I think what follows is an example of the truism that "we are most gullible when we are most skeptical."
When United Airlines Flight 93 crashed in Somerset County, Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001, a woman named Val McClatchey, who lived nearby the crash, managed to get
a picture of the cloud of smoke from the crash rising above the trees. Her photo, which she subsequently titled 'The End of Serenity,' became quite famous, but now
conspiracy theorists are suggesting that it's a fake:
Mrs. McClatchey's fame has recently taken a sour turn. The real estate agent has recently become a target of bloggers calling themselves "9-11 researchers," who are seeking to prove that the U.S. government was complicit in the attacks that brought down the Twin Towers, pierced the Pentagon and crashed United Airlines Flight 93. The smoke plume doesn't line up right, they say. It is too large in the frame. The smoke is characteristic of an ordnance blast, not a jet fuel fire, further evidence that the government shot down Flight 93. They analyze wind direction, debris patterns and camera trajectories, all in the service of the theory that the crash was faked. They have visited Mrs. McClatchey's office and called her at home, posting satellite maps of her property and accusing her of digitally altering her photo to insert a fake smoke plume. The bloggers have picked apart her story, highlighting inconsistencies in different news accounts and questioning her motives. Others have described her as "surly," "hostile," "irate" and "defensive." People have called her at home, accusing her of being anti-American and of "holding the photo hostage." On a simple Google search, Mrs. McClatchey's name now pops up in the same sentence as "total fraud."
Good grief. Why would the photo be a fake? The woman really did live near the crash, and she doesn't seem to have possessed the kind of skills needed to create a sophisticated photo forgery. Plus, the FBI examined the photo and vouches for its authenticity.
It's an interesting phenomenon when people became so suspicious that they start seeing evidence of fakery everywhere. It goes to show that doubting everything can be just as bad as believing everything.
Comments
If there's a conspiracy behind 9/11, it must involve pretty much everybody in the United States other than the conspiracy nuts. And was orchestrated by a government that can't buy toilet seats for less than $100 each.
The problem I have is that they are harassing this poor woman and of course there will be some inconsistances when you tell the same story to 100 people, you will not tell it exactly the same way each time. That is human nature. It would also depend on how a question was asked as to what answer you would get.
My money would be on the photo being real and these groups are out just for their own interest.
I get "surly," "hostile," "irate," and "defensive," when I get deluged with calls for refinacing from companies I've never heard of. I'd really go off the handle under those circumstances.
Why would it have to be tremendous?
As Lonewatchman rigthly says, you would get an explosion of the fuel tanks on impact. That would create a mushroom cloud - exactly what we see here. Only some time after that, when fire has had time to develop and spread and hings really start to burn, new smoke development begins.
http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/08/mcclatchey-photo-blogpost-makes.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/us/10cnd-shanksville.html?ex=1190088000&en=c2f1ae8bb504c23b&ei=5070&emc=eta1
If we assume that this was stated to be what, a mile from her house, and that she heard the explosion, grabbed her camera (a reasonable reaction based on the fact that she was already observing the Sept. 11th events), and ran outside, thus giving us what, three minutes from impact to shot, then I'd say this sounds about right.
Jet fuel isn't prone to immediate detonation (contrary to Hollowood's depictions), and usually requires intense heat and compression to generate its reaction. Now, a crash could very well do this, but that might explain why this isn't some huge orange fireball. I think a member of the FAA might be more qualified to explain this.
Either way, it seems to me that almost all of these conspiracy theorists are little more than "the fat kid who sits behind his computer all day in his mom's basement." Let's not give these blowhards too much credit here.
Oh, and regarding the neocons who reply to threads like on Killtown, ignore them. If they can't see the obvious contradictions in statements like "terror loving hippies," and whatever other made up names Sean and BillO taught them this week, then they don't deserve whatever press they do get.
Specifically, the "lawyer" that responded to the blog, no intelligent lawyer (possibly explaining the far right leanings) would dare use the language posted on that site, and risk that coming back to bite him in the ass.