Plume in Flight 93 photo is different

[LashL]

Take away the speed for a sec, then does it look what like UA 93 would have looked like as described by all the reports the way it came down?

Not at all.

Different type of plane, different engines, different trajectory, different surface.

Not to mention all of the other variables that have been enumerated time and again for you upthread.

You really don't *get* anything about research at all, do you?

 

[Killtown]

I already know what you're thinking Killtown, but you'd have to see what this plume would look like after 20 more seconds or so....looking for a longer video of this, standby.

Don't worry about the plume color. I'm more interested how the fireball looked as it crashed and then how it began to create the plume. I'd concede that the plume got even wider as it rose up higher and then faded in color.

 

[MortFurd]

On what basis would you "say" this, Killtown? It looks nothing remotely like a plane slamming into the ground at over 500 mph to me--perhaps your computer is malfunctioning in some way?

Oh, and if this is the one that you "say" looks most like Flight 93 does that mean it's the one that you think is real (and all the others are fake--based on Bruckheimer's Third Law) or is this also one of the fakes?

He says this because it looks very much like the smaller plume he edited into Ms. McClatchey's photo. Never mind that his methods of scaling and postioning are based on his "gut feelings."

 

[Brainache]

Is that the plume that you superimposed on the original pic?
Did you time 5 seconds from the impact and freeze the video?
Did you forget that Val said she took her pic "about five seconds" after she heard/felt the explosion(not after the explosion, but after SHE HEARD IT)?

Just my non expert 2 cents.

 

[Killtown]

Is that the plume that you superimposed on the original pic?
Did you time 5 seconds from the impact and freeze the video?
Did you forget that Val said she took her pic "about five seconds" after she heard/felt the explosion(not after the explosion, but after SHE HEARD IT)?

Just my non expert 2 cents.

It is the plume we took from, but disregard that because I'm just interest in how the plume formed. We'll worry about size in a bit.

 

[Yoink]

Take away the speed for a sec,

Killtown, on what basis are you arguing that speed is immaterial? Is this also part of the "calculations" that you seem to keep forgetting to put up on your blog? What gives you any reason to "assume" that a plane crash at over 500 mph is likely to be similar to a plane crash at 100 mph. If someone gave you the choice of being in a car crash at 30 mph and being in a car crash at 60 mph would you be stupid enough to say "oh, it doesn't matter--take away the speed and they'll be much the same"?

This is all part of this "why do you have to make it so complicated" stuff for you, isn't it Killtown. But can you just try to comprehend that it isn't us making it complicated. Gravity makes it complicated. F=MA makes it complicated (no, that's not a misspelling of FEMA). Newton (that rat bastard) makes it complicated. The properties of aerosolized flammable vapours make it complicated.

This is why very, very intelligent people--people much, much smarter than you or me, take years and years of study (I'm willing to bet more years than you have been alive) to get just a solid fundamental grasp of these things. The idea that you or I can look at a grainy YouTube video and come to some valid conclusion about Flight 93's crash is simply laughable.

 

[MortFurd]

It is the plume we took from, but disregard that because I'm just interest in how the plume formed. We'll worry about size in a bit.

"We" who? You got a mouse in your pocket?

 

[Yoink]

So, Killtown, is this it? This is your "Big Finish"? Is this the point you were building to all along: that videos of OTHER plane crashes--ones that are NOTHING LIKE the one under discussion, don't look exactly the same?

You do realize that this is like arguing that the portrait of Washington on the one-dollar bill can't possibly be a genuine likeness because it doesn't look like the portrait of Hamilton on the ten-dollar bill, right?

In fact, it's actually a sillier argument, given that there's more reason to expect Washington and Hamilton to look alike than two chaotic events like crashes occuring under such radically different circumstances.

ETA: so now that you've once again conclusively demonstrated that you have no evidence of any kind whatsoever, when should we expect you to put that apology up on your blog?

 

[MortFurd]

Yes, Yoink. He's come full circle. From "Here's a picture where I pasted in an itty bitty plume because I like it better and that proves 911 was a conspiracy" back to "Now, we take this plume and scale it down itty bitty then paste it in here and tada there's the picture the way I think it ought to be. Proved to my satisfaction, case closed. 911 was a conspiracy."

 

[Killtown]

Killtown, on what basis are you arguing that speed is immaterial? Is this also part of the "calculations" that you seem to keep forgetting to put up on your blog? What gives you any reason to "assume" that a plane crash at over 500 mph is likely to be similar to a plane crash at 100 mph.

you guys are just jumping waaaaaaaay ahead for this experiment. This is a "working hypothesis" and we a working to get there. Be patient. Baby steps.

