Split Thread 'Nose-out' footage

[bill smith]

What is there to say that the perimeter columns were not tampered with allowing a real plane to penetrate as we saw ? (Or thought we saw)

 

[beachnut]

It's just that the gap between the columns is quite a bit wider than the tyre that's wedged in it.

Prove it.
Are there limits to truther delusions? Not if you support the nose-out scam, you have to be open to all delusions, big and small and fight to the end. Lucky Flight 93 was not populated by truthers, another building would have been hit.

aircraft parts embedded in a car

FDNY eyewitness accounts.
"We just passed a compact car where the engine was running and the door was open, which looked to me like the driver had escaped, but from the back seat to the trunk was crushed by a jet engine. We started going up West Street. I believe that's when Smitty ran over the part of the plane, but he did that to avoid the bodies because there were obviously bodies in the street". FDNY firefighter Michael Hazel

"A tremendous fireball, flaming debris, pieces of the airplane, fuselage, landing gear, pieces of the building. ...We started running down one of the little side streets, Courtlandt or Dey. There were people dead in the street that obviously you couldn't help them. There was flaming debris coming down all over. It was just a matter of who got hit with the debris. FDNY Captain Michael Donovan


Look and learn.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/aircraftpartsnyc911

[trutherFail] But the engine doesn't fit [trutherFail...]; truthers fail, they fail forever! 8 years and counting the days, the minutes of failure as the nose-out scam reveals the true believers who support any delusion no matter how insane and anti-intellectual it is. Some of them support multiple idiotic ideas and never form a scenario save the chant "inside job"...

 

[twinstead]

What is there to say that the perimeter columns were not tampered with allowing a real plane to penetrate as we saw ? (Or thought we saw)

What is there to say that a winged fairy didn't temporarily make the perimeter columns vanish to allow the fake plane in, then quickly replaced them when the fake plane entered the building? Or we "thought" entered. Or we thought was real. Or we thought was a genuine fake. That turned out to be real. Supposedly.

 

[beachnut]

What is there to say that a winged fairy didn't temporarily make the perimeter columns vanish to allow the fake plane in, then quickly replaced them when the fake plane entered the building? Or we "thought" entered. Or we thought was real. Or we thought was a genuine fake. That turned out to be real. Supposedly.

beer...


How big does the delusion, the lie, the fantasy have to be for people to jump on the train of stupid and head off to Moronic Fantasy-land where insane ideas are fake CGI planes supported by debris in the shape of a nose exiting the WTC tower presented in low resolution, low frame rate video. where do we collect our beer?

 

[bill smith]

What is there to say that a winged fairy didn't temporarily make the perimeter columns vanish to allow the fake plane in, then quickly replaced them when the fake plane entered the building? Or we "thought" entered. Or we thought was real. Or we thought was a genuine fake. That turned out to be real. Supposedly.

Twinstead...the quote below is part of a post you made yesterday. From the content I see no reason to have any further arguments on 9/11 with you. No hard feelings but I'm sure you will understand..

'' It's a lose-lose situation. It's better to just tell them their ideas are idiotic, throw a couple jokes around, post a laughing dog or two, and leave it at that.''

 

[beachnut]

Another part from the CGI plane. Look how real it is. The CGI plane killed people on 911 yet some people want to welcome in insanity and spew lies.

The old CGI partial wheel assembly that is an exact copy, the exact piece from a 767 flown on 911 to murder Americans. From a CGI aircraft if you entertain insanity.

What would you do if idiots flew planes into your buildings after cutting the flight attendants throat and killing the pilots. The old stand-down did not get to the Passengers of Flight 93.

Wow, CGI now has solid stainless steel and rubber tire assemblies. I wonder if the brakes rotors are as realistic and real. CGI? How stupid do you have to be? Wait, we will soon see...

oops, too late

 

[bardamu]

I'm facepalming at myself for not initially realizing that Bardamu was confusing perimeter and core damage at first, as well as for Bardamu for not comprehending a damn thing about Ryan's presentation.

Make that a quadruple facepalm for just yourself.

Hasn't it occurred to you that Ryan wasn't discussing damage observed to the perimeter structures, and that he was modeling damage done to core columns? Do you realize that you're citing an image labeled "Base case impact damage to the WTC 1 exterior wall" to challenge a case Ryan built about the interior damage? Ryan's whole point was that we can see from the impulse calculations that the core columns were what could have been failed by the fuel alone. All the info Ryan lifts from NCSTAR 1-2B was from a section titled "10.5 SIMPLIFIED ANALYSIS OF CORE COLUMN DAMAGE". His entire model is based on what the fuel cloud could have done when it hit the interior structural components.

The pressure-impulse curves are based on core columns, but that's just so he can go on to say that if the fuel alone can "plausibly" break core columns, it can "certainly" break perimeter columns. That's why the width of the slug of fuel is 14", and that's why he can claim that the fuel alone would still break perimeter columns even if the velocity was lower. In fact, he points out during the show that the fuel wouldn't have enough momentum left to break the core columns because it would have to break the perimeter columns first.

One of his conclusions (on page 25 of the slides) is: "If aircraft is low on fuel, only fuselage and engines may penetrate". Well, NIST tell us that around half the length of each wing was empty of fuel, and they provide that information in the very same pages that were used as the source for the fuel tank's dimensions.

Furthermore: It's a model. The idea was to show that a single component out of the entire system was sufficient to account for damage done to the core (looks like we need to continually point that out to you; should have realized that before), which means that if for some odd reason several hundred pounds of fuel were flying through the towers columns by itself without a container, it could fail the cores, the point being that fuel plus jet debris can most definitely cause core column failure.

Do you think the following exchange is ambiguous as regards which columns are under discussion?

Ron Wieck: "In other words, the effect that we see, that the plane simply sliced through the building, is really the only thing we could expect to see? It can't be otherwise?"

Ryan Mackey: "Right. That is what the model predicts."

 

[bardamu]

Another part from the CGI plane. Look how real it is. The CGI plane killed people on 911 yet some people want to welcome in insanity and spew lies.

The old CGI partial wheel assembly that is an exact copy, the exact piece from a 767 flown on 911 to murder Americans. From a CGI aircraft if you entertain insanity.

What would you do if idiots flew planes into your buildings after cutting the flight attendants throat and killing the pilots. The old stand-down did not get to the Passengers of Flight 93.

Wow, CGI now has solid stainless steel and rubber tire assemblies. I wonder if the brakes rotors are as realistic and real. CGI? How stupid do you have to be? Wait, we will soon see...

oops, too late

We want to know what Giuliani did with the cgi black boxes.

 

[cyclonic]

We want to know what Giuliani did with the cgi black boxes.

They got blown up by the cgi nano-thermite.

 

[twinstead]

Twinstead...the quote below is part of a post you made yesterday. From the content I see no reason to have any further arguments on 9/11 with you. No hard feelings but I'm sure you will understand..

'' It's a lose-lose situation. It's better to just tell them their ideas are idiotic, throw a couple jokes around, post a laughing dog or two, and leave it at that.''

Frankly I could care less if you see a reason to have any further arguments with me or not. I'm going to tell you your ideas are idiotic, throw a joke around:

[joke]What you and the rest of the forum are having aren't "arguments" or debate in any meaningful sense anyway--they're holographic fake arguments that are being edited real time as to give the impression to the many eye-witness lurkers that they are indeed real arguments [/joke].

Now if I could only remember how to post that laughing dog...

The power of the NWO knows no bounds.

 

[beachnut]

CGI jet fuel fireball, holographic magic that kills. Amazing CGI matches the exact effects of a 590 mph impact from a 767 weighing 277,600 pounds with the 10,000 gallons, 66,000 pounds of jet fuel presenting the jet fuel fireball. How did they get the CGI to show a kinetic energy impact, not a bomb blast. There are no bomb blast signs, so how do you fake a kinetic energy impact of 4,380,000,000 joules. (Got Physics? lol)

Possible resting place for a FDR.

Three or four floors of the WTC crushed together during the gravity collapse; could the FDR be inside? Yes. Delusions as nuts as the nose-out lie to the "no plane" idiotic CGI poppycock do not foster critical thinking.

 

[bardamu]

CGI jet fuel fireball, holographic magic that kills. Amazing CGI matches the exact effects of a 590 mph impact from a 767 weighing 277,600 pounds with the 10,000 gallons, 66,000 pounds of jet fuel presenting the jet fuel fireball. How did they get the CGI to show a kinetic energy impact, not a bomb blast. There are no bomb blast signs, so how do you fake a kinetic energy impact of 4,380,000,000 joules. (Got Physics? lol)

But it was the first time a passenger jet had ever flown into a building like that at 500mph. How do we know what the exact effects would be?

Possible resting place for a FDR.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/JonesLie.jpg
Three or four floors of the WTC crushed together during the gravity collapse; could the FDR be inside? Yes. Delusions as nuts as the nose-out lie to the "no plane" idiotic CGI poppycock do not foster critical thinking.

Is there one of these for each building?

 

[cyclonic]

The best thing about the truthers 'meteorite' is that they say the unburnt paper is 'carbonized' paper, lmao.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Beachnut you're being unfair by posting the landing gear. No planers cannot reconcile how these parts were at the scenes nor how they arrived. They'll have to start claiming that thos parts are 'plants' obviously towed in and thrown on the cars and street using hydraulic presses and rockets. You're also unfairly forcing them to concoct ridiculous stories about how all of the thousands of people nearby were either in on it as NWO plants or totally oblivious.

Don't you realize how much more batcrap crazy you're forcing them to make their fairytales?

 

[cyclonic]

But it was the first time a passenger jet had ever flown into a building like that at 500mph. How do we know what the exact effects would be?

Did you know the towers swayed 12 to 20 feet after each plane struck?
how could they fake that?

 

[GlennB]

But it was the first time a passenger jet had ever flown into a building like that at 500mph. How do we know what the exact effects would be?

We don't.

But the chances of real-time CGI of the TV feeds, every personal video on the day, every photo taken ... all being carefully edited to look the same are simply ZERO.

What's more, all those seeing the planes would need to have been duped into 'seeing' something that wasn't really there. Uh?

What's more, your "perps" could never know what film or photo might be lurking somewhere waiting to pop up and make $1m and a Pulitzer prize for its owner. Condemning the perps to death or life sentences. Plus eternal ignominy for themselves, their families and their country.

What's more, explosives and incendiary materials - designed to explode in a directional manner - would need to have been installed in advance. With nobody noticing.

What's more, airplane debris and bodies would have had to be sprinkled around Lower Manhattan in broad daylight at the start of a normal working day. With nobody noticing.

What's more, the aircraft, their crew and passengers would need to be 'disappeared'. Never to be seen again.

And a thousand people would have had to be involved in the authorisation, planning and execution of this scheme, without ever seeing these fatal yet blindingly obvious flaws.

bardamu - it's nonsense. Get your life back.

 

[bill smith]

Did you know the towers swayed 12 to 20 feet after each plane struck?
how could they fake that?

The plane weighed one three-hundredth of one percent the weight of the building. It struck at 590 mph one third of the way down the building.. I'm sure RM or somebody like that would be happy to confirm that the strike under those conditions could generate enough kinetic energy to move the building like that.

 

[cyclonic]

The plane weighed one three-hundredth of one percent the weight of the building. It struck at 590 mph one third of the way down the building.. I'm sure RM or somebody like that would be happy to confirm that the strike under those conditions could generate enough kinetic energy to move the building like that.

Poor billy boy.

 

[beachnut]

But it was the first time a passenger jet had ever flown into a building like that at 500mph. How do we know what the exact effects would be?



Is there one of these for each building?

PHYSICS, good god man did you fail to learn how to model when you were schooled for free in the physics thread!? Wake up, we are trying to help you think for yourself and break you from dependence on other people's failed moronic delusions.

It is called physics. Did I bait the trap effectively to expose ignorance or what? We are engineers and sciencetist we can predict and explain how things work. Join us by gaining knowledge.

Only a kinetic energy impact of a 767 can cause the damage seen; I cheated, I know Flight 175 impacted and I can prove it. Too bad you can't understand that is a fact and the rest of 911.


Do you think supporting the no plane nonsense is serious signs of cluelessness?

Both towers were extreme kinetic energy events. Were things crushed like the 3 or 4 floor into objects not recognized as their original likeness? Really sad question.

The FDRs are relatively small and after the 130 tons of TNT kinetic energy collapse of one tower could be destroyed or smashed beyond recognition. GRASP this, the collapse of the towers involved the energy equal to over 250 2,000 pound bombs! Each one capable of destroying a large building, that much energy times 250 to 300. It is possible, likely the FDR and CVR were smashed into thin junk and burned in the pile beyond recognition.

WWSD

 

[ElMondoHummus]

The pressure-impulse curves are based on core columns, but that's just so he can go on to say that if the fuel alone can "plausibly" break core columns, it can "certainly" break perimeter columns. That's why the width of the slug of fuel is 14", and that's why he can claim that the fuel alone would still break perimeter columns even if the velocity was lower. In fact, he points out during the show that the fuel wouldn't have enough momentum left to break the core columns because it would have to break the perimeter columns first.

One of his conclusions (on page 25 of the slides) is: "If aircraft is low on fuel, only fuselage and engines may penetrate". Well, NIST tell us that around half the length of each wing was empty of fuel, and they provide that information in the very same pages that were used as the source for the fuel tank's dimensions.

You don't comprehend what people have been trying to tell you, do you? The model says that a single, isolated aspect of the model by itself had enough momentum to accomplish the column damage. That doesn't mean that this single, isolated element was all that was there! How you fail to comprehend this, I don't understand, but it says something real negative about your mental acuity. Again: Ryan was saying there was enough momentum available from just the fuel alone, let alone from the fuel and the jet to extert the impulse needed to sever columns. That was the whole point of his model, as well as the point of NCSTAR 1-2B, yet you continue to complain that the way the damage looked in the real world is somehow contradictory to this, when the real world damage also included the jet itself?

You really, really don't get it, do you?

Do you think the following exchange is ambiguous as regards which columns are under discussion?

Ron Wieck: "In other words, the effect that we see, that the plane simply sliced through the building, is really the only thing we could expect to see? It can't be otherwise?"

Ryan Mackey: "Right. That is what the model predicts."

You seem to be unable to understand the difference between a consequence of a model and the central point of what the model primarily covers. One more time:

• The section of the NIST report where Ryan got his information:
  
  
  
  
  
• A slide from his presentation:
  
  
  

The model's math is specifically about the core columns strength. What the jet has to get through in order to get the fuel where it could damage the core columns is something else entirely. Ryan was dealing with the momentum of the fuel against the core columns, and explicitly stated this. That there was a jet present to cut through the exterior columns doesn't invalidate Ryan's model at all.