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.
kookbreaker said:
So, we've just watched 10 pages go by because a completely unqualified nutbar of CTer thought that a smoke cloud didn't look right in his own opinion?
Click to expand...


It hasn't been a waste. I've learned a lot more about the flight 93 crash site in researching and have used Google Earth more in the last three days than the entire time since I installed it. *shrug*
 
kookbreaker said:
So, we've just watched 10 pages go by because a completely unqualified nutbar of CTer thought that a smoke cloud didn't look right in his own opinion?
Click to expand...

I think the main reason most of us are here is so that those watching from the sidelines can see the truth (:p). Killtown is clearly past help, but hopefully we can stop anyone believing what he says by showing exactly how wrong he is.
 
c0rbin said:
Killtown wants there to be a conspiracy. He wants it so bad he is willing to put his fingers in his ears and "la la la" his way from reason.
Click to expand...
Except it's not quite "la la la".

AmyWilson: "It's true!"
Christophera: "3" rebar on 4' centers"
Killtown: "The plume shifted 90 degrees":rolleyes:

All three statements perform the same function as "la la la". They attempt to shut off any further communication by showing the speaker has no clue about the issues being discussed. It's terribly reminiscent of Nigel Tufnel in This Is Spinal Tap saying “This one goes to 11”.

“La la la” is usually followed by “I can’t hear you”, meaning that there is a conscious decision to not hear arguments. It seems that Killtown, like Christophera, is incapable of understanding the arguments presented by other posters. It all sounds to them like the adults in a Charlie Brown cartoon – “Mwa mwa mwa”. Their only response is just to repeat a mantra. “90 degrees”

(Killtown: 90 degrees RELATIVE TO WHAT? STOP SAYING 90 DEGREES!!!)
 
RE: the color of the smoke, I post over at RightNation.US a lot and the place is full of military and formerly military. When Killtown started his thread over there, before bailing out and coming here, (pretty much with same end result, I might add) two different guys with service in the airforce had witnessed wrecks and said the plume in this photo was consistent with plumes they had seen after the fireball had burned off.

killer didn't bother to respond to either witness, nor to myself, nor to any other poster who asked him to comment on that.

"La La La -- read my blog --- La La La --- follow my link --- La La La --- be nice to me or I shan't respond to your posts --- La La and more La"

If you want to level accusations of the type he is leveling, you have to understand that it is a hot button topic. Develop a thick skin, put on some pants, and show up with something that can be supported by facts, science or math.

I, like one of the others on here, know that killtown isn't able to answer my questions, so I post to bring up questions and provide information for the benefit of other people who might read the contents of this thread. The hope is that they'll notice the pattern of his deflective style, his failure to answer queries directly, and observe the way his minimal answers provoke more questions than they satisfy. In this way, he attempts to keep the conversation rolling along to nowhere, and gives him the impression of running the show.

I think killtown's pretty much been tagged and bagged on here, but he just doesn't realize it. And the discussion on here has ground down to trying to get him to realize it rather than talking about the topic of the thread.
 
Buckwheatjones, what was that word you referred me as over at Rightwingnutnation? Started with a "b"and ended with a "y" or something like that?
 
Killtown said:
felt the explosion
Click to expand...

OK, so others have indicated that the shockwave from the explosion would have been felt within a second of the crash. You say she reacted to the shockwave, if she took the picture within 5 seconds of feeling the explosion, so that means within 6 seconds of the crash. Is that an accurate assessment of your claim?

Interestingly, it has also been noted that it would take 7 - 8 seconds for the SOUND of the explosion to reach her. That means that if you are correct, she actually took the picture BEFORE the sound of the crash reached her. Now, is that true? Can you tell from her comments whether she took the picture before or after she heard the crash?

If someone were SERIOUSLY interested in analyzing this photograph accurately, they would have actually investigated this issue to try to verify the timeline. Of course, you decided to waste your time alienating the people involved instead of doing anything seriously. Had you approached from an investigative standpoint, instead of a witchhunt, I would think you could have gained a lot of extra information. But that is your loss.

To get back to the point: according to Killtown, this picture was actually taken BEFORE McClatchey heard the explosion. Anyone buy that?

It makes me think of that line in My Cousin Vinny: "Are you sure about that 5 seconds?"
 
Last edited:
Killtown said:
Buckwheatjones, what was that word you referred me as over at Rightwingnutnation? Started with a "b"and ended with a "y" or something like that?
Click to expand...


Killtown, could you please answer the points put to you on this page rather than recyle historical insults?

Please note that I have abided by the stipulations in your OP. It would be rude to use cheap diversionary tactics at this stage.

Cheers

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

1 ) Certainly not Killtown. He is not willing/capable of learning.

2 ) Maybe this is an excersize for our own debating skills, though after ten pages, we have exhausted the original contention and surpassed the topic (lead by Killtowns goalposting and back-pedling)

3 ) Lurkers. If Lurkers are to benefit, perhaps we can summerize the contentions and responses here on this thread with a sign post reading "Nothing beyond this point is relavant save the joy of flaming a total nutball."
 
Let's get back on topic!

I think we all have strayed off the main subject of this thread, so here it is again:

The smoke plume in Val McClatchey's infamous photo originated at a different location than where we were told Flight 93 crashed:

plumecomparisonns0.gif


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1841211&postcount=1
Click to expand...

