Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

EPA, AVIRIS system results from WTC flyover

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
The EPA requested (through the USGS) NASA do a flyover of the WTC area using the AVIRIS system to check for hotspots, and toxic or radiation in the area.

pubs.usgs.gov...

In response to requests from the EPA through the USGS, NASA flew AVIRIS on a De Havilland Twin Otter over lower Manhattan at mid-day on September 16 and 23, 2001. For these deployments, the Twin Otter was flown at altitudes of 6,500 and 12,500 feet.


The results of the USGS / EPA data collection from the AVIRIS are on the following site.

pubs.usgs.gov...

This web site describes the results of an interdisciplinary environmental characterization of the World Trade Center (WTC) area after September 11, 2001.

Information presented in this site was first made available to the World Trade Center emergency response teams on September 18, 2001 (Thermal hot spot information), and September 27, 2001 (maps and compositional results).

The Airborne Visible / Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS), a hyperspectral remote sensing instrument, was flown by JPL/NASA over the World Trade Center (WTC) area on September 16, 18, 22, and 23, 2001 ( Link to the AVIRIS JPL data facility).




posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
The EPA assumed there was radaition at the WTC due to older planes like the 747 carry Depleted Uranium for counterweights. Also there was an accident involving a 747 that had a radiation incident.

However newer planes like the 757 and 767 carry Tungsten for counterweights.



posted on Jul, 29 2008 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


The name says it all -
Airborne Visible / Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS)
They were using AVIRIS to map thermal hotspots for the benefit of ground level recovery/cleanup operations (where not to go).

Perhaps they do have some auxilliary radiation detectors in addition to the infrared scanners but there's little point in looking for ground level radiation from an altitude of over 6000' unless you're flying downwind of Chernobyl just after the meltdown.

There had been quite a few crashes worldwide by 2001 involving planes with DU (B747, DC10, C130, L1011 are just some of them). The Tenerife crash of 2 747s in 1977 was probably the worst of them releasing a combined 3000kg of DU from the 2 planes so the idea of DU being exposed in a crash & fire would be at the forefront of EPA thought at that time.



posted on Jul, 29 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
The EPA requested (through the USGS) NASA do a flyover of the WTC area using the AVIRIS system to check for hotspots, and toxic or radiation in the area.


Actually, the request to NASA from Roger Clark of the USGS was for the following:

- Hot spot location and temperature determination
- Asbestos mapping
- Debris composition and distrubution mapping.

trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

There is no mention of checking for radiation at all. Plus that is something the AVIRIS isnt even designed for.



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Actually, the request to NASA from Roger Clark of the USGS was for the following:


Why can't you be adult enough to even admit that the EPA made the request through the USGS for the AVIRIS?

Also i have and can post sites that show the AVIRIS can search for radiation.

As stated the EPA assumed there was radiation from the DU from aircraft.



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Why can't you be adult enough to even admit that the EPA made the request through the USGS for the AVIRIS?

Also i have and can post sites that show the AVIRIS can search for radiation.

As stated the EPA assumed there was radiation from the DU from aircraft.


I'm just stating the request to NASA from Roger Clark of the USGS was for the following:

- Hot spot location and temperature determination
- Asbestos mapping
- Debris composition and distrubution mapping.

trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...

There is no mention of checking for radiation at all. Plus that is something the AVIRIS isnt even designed for. You can check that FACT at the AVIRIS site at NASA yourself.

(note: The site you said verified it could search for radiation just stated it was one of the instruments used in the SCAR test. It did not say it was used to detect radiation at all.)

No need to lie about what the AVIRIS can do, ULTIMA1. It can all be verified at the AVIRIS site itself at NASA at aviris.jpl.nasa.gov... .



AVIRIS Data

The AVIRIS sensor collects data that can be used for characterization of the Earth's surface and atmosphere from geometrically coherent spectroradiometric measurements. This data can be applied to studies in the fields of oceanography, environmental science, snow hydrology, geology, volcanology, soil and land management, atmospheric and aerosol studies, agriculture, and limnology. Applications under development include the assessment and monitoring of environmental hazards such as toxic waste, oil spills, and land/air/water pollution. With proper calibration and correction for atmospheric effects, the measurements can be converted to ground reflectance data which can then be used for quantitative characterization of surface features.


How odd, no mention of radiation. Now why is that?


[edit on 30-7-2008 by gavron]



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
I'm just stating the request to NASA from Roger Clark of the USGS was for the following:


But the original request came from the EPA to the USGS, according to the USGS's own site.



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


...but the NASA site has no record of the USGS requesting them check for radiation. It isnt even in the results they found.

So where are you getting this radiation information from?



