How the airplane wing cut through the World Trade Center - A question for Fonebone

[Scott Sommers]

How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center is a technical research paper written by T. Wierzbicki and X. Teng.

A while back, Fonebone was asking about this paper. I understand he has had enough time to read through the whole thing. I notice he's still posting his disbelief in the things described in the paper. I'd like to know what about the paper he found unacceptable. So Fonebone, here are some questions for you about the paper.

1. Did you understand it?
2. What was wrong with the modeling done by the authors?
3. Are their problems with their assumptions?
4. Do you agree with the way the authors treated the fuel mass in their calculation?

Come on Fonebone, give me an answer. I think you owe me as much.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Now here's my problem. A while back, and I can't remember when, the Fonebone asked me to send him a copy of the research paper,
How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center written by T. Wierzbicki and X. Teng.

This paper costs US$31 on the commercial market and I don't even know the guy. Just knowing he believes in this 911-conspiracy-type-crap makes it highly unlikely I could be his friend, no matter what a cool guy he is otherwise. So we got a guy, not my friend, asking me to give him things worth money. True, I told him I would. But still, I think this is a big favor.

December 23, I send him the paper. Merry Christmas.

Fonebone gets the paper, and then what? You'd think the guy would understand he's supposed to say something about it. But I hear nothing. It's as if the New World Order has sent their security slaves around to muff him. Except that I know someone is still posting from his account on the JREFF about this 911-conspiracy-type-crap.

So I post this post, hoping he'll get the message. No such luck. So I send him a PM and tell him he's being rude. You think that'd shake some sense into the guy.

But I figure the real problem is that he's seen what real research looks like and he's scared. After all, what if he has to answer a question about the modeling? There's no way on Earth he can do that. It's just a lot safer to pretend none of this has happened. Right Fonebone?

But really, I want to talk about the paper. That's why I shared it with you. What da ya' think of it? Is the model any good?

 

[JAStewart]

I can't believe you wasted your money tbh scott. You and I both know that Conspiritards won't be changing their minds any time soon.

But, I respect your efforts to enlighten.

 

[Scott Sommers]

You can be sure, it didn't cost me anything. That's not the point. The point is that it would have cost Fonebone $31 to get the paper.

 

[femr2]

You can be sure, it didn't cost me anything. That's not the point. The point is that it would have cost Fonebone $31 to get the paper.

Are you actually talking about the paper in the link below, or are you distributing hookey copies of a paid-for resource ?

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter%20IV%20Aircraft%20Impact.pdf

 

[Scott Sommers]

Are you actually talking about the paper in the link below, or are you distributing hookey copies of a paid-for resource ?

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter%20IV%20Aircraft%20Impact.pdf

No. Same guys, different paper. They've written a whole pack of papers about how big jets full of fuel crashing into WTC-like-buildings at a big, big speed would cause them to fall down. Actually, in the secret paper that costs money, they explain why this problem is so fascinating to them. In fact, I'm kind of surprised the Fonebone didn't read that far and then miss quote them. My guess is he looked at the paper, saw all those numbers and squiggly lines, and figured there was no way he was getting through JREF on that one. So it's either pretend you don't know or end up looking as stupid as that Mortibund guy - or whatever his name is - pretending he knows about telephoto lens. And that, my friends, was even too stupid for the Fonebone.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Are you actually talking about the paper in the link below, or are you distributing hookey copies of a paid-for resource ?

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter%20IV%20Aircraft%20Impact.pdf

I've just had a look at this paper. For the kind-a-guy who gets squeamish at the sight of squiggly math lines, this paper looks a lot better.

Fonebone (and anyone else), read this paper instead. It's got more pictures and the words are smaller. I think even a Truther can get through this one.
http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfil...t Impact.pdf