions instead of proper debating, and attitude as killtown, to be banned at LC.

Kind of telling, don't you think?

 

[kookbreaker]

Ok, ba-bye, thanks for playing!

Man alive, you are childish.

 

[twinstead]

Killtown, wouldn't you want to corroborate your findings with the proper authorities in the fields of physics, geomatics, meteorology, and the like?

Are you really interested in finding out what that plume of smoke is?

Are you willing to have your theory be falsified scientifically, as any theory should be?

If he was really after the truth he sure would.

 

[mortimer]

Which plume does NOT look like it's affected by wind:

[qimg]http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7508/1605/1600/plume-comparison3.1.jpg[/qimg]

Better question: In which photo can you not see the source of the plume?

 

[Pardalis]

I'm not "qualified" enough for you, so ba-bye, thanks for playing!

Do you acknowledge that you don't have the necessary credentials and expertise to call Ms Val McClatchey's picture "a fraud"?

 

[CurtC]

Man alive, you are childish.

Be easy on him, he's just a boy.