|
Thanks Will! Being a dad is great, although I'm not dealing with the sleep deprivation as well as I'd like. I've noticed a big dropoff in the quality of my work and my posts here when he's up more than twice a night. He slept 7 hours last night, so...
I have seen the pictures, and frankly I don't buy the imposition of what the plane should have looked like. First of all, the imposed plane would obviously strike the building much closer to the camera than the actual point of impact. I'm making a guess, but it looks to me like the strike point would be at least 150 feet closer to the camera.
Second, the imposed plane is coming in at a much softer angle than actually happened. I'm going to guess that the plane actually hit at roughly 30 degrees to the structure, and the imposed plane appears to be coming in at a 45+ degree angle. Normally that wouldn't be all that relavant, but the parking ticket machine hides the plane since it presents a much smaller profile at a steeper angle.
So, you've got a plane that farther up in the foreground ariving at a shallower angle to the building. Shenanigans, to paraphrase South Park. I call shenanigans. Not on you, just whoever created the picture. They're ignoring some of the physical evidence.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
|