Truthers: Was it caused by a missile/explosives?

I'm not sure what Carlos is trying to say, but any explosion making a hole this big in a concrete building would throw high-speed debris for a mile, the shock-wave would break windows all over the area, and the blast would be audible over half the city.

I think some of the problems with truthers is that they (and really most people) only know large explosions from Hollywood pyrotecnics. When you make a movie explosion, you only use fairly tiny amounts of actual explosives, the rest is fireworks, and various flamable fluids and gels. This is because the last thing you want on a movie set is flying scrapnel and devastating shock waves.

REAL LIFE large explosions have surprisingly little in the way of fireballs, but send debris flying at riffle-bullet speeds, and make shock waves that can knock people over and shatter window panes at considerable distances.

REAL LIFE large explosions don't give witness accounts like "It sounded like a bomb",
they give accounts like "It wad a huge boom, it almost knocked me over, and my ears were ringing for hours".

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
REAL LIFE large explosions don't give witness accounts like "It sounded like a bomb",
they give accounts like "It wad a huge boom, it almost knocked me over, and my ears were ringing for hours".

Hans
Click to expand...

Incorrect. The second is essentially a quote, verbatim, from my room mate the Wednesday morning following "Taco Tuesday" at the Mexican joint down the street. $1 tacos and $12 pitchers of margaritas.

"The stench was horrible, I could barely breathe, I tried to run but there were people passed out in the hallways" is missing from the actual quote.


"Big bada boom"- Leeloo Dallas
 
bill smith said:
Suppose it was a plane, say a 757 but there were explosives built in to destroy any large parts on impact ?
Click to expand...

Bill, do you know what happened to Flight 800? Of course you don't! Fuel vapor inside the center tank ignited when an exposed wire short circuited & caused the plane to break up in flight. The nose & fuselage hit the water with such force that it spread the debris out.

You don't need explosives for every little thing you imagine, Bill.
 
3bodyproblem said:
Incorrect. The second is essentially a quote, verbatim, from my room mate the Wednesday morning following "Taco Tuesday" at the Mexican joint down the street. $1 tacos and $12 pitchers of margaritas.

"The stench was horrible, I could barely breathe, I tried to run but there were people passed out in the hallways" is missing from the actual quote.


"Big bada boom"- Leeloo Dallas
Click to expand...
That is, at least, a brand new CT:

Teh WTC was brough down by tacos! :eye-poppi

.... No less plausible than the rest of'em..:p

Hans
 
3bodyproblem said:
Incorrect. The second is essentially a quote, verbatim, from my room mate the Wednesday morning following "Taco Tuesday" at the Mexican joint down the street. $1 tacos and $12 pitchers of margaritas.

"The stench was horrible, I could barely breathe, I tried to run but there were people passed out in the hallways" is missing from the actual quote.


"Big bada boom"- Leeloo Dallas
Click to expand...

MRC_Hans said:
That is, at least, a brand new CT:

Teh WTC was brough down by tacos! :eye-poppi

.... No less plausible than the rest of'em..:p

Hans
Click to expand...

You jest... but you obviously haven't had the same sort of taco's I've had in my life. I'm tellin' ya, that hole-in-the-wall that served me those tacos and tortas that night... free fall, single squib out my
donkey-1.png
, fell into it's own footprint, manager yelling "tire de eso!"... :boggled:
 
In related news it was confirmed that the twin towers were brought down by a boat!

WORKERS excavating at the World Trade Centre site have unearthed the 9.75-metre-long hull of a ship likely buried in the 18th century.

Archaeologists say the vessel probably was used along with other debris to fill in land to extend lower Manhattan into the Hudson River.

Archaeologists Molly McDonald and A Michael Pappalardo were at the site of the September 11, 2001 attacks on Tuesday morning when workers uncovered the artifacts.

They call the find significant but say more study is needed to determine the age of the ship.

The two archaeologists work for AKRF, a firm hired to document artifacts discovered at the site. They found a 45kg boat anchor in the same area yesteray, but they're not sure if it belongs to the ship.

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...te/story-e6frfku0-1225892160216#ixzz0tiy42WN8
Click to expand...
 
Well, what I was trying to say is that neither a missile nor explosives planted inside the building could do a damage like that.
 
bill smith said:
between the 'heres' and the 'theres' I hardly kmow whether I'm coming or going Fitz.

So was it a missile or a plane then ?

Suppose it was a plane, say a 757 but there were explosives built in to destroy any large parts on impact ?
Click to expand...
The point is that the site shows no signs of explosives. It shows signs of a kinetic impact, followed by intense fire. A missile cannot make the observed extensive damage without leaving the tell-tale signs of a HE detonation. A large plane does not need explosives to make the damage, just velocity and fuel.

Ergo, the damage must have been made by a plane. Add to this the facts that:

1) A plane was hijacked and was lost.

2) The parts of an identical plane was found at the site (here, I'm not even considering the possibility that any parts, except the FDR, were positively ID-ed).

3) The FDR of the missing plane was found at the site, and its data showed the plane's route to the crash site.