My calculations conclude that the plume in Val's photo originated closer to the orange "explosion" icon to the right on this diagram:

plumeanalysis1000ftsmdj4.gif



The main reasons that brought me to this conclusion are:

1) the plume in her photo still looks in its "infancy" stage (ie looks less than 45 seconds old)

2) this seems to be verified with Val's story of immediately running outside to take it's picture as soon as she got jolted on her couch from the blast

3) the size of Val's plume in the photo is way too big IMO to have originated from the crash spot

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

5) drawing a "realistic size" explosion/plume diameter puts it much closer to her house as a show in my diagram


Hopefully this clarifies things.


Note that some of you say that the plume could have shifted into Val's camera line (yellow arrow) in about 50 seconds since the wind was blowing that direction at 9 knots. I agree with this, but that would still make the plume way too big to have originated at the crash spot. I believe my generously sized plumes of approx 600' across would be more accurate for UA 93 to have made than the estimated 2,200' across it would have had to be if coming near the crash spot.

Discuss.
 
c0rbin said:
Of course I don't wish to stifle discussion...especially not on this board, but I must ask who benefits from this discussion?

1 ) Certainly not Killtown. He is not willing/capable of learning.

2 ) Maybe this is an excersize for our own debating skills, though after ten pages, we have exhausted the original contention and surpassed the topic (lead by Killtowns goalposting and back-pedling)

3 ) Lurkers. If Lurkers are to benefit, perhaps we can summerize the contentions and responses here on this thread with a sign post reading "Nothing beyond this point is relavant save the joy of flaming a total nutball."
Click to expand...
It's almost always #3. The people on the fence who might be reading this thread.

It's like who benefits from maps. Not the locals, who know everything by sight. Not the blind, who can't see the map anyway. Maps are for the people who are coming into an area for the first time.

And while a summary would be nice, I wouldn't expect a critical thinker to rely on it exclusively. Sometimes you have to walk the road to know you've gotten to the right destination.
 
Killtown said:
[qimg]http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/2352/plumeanalysis1000ftsmdj4.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

How did you come up with such a graphic? Do you have geomatics engeneering expertise?

Did you do a topographical survey of the region? Have you gone there to look for yourself?

What is your field of expertise?
 
Killtown said:
I think we all have strayed off the main subject of this thread, so here it is again:

..snipped...

Discuss.
Click to expand...

Thank you Killtown. Does this mean you have dropped your issue with the colour of the smoke?
 
Killtown said:
Buckwheatjones, what was that word you referred me as over at Rightwingnutnation? Started with a "b"and ended with a "y" or something like that?
Click to expand...

Well, killtown, since you know the first letter and the last letter and there are only five vowels from which to select the middle letter, I find it hard to believe that someone with your level of accumen -- who can string together all sorts of convolutions from unrelated bits of minutia -- is unable to piece this one together, but I'll help you out and remind you for the benefit of all the fine folks over here.

I called you Boy. As in "Is McClatchey a liar or not? Pick one or the other, boy."

So. Now that we've dispensed with that and your tender feelings, can we realign ourselves to the topic? I mean, if you can grow past your sense of alienation, disenfranchisement, and those deep emotions of personal "woundedness," can you speak to the math that shows the viability of a mushroom cloud 600 meters wide?

Can you tell me why any conspirator would set off an explosion a mile away from the hole that it was supposed to replicate?

I have a list of other questions, but let's see if you can answer either of these two without resorting to "read my blog" or "follow my link."
 
Last edited:
Killtown said:
I think we all have strayed off the main subject of this thread, so here it is again:




Note that some of you say that the plume could have shifted into Val's camera line (yellow arrow) in about 50 seconds since the wind was blowing that direction at 9 knots. I agree with this, but that would still make the plume way too big to have originated at the crash spot. I believe my generously sized plumes of approx 600' across would be more accurate for UA 93 to have made than the estimated 2,200' across it would have had to be if coming near the crash spot.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you have dropped the smoke colour rubbish from your argument.

Glad to see you have dropped the 90degree bending plume rubbish from your argument.

Please give us the calculations you have used to state that the plume would be 2200ft across if it originated from the crash spot.

Also, what is wrong with Arkan's earlier google map?
 
Shrinker said:
Thank you Killtown. Does this mean you have dropped your issue with the colour of the smoke?
Click to expand...
1) Yes, as I said, WE all strayed off course, including me. It doesn't matter what caused this plume, it only matters were it originated from, agreed?

2) What would your thoughts be if it was PROVEN that it originated from a different spot? (hypothetically of course.)
 
Killtown said:
1) the plume in her photo still looks in its "infancy" stage (ie looks less than 45 seconds old)
Click to expand...

How are you able to determine that? What is your expertise in this field?

2) this seems to be verified with Val's story of immediately running outside to take it's picture as soon as she got jolted on her couch from the blast
Click to expand...

The exact time it took her is inconclusive, it has been shown to you. There is no exact timing of her reaction.

3) the size of Val's plume in the photo is way too big IMO to have originated from the crash spot
Click to expand...

Again, what is your expertise? Don't plumes of smoke expand? Isn't it logical to assume that after the explosion, it exanded as it got carried away by the momentum of the crash and the wind?

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

Was there a hurricane that day? Of course plumes of smoke go up, I've never seen one go down.

5) drawing a "realistic size" explosion/plume diameter puts it much closer to her house as a show in my diagram
Click to expand...

Again, expertise? How did you come up with this alternative explosion? Where is your work?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

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