How was there even an explosion at Shanksville (officially speaking)?

Originally posted by hooper

Please post a link to the official story that is contradicted by the plane exploding.

Here ya go!

reply to post by GenRadek

Um, maybe you should have read the OP to understand why (like most people with common sense would have by now).

Originally posted by waypastvne
The jet fuel is held in the wings and it was atomised and ignited on impact. Just like it did at World Trade Center 1, World Trade Center 2, the Pentagon, and every other crash site involving a large amount of jet fuel.

You either are very uneducated in basic physics or willfully being moronic.

We all have seen the big fire balls at the world trade center. This was not the case in Shanksville at all. Think before you type.

Too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

You either are very uneducated in basic physics or willfully being moronic.

We all have seen the big fire balls at the world trade center. This was not the case in Shanksville at all. Think before you type.

Oh really? Then please, explain the massive black smoke ball that was seen after impact? And how would you know that the fireball did not happen at Shanksville? Were you there?

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757.

Not when actually measured from wing end to wing end and the circumference of the fuselage. Fits a 757 no problem. Where have you been?

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by hooper

Please post a link to the official story that is contradicted by the plane exploding.

Here ya go!

Yep, just as I thought. Nothing. You think the "explosion" contradicts your own speculation about the crash.

Originally posted by ATH911

Like if it crashed on the asphalt tarmac, regardless of any speed as long as it crashed hard enough to ignite the fuel, which seems like what you are saying, yes?

edit on 9-11-2011 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)

Sorry to be blunt, but that's a meaningless sentence. If you write something that is understandable I'll attempt to help you out.

I've read your OP again and it makes no sense. Something you've invented called "The OS" - apparently a combination of sources that you've flung together yourself - says that the plane crashed into the ground and the cockpit broke off. The remainder of the jet ploughed into the ground. You seem to think that this precludes an explosion but nobody else, literally nobody else, can see why you would think this. Demanding to beshown why you can't understand something is not going to get a result. Sorry.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Oh really? Then please, explain the massive black smoke ball that was seen after impact? And how would you know that the fireball did not happen at Shanksville? Were you there?

What black smoke?

Isn't it interesting that the plane crash video examples you posted ALL showed a black mushroom cloud rising after each cash. What's with the grey mushroom cloud in the McClatchey and Berkebile footage?

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Sorry to be blunt, but that's a meaningless sentence. If you write something that is understandable I'll attempt to help you out.

Funny that you're the only one who can't comprehend it!

I've read your OP again and it makes no sense. Something you've invented called "The OS" - apparently a combination of sources that you've flung together yourself - says that the plane crashed into the ground and the cockpit broke off. The remainder of the jet ploughed into the ground. You seem to think that this precludes an explosion

Wait, so you are saying that there still would have been an explosion in the "story I 'flung' together"?

but nobody else, literally nobody else, can see why you would think this. Demanding to beshown why you can't understand something is not going to get a result. Sorry.

Who else even thought to question it?!

reply to post by ATH911

Funny that you're the only one who can't comprehend it!

He's not the only one.

Wait, so you are saying that there still would have been an explosion in the "story I 'flung' together"?

Yes.

Who else even thought to question it?!

Well, to be honest, no one else cares.

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by GenRadek

Oh really? Then please, explain the massive black smoke ball that was seen after impact? And how would you know that the fireball did not happen at Shanksville? Were you there?

What black smoke?

Isn't it interesting that the plane crash video examples you posted ALL showed a black mushroom cloud rising after each cash. What's with the grey mushroom cloud in the McClatchey and Berkebile footage?

10 years..... 10 years, and you still have zero clue regarding video and camera picture color differences, light shading, position of sunlight, etc, affecting the color of something as simple as smoke. So sad.

Shanksville's mushroom cloud looks pretty black to me, but its lit up by the sunlight.

Look here:


compared to Shanksville's smoke:


Smoke colors can and are affected by sunlight direction and shading.

This is fun! Like shooting fish in a barrel. With a bazooka.

Originally posted by ATH911

Funny that you're the only one who can't comprehend it!

I'm the only person paying attention to you, apart from hooper. And he couldn't understand you either!

The sentence literally makes no sense. If you like I can pull it apart and show you why.

Wait, so you are saying that there still would have been an explosion in the "story I 'flung' together"?

Don't understand, sorry. If you mean that there "still would have been an explosion" in what you call the "OS" then yes. There was one. In real life.

Who else even thought to question it?!

To question what you wrote? No one. Nobody else cares except me.

Or do you honestly think that there are a million others reading your nonsense and nodding along to it? If nobody answers that means that everybody is in silent agreement with you? Hilarious.

Originally posted by GenRadek
Shanksville's mushroom cloud looks pretty black to me, but its lit up by the sunlight.

Look here:

compared to Shanksville's smoke:

Um, the building smoke looks darker.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
hooper. And he couldn't understand you either!

Well that's a given!

The sentence literally makes no sense. If you like I can pull it apart and show you why.

Well, my posts do take a certain amount of intelligence to understand.

If you mean that there "still would have been an explosion" in what you call the "OS" then yes.

So what was your complaint about my interpretation of the OS? And what is the correct version?

Originally posted by GenRadek

Smoke colors can and are affected by sunlight direction and shading.

And by innumerable other factors like camera, lens, method of reproduction, all kinds of things.

If for example you edited your video of an explosion in fcp and output it and watched it on a dvd then it would appear much lighter than one done straight from a camera. This is because fcp changes the gamma levels.

But of course these types of things take research and knowledge. Not just flailing about on the internet asking others to prove stuff to you.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Too small to have been caused by a Boeing 757.

Not when actually measured from wing end to wing end....

Aww ya I almost forgot that most people's education of physics came from Bugs Bunny cartoons.

Not in the real word, PAL!

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

The plume in the Berkebile video is the same grey color (grey?!) as the HUUUUUUUUGE grey plume (grey?!) in the McClatchey photo. Shouldn't they be different color according to your guy's logic?

Why don't you find a video of a non-9/11 meduim-to-large plane crash to compare the smoke from the explosion?

reply to post by Shadow Herder

And don't forget, that crater is a lot bigger than it initially would have been if a burrowing plane caused it because it's, officially, a filled-back-in-hole, so that would increase its diameter.

reply to post by ATH911

And don't forget, that crater is a lot bigger than it initially would have been if a burrowing plane caused it because it's, officially, a filled-back-in-hole, so that would increase its diameter.

Do you actually read what you write? The hole is bigger than it initially would have been? Burrowing plane? And again sorry, but there is no "officially" in there at all. Finally, are you saying that a hole increases in diameter as you fill it back in?