Don't worry about the size of this plume. I'm more interested on how it formed from this crash. Do you feel UA 93's plume formed in a similar way to this one?

 

[MortFurd]

Don't worry about the size of this plume. I'm more interested on how it formed from this crash. Do you feel UA 93's plume formed in a similar way to this one?

Damifino.

Quit trying to bait an effin' trap and just explain what you are doing. Make a single, coherent posting that explains your thought processes and leads logically from your assumptions to your conclusion.

 

[twinstead]

The only other option killtown is to return to the conspiracy forums and brag about how you owned the folks at jref.

Then you can, just before somebody who doesn't agree with you gets banned at LC, you can continue to say, "read my blog", and all the members of the choir there will nod their heads and post "hell yea's" and "down with the man" and "wake up sheeple" till the cows come home.

And it won't make any difference; the truth won't change.

 

[Belz...]

Ok, I'll go along with that. Everybody else concur?

Yep. We all concur. And this means the estimate is right. As you might know, science and investigation is a matter of popularity. The more people agree, the better.

...of course, except Galileo.

 

[Belz...]

Now, in order to hold that it COULD BE a photo of that cloud, all we have to show is that it is perfectly conceivable, under a wide range of possible initial conditions that a cloud of the size seen in that photograph could have been produced by the crash of a plane such as Flight 93. That's it. This has been done (in an extraordinarily detailed manner). For our position to remain undisturbed we don't have to agree to any one specific variable as to the amount of fuel, or how much of it was burnt on impact, or exactly how fast the wind was blowing or whatever. All we have to show is that there is as yet NO REASON TO BELIEVE that what we observe in the photograph lies outside the range of possible results of the crash of Flight 93.

Now, the burden of proof is entirely upon you.

Disregard my previous post, Killtown.

THAT is the way to investigate a claim.

 

[Yoink]

This is a "working hypothesis" and we a working to get there. Be patient. Baby steps.

No, Killtown, this is a patently absurd and utterly useless hypothesis. "Baby steps" are fine if each step is plausible and well supported by testable evidence. All you have here is an unsupported (and, on its face unlikely) assertion.

Why don't we all leap to the goal line: the OV says that a 757-222 crashed near Val McClatchey's house, diving into the ground at a steep angle at over 500mph. You assert that the photo Ms. McClatchey took could not possibly be an unaltered photograph of the resulting cloud of smoke. Can you tell us if you have any single piece of evidence to base this accusation on?

Just one piece of evidence. That's all I'm asking for here. Just one. Not a "go look at my blog," not a "hey, let's look at utterly irrelevant videos of photos of planes crashing in completely different circumstances" just one, single, solitary, piece of evidence.

Anything?

Anything at all?

Hello....Killtown....are you there?

 

[Belz...]

Um, when you guys stop stalling so we can get through this experiment.

WHAT experiment ? This is just speculation.

K, moving on.

Hello ?

 

[Stellafane]

Yes, Yoink. He's come full circle. From "Here's a picture where I pasted in an itty bitty plume because I like it better and that proves 911 was a conspiracy" back to "Now, we take this plume and scale it down itty bitty then paste it in here and tada there's the picture the way I think it ought to be. Proved to my satisfaction, case closed. 911 was a conspiracy."

Anyone else get the impression this whole "Killtown" thing has about run its course? Not that he came here with any real ammo or anything, but at least for a while he had a bit of energy, misplaced though it was. But now he's just sort of going through the motions. I suspect it won't be long before he feigns offense at some imagined slight and stalks off never to return, or he goes the Jenabel route and commits suicide by mod.

 

[Killtown]

Relax, relax, relax. As soon as you stop bickering, we can move on.

Does everybody agree that B-52 crash is comparable to how UA 93 was said to have crashed in terms of how the fireball and plume was crated? We'll worry about the size of the explosion UA 93 would have made from coming in faster after this (and yes, I would believe the explosion 93 would have made would be larger than this one. See, I'm learning).

 

[Belz...]

Yes, it should explode into a fireball when it hits and form a mushroom cloud. You don't have to make it more complicated.

See, guys ? I told you: a video-game 3d model reused every time. That's how Killtown sees real-life explosions.

 

[Belz...]

We also seem to be in broad agreement that your willingness to publicly slander her, while hiding behind your internet anonymity, when you apparently do not have any evidence whatsoever to support your attacks was base, cowardly, and dishonest.

Someone should send Val a link to this thread. I think she'd appreciate how our friend here is beign demolished.