• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Lloyd England: Eye of the Storm

All I see is somebody desperately trying to minimize and eliminate evidence that shows his fantasy to be wrong, all in typical truther fashion.
 
the wind, it has many mandrels

IMG_3980.jpg
 
Maybe you should just make out that $1 million check to the JREF Turbofan.
 
All I see are pictures and examples that are far from a wing like object striking
a pole.

You guys should sign up for Mythbusters! :cool:
 
Turbofan said:
All I see are pictures and examples that are far from a wing like object striking a pole.
Click to expand...


You wanted photos of specific impact/shearing damage to a pole? I could have sworn you asked for photos of a metal cylinder bent without a mandrel or radius tooling.

The goalposts are moving so fast it's hard to keep up. Apologies.
 
Last edited:
Mangoose said:
You wanted photos of specific impact/shearing damage to a pole? I could have sworn you asked for photos of a metal cylinder bent without a mandrel or radius tooling.

The goalposts are moving so fast it's hard to keep up. Apologies.
Click to expand...

It's not my fault you cannot read. If you go back to initial post, I asked someone
to show how a plane wing type object could form a smooth radius in a metal
pole with similar force as the alleged plane.

Then your basic friends come back with a bunch of pictures and experiments
that resemble anything buy what I asked. They even want a million on top of
that :big:
 
Turbofan said:
It's not my fault you cannot read. If you go back to initial post, I asked someone
to show how a plane wing type object could form a smooth radius in a metal
pole with similar force as the alleged plane.

Then your basic friends come back with a bunch of pictures and experiments
that resemble anything buy what I asked. They even want a million on top of
that :big:
Click to expand...
But you admit that such a pole can be bent without a mandrel, yes?
 
Turbofan said:
You had to use a RADIUS Basic guy!

Try that with a suitable plane wing facsimile at a simulated 530 MPH!

Basic guys, try to keep up. One end of the pole is planted. The other
end is struck with great force.

This is funny stuff.
Click to expand...

Wait, a pole is "radius tooling"? I'll be damned.

I suppose I could have bent it with my bare hands.

You want me to go that?

I will, if you promise to give me the flight path calculations for the stupid CIT NOC path, what do you say?
 
16.5 said:
Wait, a pole is "radius tooling"? I'll be damned.

I suppose I could have bent it with my bare hands.

You want me to go that?

I will, if you promise to give me the flight path calculations for the stupid CIT NOC path, what do you say?
Click to expand...

STRIKE IT WITH AN AIRPLANE WING LIKE OBJECT AT A SIMULATED SPEED OF
530 MPH!

Damn, my 2 year old nephew would have had these instructions down on the
first try I'm sure.
 
Turbofan said:
STRIKE IT WITH AN AIRPLANE WING LIKE OBJECT AT A SIMULATED SPEED OF
530 MPH!

Damn, my 2 year old nephew would have had these instructions down on the
first try I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Please explain a way to simulate hitting it with the wing of a 100 ton aircraft moving at 530 mph.
 
Let's see a bank statement

Turbofan said:
STRIKE IT WITH AN AIRPLANE WING LIKE OBJECT AT A SIMULATED SPEED OF 530 MPH!
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone here is going to attempt said experiment prior to your providing proof that you actually have $1M to pay out. (We are skeptics, you know)

Turbofan said:
Go find a metal cylinder and bend it without a mandrel, or radius tooling.
Click to expand...

Does this mean you now retract the following claim?

Turbofan said:
Without a mandrel inside of the tube, the metal will collapse on itself and kink.
Click to expand...
 
Turbofan said:
STRIKE IT WITH AN AIRPLANE WING LIKE OBJECT AT A SIMULATED SPEED OF
530 MPH!
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought you said I could not bend the pole without radius tooling or a mandrel?

I am confused, it seems like everytime you are proven wrong about something you change your question.

Why ever could that be?

By the way, several days ago, I asked you for your calculations on the CIT NOC. Still no response? Tell you what, why don't you run those calculations at a "simulated" speed of 530! Your two year nephew could tell you are ducking THAT question.
 
Turbofan said:
STRIKE IT WITH AN AIRPLANE WING LIKE OBJECT AT A SIMULATED SPEED OF
530 MPH!
Click to expand...

And just how do you want me to explain to the police why I vandalized a light pole?

"Sorry about the light pole, officer. But please let me explain myself. I was trying to settle a debate over the Internet with a paranoid lunatic. I hope you understand".
 
Last edited:
For those of you considering buying a 757 jet, to slam it's wing into an aluminium pole at above 500 mph, to prove to Turbonuts the error of his ways. Please make sure Turbodunce is in the 757 so he gets a good look at it when it happens.
 
Pi_314 said:
For those of you considering buying a 757 jet, to slam it's wing into an aluminium pole at above 500 mph, to prove to Turbonuts the error of his ways. Please make sure Turbodunce is in the 757 so he gets a good look at it when it happens.
Click to expand...

Performing Turbo's experiment with an actual 757 would cost substantially more than the $1M he's allegedly offering....however a "wing-like object" could be probably obtained for much less less money, depending on the as-yet unspecified criteria for being considered "wing-like".

....anyone else hear those goalposts moving? ;-)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom