Something really wrong with Flight 93 plume photo

[bushatbooker]

Plane crash plume said to be 30 seconds old...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOreA5Q45JU


Flight 93 plume that is said to have had to travel 250 yards and be 50 seconds old to line up for this shot...

[mirandapriestly]

1. they look different alright, eom

[bushatbooker]

6. It's "clear as day" that the Flight 93 plume is very young

in that photo, so either that explosion went near the pond, or just over the horizon in the photo:



The plume looks like a mile in the sky!

[LARED]

2. I know, it looks like a little red X (n/t)

[mirandapriestly]

3. it's not that hard to get it to come up.eom

[LARED]

4. I tried really, really hard, but its still a red X (n/t)

[bushatbooker]

5. Red X?

what are you talking about?

[hack89]

7. Where is the wind relative to the photographer

in the flight 93 picture? What if the wind was blowing towards the photographer?

[bushatbooker]

9. Map of wind direction an photographer's house

http://flight93photo.blogspot.com/2006/07/plume-analysis.html

Wind was reported 9 knot NW (ie blowing south east.)

Plume had to travel 250 yards to line up with photo and that would have taken about 50 seconds apparently.

[sabbat hunter]

8. just like 2 snowflakes

no two crashes (be they airplane or whatever) are exactly alike. different types of planes also might make a difference.

[bushatbooker]

10. You think this huge smoke plume could drift 250 yards

and still stay intact like this...

[Bryan Sacks]

11. Can't contain myself on this stuff

Bushatbooker: you've hit a personal sore spot here.

I cannot vouch for the veracity of the photo (who can anymore, these days)? But what is patently absurd is the suggestion that no plane crashed near Shanksville. Perhaps you are not saying that, or suggesting that.

But understand, it is absurd. It's absurd because THE PLANE IS STILL THERE. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE. Less than 1% of it, but still a lot of it. It's spread out over hundreds of yards near the crash site, in very small pieces. I know, becuase I went there in August 2004 and got behind the fencing (with permission). I saw countless tiny yet entirely identifiable pieces of plane in the ground - all you had to do was dig a little. I am sure the same is true today, as it will be for dozens, if not hundreds, of years.

Yet people still persist in suggesting (and again, I hope you are not) no plane crashed there.

It's insultingly stupid. It gives the LAREDs of the world all the ammunition they need, too, which is beside the point but a source of easily-avoidable frustrating.

There is not a single person who was witness to the plane's descent, nor a single witness to the aftermath, who believes no plane crashed there. Please don't use this opportunity to pull out-of-context quotes from coroner Wallace Miller's mouth. Find the other of his quotes where he debunks the no-plane foolishness and chides those who would mangle his words.

I know this won't convince those who are dug in, but nothing will. I mean that. There is far more reason to believe that no spaceship landed on the moon than no plane crashed in Shanksville.

Sigh.

[bushatbooker]

12. No 757 crashed and caused that crater.

No way, no how. I hope YOU don't think one did.

[Bryan Sacks]

16. Of course it did. Of COURSE it did!

Do know know that there were dozens of people who saw the plane flying overhead seconds before it crashed, including two who were just a couple of hundred yards away? They fled directly to the scene and were the second and third people present. They stayed there for like six hours. We talked to them and got them on tape - though I have to admit that we never even thought to ask him if there was a plane!! We asked if they saw or heard anything to suggest it was shot down.

They found a 1/2 ton piece of engine nearby, remember. There were, and as I said still are, thousands and thousands of peices of plane everywhere in the area of the crash.

[Nozebro]

17. Who trucked the engine piece out there to the explosion site?

Did you talk to anyone that saw them off-loading the engine piece? I'm not implying that no one could have seen them doing the off-loading, I'm just asking if you actually talked to anyone that DID see them doing it. What kind of equipment did they use? Was it covered with a tarp while it was being transported? How long did it take to get it to the spot where it was to be "found"? Things like that I'd be curious to know. Thanks.

[seatnineb]

19. u spoke to the 2nd and 3rd person who arrived where 93 crashed

I thought the police cordoned off that area..............

The impact was so powerful that police investigators who cordoned off the site as a crime scene on Tuesday
reported finding no pieces of debris larger than a phone book, and no bodies.
http://toledoeast.blog-city.com/flight93heros.htm

[Ezlivin]

28. "[T]housands and thousands of peices [sic] of plane everywhere"

If that is true, than a quick collection of these pieces should yield one with a serial number.

In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft have many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling.

Following a certain number of flying hours or, in the case of landing gears, a certain number of takeoff-and-landing cycles, these critical parts are required to be changed, overhauled or inspected by specialist mechanics. When these parts are installed, their serial numbers are married to the aircraft registration numbers in the aircraft records and the plans and scheduling section will notify maintenance specialists when the parts must be replaced. If the parts are not replaced within specified time or cycle limits, the airplane will normally be grounded until the maintenance action is completed. Most of these time-change parts, whether hydraulic flight surface actuators , pumps, landing gears, engines or engine components, are virtually indestructible. It would be impossible for an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash to destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers. I repeat, impossible. George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (ret.)

[seatnineb]

29. very interesting....nice find! n/t

[bushatbooker]

30. Can you describe the physics involved at the crash scene

to explain how the crash scene got that way?

[spooked911]

32. No one has been able to yet!!!

They will just ignore it or pretend there is nothing unusual there.

[LARED]

13. LAREDs of the world?

What is that supposed to mean?

[vincent_vega_lives]

22. You have clones?

AGENT LAREDs

[seatnineb]

14. Rubbish.

Flying a plane at 400-500pmh on purpose ,whilst simultaneously committing suicide...... into buildings such as the WTC,The Pentagon and an abandoned strip mine in Shanksville are outrageouse, bordering on humanly impossible events.....

And I'll be fuckin' damned if I have to take any bullshit eye-witness to such an event...at face value.....

Speaking of which......

Why don't you provide a name and a location to the witness who showed you pieces of flight 93 embedded in his property after 4 years....

[Bryan Sacks]

15. Bullshit eye-witness?

I went with two others. Their names are Michael Richardson and Kathleen Rosenblatt. My name is my name. And your name, seatnineb?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

The name of the man whose property it was - he may not want to be named, honestly I don't know. But again, if you get up off your ass, you can go talk to him yourself. As I've said here several times already, if you go to Shanksville and ask someone on the street whathis name is, you'll find out in a few minutes.

What on earth do you mean by 'location'? His house was 110 yards from the crash site, seatnineb. Still is, to my knowledge. Where the hell else would it be?

Do you feel silly yet?

[seatnineb]

18. I ain't the one sayin' that there are pieces of fl93 in my garden.....

....your unamed witness is the one saying pieces of flight 93 are in his garden...a pretty big fuckin' claim........

And you met this unamed eye-witness 4 years after 9/11.....and you think that this evidence is credible???....get outta here!

[Bryan Sacks]

20. I am getting out of here

I've been foolish to argue this long.

[seatnineb]

21. Bryan...I respect your 9/11 research very much.....but

....your censoring of BushAtBookers analysis of the smoke plume is unwarranted.

Who is to say that the witness you spoke to was not visited by the same FBI who tried to convince Susan McLiewan that the little plane that she saw ....was not the plane that she saw!!!!!

This small white plane went over the top of me ....it was so smooth...it just glided over me ...just like that.

When we got to watch it on TV...and they kept saying it was a large plane,like a 757 .....and I was like no.........but what I saw was a little jet......(a 757) would have blown me off the road if it had flown by that close....

So about 11:30 that night the FBi came to talk to me...kept asking me how big the plane was ..

I said that the plane was small...not much bigger than my van that I saw...and that it went over the top of me...

And he(FBI) says:"Mam...You don't know what a 757 looks like!"

And I said:"Don't be condenscending to me".....if you don't wanna believe me that's fine...but what I saw I thought I should report...and you wanna know that there was something else in the air at the same time that something else was going on...

And that is when he did seem to get a little nicer....and he said that "it was a White lear jet and that it was someone taking pictures".....

And I said :"Before the crash?!!!!"

And he said:"We gotta go"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg77n3ckHGI

[vincent_vega_lives]

23. censoring

Is that what we are calling disagreement in this World View? :eyes:

[seatnineb]

24. O.K...censoring may have been the wrong word to use.......

But I think Bryan got the gist.....

[vincent_vega_lives]

25. He's nuthin but a

bushco apologist, disinfo spewin, OCT'er! :evilgrin:

[Bryan Sacks]

26. I believe Susan McElwain

But she's referring to another plane, the mysterious one the FBI at first tried to deny flew over the heads of onlookers. She's right, that was no 757.

I've tried on four occasions to contact her. Never was successful. I'd love to talk to her.

I notice the video has been removed, too :(

And Vincent Vega: what exactly do you do here except stir shit up? Just wondering.

[seatnineb]

27. At Team8Plus.....we had Zaphod and HawkesCafe try to track Mcleiwin's

...location.


http://team8plus.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?3144


I am also a bit concened that this documentary which was Italian(Il Mistero di 93) seems to have been wiped off the web....

Here is a screen shot of from that docu with Mcleiwin indicating how the plane flew past her....

[bushatbooker]

31. Another plane crash video shows smoke plume dissipating

The plane crash video shows smoke plume similar to how the plume in the Flight 93 photo starts, but notice how quickly it starts to dissipate...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGWFHycSkho


That plume in the Flight 93 photo was be only seconds old, so it COULD NOT have come from the crater area!!!

[Robb]

33. Worked this in 2002

Not real tough, NOAA had wind direction hourly, lots of folks have figured out where the photographer was standing.

Wind blowing toward the camera position. 10 mph, if my aging memory serves.