Posted on 09/12/2005 12:10:14 AM PDT by spycatcher
Today is September 11.
Michelle Malkin and other bloggers are buzzing about the proposed Flight 93 memorial, which bears a striking resemblance to an Islamic crescent. Zombie produces an animated image consisting of the memorial (rotated so the arms of the crescent point to the right) overlapped with the crescent of the Tunisian flag. The juxtaposition is nearly perfect.
Zombie also links to this image credited to "Etaoin Shrdlu". What you're seeing is an azimuthal equidistant projection of the globe centered on the Flight 93 crash site. On such a projection, the concentric circles represent a fixed distance from the center, and the angle of a straight line from the center to any point represents the azimuth between the two points. Etaoin's image shows that a line perpendicular to the endpoints of the crescent (that is, the direction the crescent faces) appears to pass very close to Mecca. Mecca sits near Saudi Arabia's western coast with the Red Sea, and as Etaoin's image shows, the crescent points right at it.
But I've always been one to go for cold calculations over pretty pictures, so I set to find out if indeed the crescent points towards Mecca. Here's what I came up with:
According to this site, the latitude/longitude coordinates of Mecca are 21.4234, 39.8262 and the coordinates of the Flight 93 crash site are 40.052, -78.8963. Using the calculator from this site, I determined that the azimuth between the two points is 124.80°.
Next I went to the Flight 93 National Memorial website and found the biggest overhead view of the memorial I could find with north oriented up. I measured the distance from tip-to-tip of the crescent and came up with 64px east-west and 90px north-south. The arctangent of 64/90 is the angle between north and a line drawn between the tips, which works out to 35.42°. Adding 90° to this angle gives the direction the crescent faces as 125.42°.
Conclusion: the crescent points towards Mecca with an error of 0.62°, or 0.17%. If you take a circle and divide its circumference into 580 equal arcs, the angle subtended by one of those arcs is the error. (Bear in mind that any error in my figures could change this value; the figure most open to interpretation is the distance in pixels between the tips of the crescent.)
I don't know if the architect deliberately made his design look like an Islamic crescent, or if it's coincidental. I don't know if the architect deliberately made his crescent point almost directly towards Mecca, or if it's coincidental. What I do know is that a memorial in the shape of a swastika would never be permitted, whether the resemblance was intentional or a coincidence. Nor would a memorial resembling a Confederate battle flag.
The strong resemblance of this memorial to an Islamic symbol, whether intentional or accidental, is grossly insensitive to those of us who find it offensive. The commission needs to go back to the drawing board.
Now zoom into the original pic and see if you can tell from the drawing where the red maple trees are supposed to end. I can't, much less use the drawing to figure a east/west, north/south coordinate.
Just a bit off and it points to Sudan or Iran depending or even further offline from Saudi.
I'm too tired to continue with this, but it's looking to me like the whole direction thing starts with wishful thinking about a blurry drawing of an unfinished monument in an approximation…
If this is supposed to face Mecca, then I'd say the designer goofed by confusing the crescent's rear with its face. The 'qibla' is the line pointing along the shortest distance to Mecca, not the other way around the world, and off the top of my head I don't see a rationale for why an arc would ever be considered to 'point' in any direction except for its opening. Then you look at the fact that people will be entering from the outside of the arc, driving its outer edge, and looking toward its interior... they'll generally have their backs toward the east and 55-degrees.
I'm not sure visitors will sense any of the crescent-ness of this, much less its orientation if it is sufficiently large. Already the endpoints are somewhat ambiguious on the plan view. In the grand scheme of things I'm much more concerned about the WTC memorial than a monumental inkblot test.
The design was exhibited for the families and family members were on the selection committee.
A crescent was a mistake, the Mecca-orientation part I'm beginning to think is bogus.
"Good grief, this is like an ink blot test and some are finding an Osama memorial in it."
FRiend, this is no ink blot test. Ink blots are purely random creations that allow the test taker to interpret them purely with only their internal references. But this is an intentional cresent, with intentional color and orientation that easily drives a normal person to make this rational conclusion. The parallels are far too similar to be coincidental. Did you even see the list of similarities??
Early in my video production career I sold an ad concept to a Japanese heavy industrial corporation. The ad started with a shot of a sunrise. Reason: In Japanes culture, the rising sun is a symbol of good fortune.
Even the accidental use of the crescent should not be ignored, any more than the accidental use of a cross to mark the impact site would be ignored by the liberals. The judges who selected this plan are at best completely ignorant, and at worst insulting our entire nation and especially the memory of those who died fighting an extremist cult dedicated to that symbol.
I've heard that family members have approved the design. I can't understand that. I just can't.
I had a tagline once with a similar sentiment. I was ordered to stop using it.
well, after 10 minutes, that damned pdf locked up my browser.
I'll try to find a different version.
It's good to be the King.
Did they know what we know now? I doubt it. Much like Rather's forged documents, the internet has proven to be the ultimate vetting tool.
It points east, because the the long trough of the plane's impact points east.
Furthermore, if you are going to encompass the wreakage, than you are going to have to create an arc. Looking at overhead shots, again of the debris field, only an arc/crescent does it justice.
the design does not point East - its axis (perpendicular to the line of the gap) is oriented at 44.8044degrees north of East, or almost due North-East.
DRAT
make that 34.8044 degrees north of east
too tired.
Well, those degrees mean nothing to me... but are we sure that is not the trajectory of the debris trough?
...and I can get one.
if the debris or impact axis aligned with the Great Circle azimuth to Mecca, that would be an interesting coincidence.
we do not know that it did, but let us for the moment assume that it did.
if it were the ONLY "coincidence" I would buy that explanation.
add the minaret and the crescent+cluster and the "coincidences" seem to point to a deliberate set of choices.
I couldn't agree more.
LET'S ROLL!
ping
>Our friends at LGF have been covering this:<
Next to Free Republic, the home of the Lizard minions is my absolute favorite on the web. LGF is priceless if nothing else for the sharp stick they perpetually poke in the eye of Markos "Screw Them" Moulitsas.
Rock on, Green Ones!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.