4) Remains of the passengers having boarded the missing plane were found at the site.

5) Numerous witnesses reported a plane like the missing flying into the building.

Hans
 
bill smith said:
between the 'heres' and the 'theres' I hardly kmow whether I'm coming or going Fitz.

So was it a missile or a plane then ?

Suppose it was a plane, say a 757 but there were explosives built in to destroy any large parts on impact ?
Click to expand...


Why bother with explosives when the KE alone is equivalent to over 1300 hundred pounds of TNT?



A moving object possesses what is known as Kinetic Energy. The amount of this energy depends on only two things....The objects Mass (in simplistic terms, its weight) and its Velocity (speed).

The formula for Kinetic Energy is

EK = (1/2)mv2 or 0.5 x Mass x Velocity x Velocity.
http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechanics/energy/kineticEnergy/kineticEnergy.html

The mass of a Boeing 757-200 (AA77 was a 757-200) is a maximum of 115,680kg at takeoff.

It was on on a long flight so it fuel load would be near max but it did not have a full load of passengers and would have consumed some fuel so we will assume a conservative mass of about 100,000kg at the time it hit the Pentagon.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/technical.html

The velocity of the aircraft at impact was 460 plus knots or 236 m/s
http://www.euronet.nl/users/grantm/frans/speed.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0

so the Kinetic energy (in Joules) of the plane at impact is:
0.5 x 100000 x 236 x 236 = 2,784,800,000J or 2,785MJ

So what does this mean? Well to put it into perspective a stick of dynamite has an explosive energy of 2.1MJ so the KE in flight 77 was equivalent to 1326 sticks of dynamite

or
A kg of TNT has a energy of 4.6MJ so the KE was equivalent 605kg of TNT (1331 lbs)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamite

And thats just the Kinetic Energy.

Still think there would be much 757 left after the impact? or that it wouldn't have the energy to punch through 5 walls?
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Why bother with explosives when the KE alone is equivalent to over 1300 hundred pounds of TNT?



A moving object possesses what is known as Kinetic Energy. The amount of this energy depends on only two things....The objects Mass (in simplistic terms, its weight) and its Velocity (speed).

The formula for Kinetic Energy is

EK = (1/2)mv2 or 0.5 x Mass x Velocity x Velocity.
http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechanics/energy/kineticEnergy/kineticEnergy.html

The mass of a Boeing 757-200 (AA77 was a 757-200) is a maximum of 115,680kg at takeoff.

It was on on a long flight so it fuel load would be near max but it did not have a full load of passengers and would have consumed some fuel so we will assume a conservative mass of about 100,000kg at the time it hit the Pentagon.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/technical.html

The velocity of the aircraft at impact was 460 plus knots or 236 m/s
http://www.euronet.nl/users/grantm/frans/speed.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0

so the Kinetic energy (in Joules) of the plane at impact is:
0.5 x 100000 x 236 x 236 = 2,784,800,000J or 2,785MJ

So what does this mean? Well to put it into perspective a stick of dynamite has an explosive energy of 2.1MJ so the KE in flight 77 was equivalent to 1326 sticks of dynamite

or
A kg of TNT has a energy of 4.6MJ so the KE was equivalent 605kg of TNT (1331 lbs)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamite

And thats just the Kinetic Energy.

Still think there would be much 757 left after the impact? or that it wouldn't have the energy to punch through 5 walls?
Click to expand...

I don't really do the Pentagon.
 
If it was a missile and not a plane. What happened to the plane and all the passengers and crew?
Where did they go?

That is something I have never seen properly answered by any 'truther'.
Without a good answer to that you can forget talk of missiles until there is an answer.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
If it was a missile and not a plane. What happened to the plane and all the passengers and crew?
Where did they go?

That is something I have never seen properly answered by any 'truther'.
Without a good answer to that you can forget talk of missiles until there is an answer.
Click to expand...


They think that is a problem with the "official story"...they expect big bits of planes and piles of bodies just like all the other relatively low speed plane crashes......they can't seem to comprehend that the wings and tail simply shredded like the Phantom or that the bodies were inside the building and didn't look like much more than ground meat in any case.............
If the official version needs no plane or bodies so they think that neither does theirs......
 
Well, the official version does need a plane and bodies, because they weren't there in the form the 'truthers' wanted doesn't alter the fact.
 
I'm replying this way Twinstead because I am having difficulty logging in to the jref. When I press the 'quote' button on your post I get the login box I fill it in correctly, send it - and it comes right back asking to be filled in again. Indefiinately. I can log in and post by using 'post reply'.Maybe it's an issue with the forum software. Maybe the mods can take a look. Just thought I'd share that,

Yes, I know quite a lot about the Pentagon. I can pull many fascinating rabbits out of the hat there. But my gut instinct tells me it's a set up. A honeypot to attract and generate conspiracy theories.
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
Come on bill. You do everything else. I'm sure you could pull something out of your nether regions about the Pentagon too ;)
Click to expand...

I'm sure Bill could,but Telltale Tom is the bull goose troll here now.Bill hasn't got the touch anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom