Merged No Planer calls for scientific study / Missiles of 9/11

Mikeys said:
they add abrasive mixes to water and the pressure applied is continuous. They don't just blast an aluminum bubble filled with water against the cutting object at high speed.
Click to expand...

OOPS!!

Weight of the water alone, very little KE in relation to the WTC, but yet the car is crushed.

Also, they don't need to add any abrasive. It helps, but not needed.
 
Mikeys said:
because it couldn't. Aluminum composite the plane was made of would burst into dust right at the point of impact. What else do you expect?
Click to expand...

So, lead cannot penetrate steel? Water cannot penetrate steel? Facts cannot penetrate your head?

Wow. Glad to know that....
 
Mikeys said:
Slicing requires perpendicular action. No slicing took place. You are the only responder who wants to talk the actual stuff.
Click to expand...

You do not appear to understand the basic principles of impacts.

Have you read NIST's section on the same in NCSTAR1-2B, Chapters 9 & 10?

Or, perhaps easier for you, the section on Impact Physics in Ryan Mackey's "Big Physics" presentation?

If not, go try to educate yourself.

Mikeys said:
Unfortunately your not much of a fireball.
Click to expand...

I was willing to discuss this with you, but you've turned out to be too much of a ass.

Perhaps that is the reason that nobody wants to interact with you.

Now, go find someone else to hold your hand.
 
Mikeys said:
I never claimed that hitting a building would be difficult. I never raised the issue. The video is not about it. The video is a fake, I admit. Someone did it and posted it for fun.
Click to expand...

The one who posted the video did not do it for fun; They are very serious. Just read the comment directly under the video.
 
Mikeys said:
Your equation will work on solid objects only and then you have to think about their densities. You can not plug into an equation numbers freely willy and go home happy as a clam. It was an aluminum shell bubble vs steel wall.
Click to expand...
Unadulterated horse poop. It would help if you understood very basic physics.

Which weighs more, 900,000 pounds of airplane or 900,000 pounds of feathers?

It doesn't matter what the airplane was "made of" or how it was made. 900,000 pounds of mass striking the WTC at 500+ mph.

There was no way the aluminum shell could cut through the wall without anything done to that wall prior to the impact or at east during the impact. It would have been pancaked, turned to dust, incinerated, and that at any high speed and above.
Click to expand...
It would also help if you understood very basic building facts. The WTC facade was not a "steel wall." Glass and aluminum. Your Wile E. Coyote fantasy of a fully laden jet airliner "squishing" flat on the otherwise undamaged outer shell of the WTC is, fantasy.

There was no debris coming down the wall. There was no explosion on contact, no fire, the plane was just swallowed. It was swallowed not because of the kinetic energy with which it hit the wall, but because most likely the columns had been undone in the place of impact, not a big deal.
Click to expand...

Just to interject some reality into your fantasy, are you actually suggesting the impact site was "pre-weakened?" And the jet moving at 500 mph flew into that very specific spot?
thum_524585046ca9f650f6.jpg

Many truthers claim it was "impossible" for a airliner to hit such a "tiny" target as the entire WTC in the first place. Now you're claiming not only could one hit it, it could pick the specific impact floors? At 500+ mph?

Notice the angle of the opening? The plane didn't hit horizontally. That would be some amazingly precise "weakening of the walls" to fit that diagonal space.
 
Last edited:
The wall was "weakened."

I have it on good authority that they actually built it out of thousands of smaller parts that had to be assembled and joined together.

The plot just keeps getting bigger. Whoever heard of constructing a building in such a way?:rolleyes:
 
It was weakened with a big old screaming fast fully fuel-laden jetliner.
 
Travis said:
The wall was "weakened."

I have it on good authority that they actually built it out of thousands of smaller parts that had to be assembled and joined together.

The plot just keeps getting bigger. Whoever heard of constructing a building in such a way?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

At this point, Tony S. would step in with his claim that the joints would be "built to maintain the strength of the columns" and that they would not weaken the wall in any way. :rolleyes:
 
Robrob said:
Which weighs more, 900,000 pounds of airplane or 900,000 pounds of feathers?It doesn't matter what the airplane was "made of" or how it was made. 900,000 pounds of mass striking the WTC at 500+ mph.
Click to expand...
do you cut your bread with a pound of feathers or steel. Don't repeat the same nonsense after anyone else. It will make you look like anyone else and that's about all you gain.


It would also help if you understood very basic building facts. The WTC facade was not a "steel wall." Glass and aluminum. Your Wile E. Coyote fantasy of a fully laden jet airliner "squishing" flat on the otherwise undamaged outer shell of the WTC is, fantasy.
Click to expand...
It was a steel frame which is a wall. I understand it was not solid, but it also was not just a wall. It was connected with the inner grid with trusses on which platforms rested. I never said it. Damage to both on the outside is most likely.

Many truthers claim it was "impossible" for a airliner to hit such a "tiny" target as the entire WTC in the first place. Now you're claiming not only could one hit it, it could pick the specific impact floors? At 500+ mph?
Click to expand...
It was a drone if we are to follow the scenario. You need technology not skills to hit what you aim at.
Notice the angle of the opening? The plane didn't hit horizontally. That would be some amazingly precise "weakening of the walls" to fit that diagonal space.
Click to expand...
Nothing amazing here.
 
Mikeys you don't have to trust us. Go to any university physics department, in any country on Earth, and run your theory by them.
 
beachnut said:
You claim you can not learn physics, then, spread lies based on physics which you pervert by plagarizing claims made by idiots.


I think you can do better, and make delusional claims on a scale never seen before. You can do it.
Click to expand...

I don't claim or plagiarize, just point the obvious, something that you too can analyze by yourself without having to admit your lack of common sense and sheepish trust in doctored science. The vids are free.
 
dafydd said:
What?
Click to expand...

He is lacking spelling and punctuation.

I think he wanted to say:

Do you reckon, chief, the truth movement is a conspiracy against conspiracy?

The "chief" bit because of MIKILLINI's avatar.
 
Mikeys said:
I don't claim or plagiarize, just point the obvious, something that you too can analyze by yourself without having to admit your lack of common sense and sheepish trust in doctored science. The vids are free.
Click to expand...

LOL @ "sheepish trust in doctored science". Aren't you just full of yourself. It's not like we've never heard "anybody who disagrees with me is a mindless sheep" before
 
Last edited:
dafydd said:
You do not know any physics, by your own admission. Anything you say about the impacts can be discarded.
Click to expand...

Do you have something more to say aside from this line. I know as much physics as most here and that's most likely gross understatement. That's why I don't use it as an argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom