[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.

[SOMERLED]

This goes to show that this discussion will go nowhere. If you can't grapple with the concepts of freefall and terminal velocity and how they relate how can you make "common sense" a centerpiece of your arguments? How can you say that the buildings fell at freefall when you have no idea what that means?

Your formula for hooke's law was wrong, and it may have been a typo, but hooke's law has nothing to do with inelastic collisions. Your theory on the necesity of a military plane shows your complete lack of understanding of the dynamics of the collision; the hardness of the nose of the plance has nothing to do with its ability to penetrate a building. It is the mass of the plane behind the nose that does the damage. Your "reasoning" seems to indicate that the plane entered the building like a spear but it did no such thing. The collision turned the plane into a jet of debris and a fireball. All of this has nothing to do with spring constants.

If you jumped off the roof of a four storey house, you would fall at free fall speed.
You would not reach terminal velocity.
Now what has free fall got to do with terminal velocity?

 

[SOMERLED]

You mean you missed those nice pictures of oil burning ? Have you ever seen plastic burn ? Tires ? Anything made from petroleum ?



Yeah, if you look at the 27th floor you don't see a fire, either.



The problem is it wasn't just claimed. It was EXPLAINED.



That is precisely what we are saying.



That's just hilarious. A red-hot sword will not support the same weight as a cold one.



Anyone with an ounce of that common sense you keep talking about would realise that this means something's amiss. And the something amiss may not be on the opposing side.



How ? By arguing on a web forum ?

What is wrong with identifying accessories after the fact?
We each do our bit.

 

[SOMERLED]

Take a look at the photos here and tell me how the south tower was a sealed unit. Looks to me like it has an enormous hole in it that would let in plenty of air.

And while you are looking, remember that you are looking at a place where three thousand people died. At the moment those photos were made, hundreds were already dead within the buildings.

The photos you referred to show lots of black smoke. Black because there is not enough oxygen left inside either building (sealed unit) to feed the flames.
Now can you tell me, where all this WHITE smoke came from.
Three thousand people didn't die, until one of the murderers pressed a button to start off the controlled demolitions.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Thank you for putting up such a clear example of how powerfully the wings cut through the corrugated steel of the outside wall.
Why didn't the same thing happen at the Pentagon?

Because the Pentagon's walls were reinforced concrete, that had receintly had additional steel reinforcing columns installed (http://renovation.pentagon.mil/history-features.htm#materials , http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pentagon/about.html , http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/news_1-1.html ) not prefab steel lattice and glass (http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/World_Trade_Center.html).

 

[cloudshipsrule]

So what happened to the top chunk. Why didn't it fall to the ground in one lump?

Because it was ONE THOUSAND FEET in the air and we're not talking about lincoln logs. You'll just never get it. In your world of Lego skyscrapers and alien-alloy metals our humble understanding of Earth-based physics is useless. Give it up. You might as well find another forum to bug. I'm done.

 

[tacodaemon]

Then there is the angle of incidence, sometimes related to the angle of reflection. It is the angle at which light is reflected from a surface.
Can that not now be related to solid objects, such that at a particular angle, an object will bounce off, rather than penetrate a surface?
Think of a dart thrown at a wooden fence. If the angle that the dart hits is shallow enough, then the dart will bounce off, rather than stick in the fence. Do we agree?

Hey, it's physics by analogy. You wouldn't happen to know a fellow by the name of Archimedes Plutonium, would you?

 

[332nd]

You write as if I'm the only person in the world with this information.

No, I write as if you are yet another truther who demands a new investigation and the real criminals be brought to justice yet does little or nothing outside of posting on forums or blogging.

Let me repeat, everybody and their uncle knows and is creating, one way or another.

Creating what?

85% of americans know, have you noticed all the movements

.

Ah! So there will be mass protests any day now? They will march on Washington and demand justice? School is out now so the students will be able to go and if the 85% figure is correct then I'm sure it would be easy to get 2-3 million people there. IF the figure is correct.

I say again, there is only the MSM keeping this fraud going and that is cracking. Rosie O'D, Charlie Sheen et al. Loose Change. It's all coming on top and not before time.

So it should be easy to put in motion what are you guys waiting for?

 

[SOMERLED]

It's been explained to you over and over again that your equation is senseless. You can't have millimeters on one side, and newtons on the other. That's not an equation, and every person in the world who is familiar with physics can confirm this fact.

I'll help you out a little. The thing you left out of Hooke's law was the spring constant: d = k*F. The "k" term has the proper units to make it into an equation. What you wrote is not an equation. Now, where were you going with it?

Because something at a lower temperature does not glow. If you can see the flames, they're at least 800 C.

Also, it's been explained to you over and over that black flames typically indicate a hot flame, because it produces a lot of carbon. Cooler flames leave larger molecules intact which are usually lighter colored.

Every little thing you have asserted so far has been shown to be wrong. I can't recall any previous poster with that kind of record. Everything from the performance of steel in a fire, to your nonsensical "scientific law" equation, to your claims that words such as "indupitably" and "verb transitive" are correct.

Curt,
You don't have millimetres on one side and Newtons on the other.
They are both on the same side of the equals sign.
On the other side of the equals sign is a constant.
Let's call that constant 2.
Now 8 = 2
4

Now lets increase the force from 4 Newtons to 6 Newtons.
The spring will now lengthen to 12 mm.
Now,
12mm = 2
6 N

2 is the constant.
In 1666, the Great Fire of London devastated the city. A lot of rebuilding was called for. The Chief Surveyor to the City of London was called Robert Hooke.
He was concerned with a bit of health and safety really and started to interest himself with wooden beams and how much load they could bear etc.
How much bend they had in them, before they snapped and someone died.
Fooling around with springs and other stuff, he worked out the constant.
The fact that how much a spring lengthened was proportionate to the load.
Eventually Hooke's law was applied to metals and then years later of course, to calibrating galvanometers, ammeters, voltmeters etc. Good stuff eh, pity you don't know it.

 

[SOMERLED]

As a lurker who has been closely following this thread, I have to agree with Malcolm on this point. The replies to his equation has easily demonstrated the expertise he is dealing with.

Given a jumbled mess of an equation, people were not only able to identify it, but they were able to correct it and explain why your original equation was incorrect.

I refer you to my post number 1846.

 

[SOMERLED]

HA! Typical. You blunder on your "equation" and when cornered, claim to have done it on purpose. You are quite a piece of work, mister.



I repeat: have you EVER seen an open fire that burnt petroleum-based material ?



Well, maybe the huge hole on the side of the building helped.



Thank you. You have just admitted that you are close-minded about this issue and that the truth is not important to you.

I refer you to post number 1846.

 

[SOMERLED]

I see now that you find it unimpressive because we were all talking above your level of ability to understand.

Yes, you can calibrate a spring to measure force and be relatively accurate with it. this is the priciple upon which spring scales are built.

This is possible because of Hooke's law which remains
F=-kx

this means that the extension will indeed be proportional to the force applied BUT you wrote that the extension is EQUAL to the force applied which is plain and utterly wrong because a length unit is not a unit of force.

In all equations you must conserve the units



You have demonstrated an utter lack of comprehension on both scientific and mathematical concepts yet believe that you are schooling us?

I refer you to post 1846.
Who is "us"?

 

[SOMERLED]

And with that, we should end the this one sided monologue, as you are not here for discussion and came here with the sole purpose of not listening (or reading) that what you claim has been refuted time and again on this forum in various other threads on the same subjects that you posted in your Opening post.


This isn't and has never been a debate. Case closed.

This is getting monotonous,
GOODBYE.

 

[SOMERLED]

The photos you referred to show lots of black smoke. Black because there is not enough oxygen left inside either building (sealed unit) to feed the flames.
Now can you tell me, where all this WHITE smoke came from.
Three thousand people didn't die, until one of the murderers pressed a button to start off the controlled demolitions.
[qimg]http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11corexplosions.html[/qimg]

My apologies, I'll get a picture up yet.
http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11corexplosions.html

 

[SOMERLED]

Because the Pentagon's walls were reinforced concrete, that had receintly had additional steel reinforcing columns installed (http://renovation.pentagon.mil/history-features.htm#materials , http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pentagon/about.html , http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/news_1-1.html ) not prefab steel lattice and glass (http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/World_Trade_Center.html).

The wings of the 'Pentagon plane' folded back along the body and the plane turned itself into a dart, so fast and so thin, that there isn't a trace of it on the one video they handed out. That's some plane.
Also the videos, what can't they show the general public the videos?

 

[SOMERLED]

Because it was ONE THOUSAND FEET in the air and we're not talking about lincoln logs. You'll just never get it. In your world of Lego skyscrapers and alien-alloy metals our humble understanding of Earth-based physics is useless. Give it up. You might as well find another forum to bug. I'm done.

This is getting really monotonous,
Goodbye.

 

[Par]

Tirdun & Arus808:

Indeed. After such a brazen admission of pure dogma, calling an end to this charade of a thread seems positively overdue. It’s all completely one-way, so what’s the point?

That I will never shift my position on the inside job that was 9/11 is quite correct.

(Imagine looking at numerous photographs of perfectly ventilated fires producing vast plumes of blacker than black smoke and still holding onto the belief that black smoke necessarily means an oxygen-starved fire. Just what sort of cognitive meltdown must one be experiencing in order to exhibit such a characteristic?)

 

[Arus808]

This is getting monotonous,
GOODBYE.

goodbye? does that mean that you are not going to address any of the refutations brought up that long debunked your original claims and leave us? Yes its getting monotonous. Its getting repetitive as we have to repeat the same debunking over and over to someone who doesn't even bother reading and comprehending the answers we've given. Or has been shown to ignore the answers given and actually ask/make the same claim over again.

Just admit that you came here not to discuss, but just to spam this forum and waste our time.

 

[Belz...]

Do you believe that wood stands up to fire better than steel?

Why don't you check with a firefighter captain and transform belief into certainty ?

 

[Belz...]

where was the fire going to get its oxygen from?

Maybe a big hole in the side of it had something to do with that, hey it's just a guess but worth considering don't you think?

Thank you for putting up such a clear example of how powerfully the wings cut through the corrugated steel of the outside wall.
Why didn't the same thing happen at the Pentagon?

Oh, no. You're not going to sleaze your way out of this. You asked where the fire was getting its oxygen from. At least three of us answered. Do you concede that the fire was getting air from the hole, yes or no ?

 

[SOMERLED]

Hey, it's physics by analogy. You wouldn't happen to know a fellow by the name of Archimedes Plutonium, would you?

Is this an example of anything will do as long as it keeps him away from mentioning Offutt AFB and the place the real attack planes took off from?