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
...but the NASA site has no record of the USGS requesting them check for radiation. It isnt even in the results they found.
?


Maybe because the EPA asked for the flyover. Also i have posted the information about the EPA believing that DU from the planes was the cause of radiation of the WTC. Which does not explain the radiation since we know that DU is not in the 757 and 767.

The source i posted also shows that the AVIRIS is able to do a lot more then imaging.


[edit on 30-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Maybe because the EPA asked for the flyover.

So the data provided by NASA. and all the output, is some coverup? It is all invalid then? It doesnt mention radiation on their results...shall I provide the JPL NASA link again?



Also i have posted the information about the EPL believing that DU from the planes was the cause of radiation of the WTC. Which does not explain the radiation since we know that DU is not in the 757 and 767.


All interesting stuff, but does not change the FACT that the AVIRIS was not used to detect radiation. You can bob and weave, but the FACTS keep knocking you down for the count.



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
So the data provided by NASA. and all the output, is some coverup? It is all invalid then?


No, as shown the EPA requested the flyover and as facts show the EPA believed there was radiation at the WTC that was casued by the planes.

As also shown by facts the AVIRIS can be used for more then imaging. Such as the thermal hotspots.

pubs.usgs.gov...

AVIRIS data collected on September 16, 2001, revealed a number of thermal hot spots in the region where the WTC buildings collapsed. Analysis of the data indicated temperatures greater than 800oF in these hot spots (some over 1300oF) . Over 3 dozen hot spots of varying size and temperature were present in the core zone of the WTC. By September 23, most of these fires that were observable from an aircraft had been eliminated or reduced in intensity.


So what cased these hotspots and what kept them hot for over 6 weeks?


[edit on 30-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
No, as shown the EPA requested the flyover and as facts show the EPA believed there was radiation at the WTC that was casued by the planes.


No, as shown by the NASA link provided, the USGS did not request the AVIRIS be used to detect ANY radiation. Not sure why you have to keep lying, ULTIMA1, it only makes you look bad.



As also shown by facts the AVIRIS can be used for more then imaging


...but not for radiation, as proven by the link to the AVIRIS site at NASA.

You know, if you learned to do actual research, it would help you out so much. Maybe you should take a course in it sometime.



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
the USGS did not request the AVIRIS be used to detect ANY radiation. Not sure why you have to keep lying, ULTIMA1, it only makes you look bad.



Maybe because as shown dozens of times that the EPA asked for the flyover through the USGS. Gee how old are you, you only have a 1 track mind?

Please be adult enough to answer the following question truthfully.

Did the EPA request the flyover according the USGS site, YES or NO ?



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Maybe because as shown dozens of times that the EPA asked for the flyover through the USGS.


I notice you avoided the FACT that NASA was not asked to look for radiation....a fact proven by the NASA link. You cannot dispute it, unless you think NASA is lying in the report they provided.

Is that what you are saying? That NASA is lying?



posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   
@ULTIMA1: I've just searched the USGS link you provided for the word "radiation", and it only returned thermal radiation, etc..

Where did the idea of ionizing radiation come from? Just curious as to why you think the EPA = radiation of the nuclear kind.


[edit on 30-7-2008 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Is that what you are saying? That NASA is lying?


Please stop avoiding my question and be an adult for once.

Please be adult enough to answer the following question truthfully.

Did the EPA request the flyover according the USGS site, YES or NO ?



[edit on 31-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
Just curious as to why you think the EPA = radiation of the nuclear kind.


Where did i say anything about nuclear?

I have stated and shown that the EPA assumed radiation at the sites was casued by DU from the planes. But i have also proven that the planes supposed to have been involved on 9/11 do not carry DU.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have stated and shown that the EPA assumed radiation at the sites was casued by DU from the planes. But i have also proven that the planes supposed to have been involved on 9/11 do not carry DU.


And we have proven that NASA did was not requested to use the AVIRIS to search for radiation, plus the AVIRIS was not designed to do that anyway! Fnny how FACTS like that keep getting in the way of your conspiracy theory.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Please stop avoiding my question and be an adult for once.

Please be adult enough to answer the following question truthfully.

Did the EPA request the flyover according the USGS site, YES or NO ?


I have alwatys stated this true fact: Roger Clark from the USGS contacted NASA to request use of the AVIRIS. A fact proven by NASA.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
I have alwatys stated this true fact: Roger Clark from the USGS contacted NASA to request use of the AVIRIS.


Sorry but you do not state the complete fact. RogerClark contacted NASA AFTER the EPA requested the AVIRIS through the USGS, according to the USGS site.

I guess i have to get the mods in here to settle ths since you refuse to be adult enough to see and admit to the facts as posted.









 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join