Conspiracy theorists blog that Flight 93 photo [may be] fake

Originally posted by Mr_pointy
I don't see how those show anything about the plume, but here's a picture from a concord crash:
image.guardian.co.uk...

Looks a lot like the flight 93 plume.

Except for that looks like a plume from a plane crash. Notice the thick column at its base which means fuel is still burning, feeding the plume.

Val's plume was from an short pulse explosion.

Except for that looks like a plume from a plane crash. Notice the thick column at its base which means fuel is still burning, feeding the plume.

Except the concord could have crashed into a building, setting it on fire, creating the smoke.
I invite everyone to read this thread and watch Killtown fail to provide any support for his theories.
forums.randi.org...
He never gives any hint about how he came up with either, how large the plume should be, or how far the wind could have moved it.

Buck,

I can't say anything about what this image represents. There are many
possibilities and I am uncomfortable speculating. The dispersal and combustion of fuel following a high-speed impact of an airplane into the ground is a complex event and I know of no simple way to relate the resulting plume of smoke to the quantity of fuel and type of event.

Joe Shepherd

This is from, Dr. Joe Shepherd at CalTech's Explosion Dynamics Lab. Posted here:
forums.randi.org...

[edit on 17-8-2006 by Mr_pointy]

You have voted Killtown for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

!st time using the way above thingy.. Not bad, you got me to use it Killtown.

Nice job man, I have always known something was up with 93.

I live in the area and saw local news, alot of what they were saying didn't show up in mainstream news like CNN, Fox, MSNNBC and so on. So ya.

The plane was shot down. Ed Felt called the 911 center in Westmorland county and stated this.

"I am calling from Flight 93, this is not a hoax... Bla bla bla... I am in the bathroom, it seems someone has hijacked the plane... blablabla.... There is white smoke, I see white smoke.... A few seconds later the line went dead..."

So ya the plane was shot down.

[edit on 8/18/2006 by ThichHeaded]

[edit on 8/18/2006 by ThichHeaded]

Given the headaches of a lawsuit and the blunt personal criticism from the bloggers, Mrs. McClatchey wonders if her quick decision to grab her camera that morning nearly five years ago and capture the last puff smoke that was Flight 93 was the right one. But she is glad to be able to give something back to the families of the dead, and thinks her photo will stand the test of time and conspiracy theorists.

I wonder how much she made from this photo.

I remember a while ago.. Like a very very long time ago, before I got into ATS and conspiracies and such, I emailed her and asked her to use her photo in a montage or something I was going to do on flash and she told me 20 bucks. I emailed her back and told her I was doing this for no money involved and she still said 20 bucks.

After that I changed my views of her.. But Killtown brings up some good points about this image.

Originally posted by Mr_pointy


Except the concord could have crashed into a building, setting it on fire, creating the smoke.
I invite everyone to read this thread and watch Killtown fail to provide any support for his theories.
forums.randi.org...
He never gives any hint about how he came up with either, how large the plume should be, or how far the wind could have moved it.

You know what I see - not what you do. I see a thread where you and others twist his statements. Further to that, I see you bringing an argument from another board here. He put hard work into this...that deserves respect. We don't have to agree with his conclusions to give him credit in his work. THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. I don't see Killtown here beating people about their heads and shoulders demanding they accept his theory...I just see him presenting his work. YOU, on the other hand, seem to have some strong desire to entangle us in your argument elsewhere (without presenting your case here).

If you have some personal beef with Killtown on another board - KEEP IT THERE...but don't come here acting like a turd-head and inviting everybody over to another board to try to sway them to your opinion. In other words, either present your case here (and without whatever personal issues you have) or bug-off.

Just in, Flight 93 reportedly had about 5,500 gals of jet fuel at impact.

Kind of hard to make a BIG smoke plume with so LITTLE fuel!

And also take into account that many OCTs believe a lot of fuel was buried underground along with the plane!

Just be honest with yourselves and come to the realizaton that the smoke plume in Val McClatchey's photo was NOT from Flight 93 crashing.

Plus in western PA is alot of coal mines and such. Old steel area.

That might have been someone blowing something up over there.. For it is a remote area up there.

Thich, can you clarify your coal mine thesis? The thing about mines, especially old ones, is when they blow up, there is usually less smoke and more land subsidence. But for the sake of argument, let's say it was some sort of abandoned mine accident. Does that mean that Val photographed it a long time before 9/11 and thought she could capitalize on it after the fact? I don't think that'd have gotten FBI attention. Hopefully one of y'all can help me out on the following but something just "clicked". Every July 4th the USN puts on a big demonstration where they invade the golf course in Coronado California. There are lots of staged explosions, which since the aim is theatrics, are very large and very smokey. One more thing, they don't produce a crater or really any evidence of explosion there after. They are almost identical to the kind of explosion that is shown in the photograph Killtown presented. What it means, I don't know, but part of this just has psy-op pasted all over it.

-Evil

home.hamptonroads.com...
So what if the coal-mining and farming region was in the economic doldrums? There were worse fates than a modest lifestyle, they thought. At least they were safe.

www.post-gazette.com...
Now, Miller -- an ever-calm master of the low-key and understatement -- said he was prepared to handle more tragedy if the worst-case scenario unfolds at Quecreek.

This is coal country, he said of this region tattooed with mines.

"Anybody who lives in this area knows we have coal fatalities," he said.

This is all I can come up with on a quick Google search. I think that info may have to come from a library or something in Pittsburgh or even shanksville

I only know this cause I grew up in this area, so alot of ahhhhh.. Inside info so to speak.

Remember tho, Pittsburgh was a high steel making industry back in the look 00s to about 1980. They helped make alot of military vehicles and buildings, including the WTC and such buildings like that.

During the Missile crisis during Kennedy's admin Pittsburgh/homestead/clairton was marked to be wiped.

On a side note Killtowns site is # 3 on google for "shanksville coal mines"

[edit on 8/23/2006 by ThichHeaded]

Thanks, I especially liked that bit about JFK's hometown... the cold-war was full of such childish statements on both sides. Still, I feel I shall remain scratching my head as to what happened- there are just too many variables.

Original aerial analysis that shows a 200yrd plume if it came from the crash site (orange jagged icon):


New aerial diagram to give you more perspective of things:


The stadium to the left is Heinz Stadium, home of the Pittsburgh Steelers.


www.pbase.com...

So imagine if UA 93 crashed in the middle of the field inside the stadium and then imagine that its plume had to grow to the size of THREE of these stadiums!


killtown.blogspot.com...

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Killtown]

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Killtown]

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Killtown]

Another perspective of Heinz Stadium.

On WING TV show today talking about the Flight 93 photo controversy...

www.wingtv.net...

This is a very good start, and I have anxiously been awaiting those who want to find out more about 93 instead of the WTC.

Do you beleive that Flight 93 was NOT shot down in PA? I feel it was and hope this ins't just new disinfo for Flight 93. I can see this article affecting alot of people and there beeing alot of bandwagoneers, so be careful

good job

Killtown- Thanx for all your input here. No matter what the size of the plume, wind direction, speed, ordinance blast closer to the camera, etc. . .The fact remains that in no way shape or form does the plume resemble anything that KNOWN plane crash photos & vids depict.

WHERE'S THE BLACK SMOKE??? C'MON!!!

Originally posted by esdad71
This is a very good start, and I have anxiously been awaiting those who want to find out more about 93 instead of the WTC.

Do you beleive that Flight 93 was NOT shot down in PA? I feel it was and hope this ins't just new disinfo for Flight 93. I can see this article affecting alot of people and there beeing alot of bandwagoneers, so be careful

good job

I also love the input on this thread- But I second your opinion esdad - What's the final conclusion by you, because it could open a Pandora's box, so to speak, as esdad has envisioned. . .

Is there any information on the camera model used by the photographer?

I'd be curious as to the type of lens that was being used.

Many Zoom/Telephoto lenses can cause a distortion of perspective.

here is a little info on this type of distortion:
www.cybercollege.com...

You may have also seen this used as an effect in movies.
If you zoom in on a subject, while simultaneously moving the camera away, keeping the main subject the same size in the frame, you can see all of the background objects changing size..a distortion of perspective...If you have a video camera, try it yourself!







[edit on 15-9-2006 by spacedoubt]

yeah, bit bored. It's pretty easy, but I really don't know how to use photoshop. I'm sure a few professionals with a couple of days could make a very realistic looking image. This took about 2 hours

Smoke Plume Image
(Orignal photo here, taken by 'wax115')

Originally posted by esdad71
This is a very good start, and I have anxiously been awaiting those who want to find out more about 93 instead of the WTC.

Do you beleive that Flight 93 was NOT shot down in PA? I feel it was and hope this ins't just new disinfo for Flight 93. I can see this article affecting alot of people and there beeing alot of bandwagoneers, so be careful

good job

Thanks!

I don't think any plane crashed in the area, or else it would have left a long dark smoke trail. But the only thing matters is that 93 didn't crash in Shanks where we were told.

Val's photo controversy is a seperate issue really. if it's real it proves a different explosion, but doesn't necessarily prove 93 didn't crash.

Originally posted by 2PacSade

Killtown- Thanx for all your input here. No matter what the size of the plume, wind direction, speed, ordinance blast closer to the camera, etc. . .The fact remains that in no way shape or form does the plume resemble anything that KNOWN plane crash photos & vids depict.

WHERE'S THE BLACK SMOKE??? C'MON!!!

I believe that too, but just using that as evidence can put you in a trap. The best evidence is to assume it's from plane crash, but show it originated from a different location, that is much closer to Val's house. Of course this all assumes the photo is real which I doubt.

[edit on 17-9-2006 by Killtown]