TheRedWorm
I AM the Red Worm!
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2007
- Messages
- 4,452
Because you haven't watched the video you're commenting on.
Does the video contain your math? If it does, reproduce it here, if it doesn't then don't bother.
Because you haven't watched the video you're commenting on.
So what's the reason for you not being able to tell me. It's your idea isn't it ?
You're flailing about now - toothbrushes and screwdrivers? Try to stick to the topic.
And yet you believe a wing designed to convert airflow to lift becomes a penetrating missile cabable to slice through dozens of steel box columns if it goes fast enough. This doesn't bode well for the gene pool.
My prime objective is to expose the truth, whatever it is. What's yours?
I can tell you, but if you won't give me the courtesy of watching the video, why should I answer your question?

I can tell you, but if you won't give me the courtesy of watching the video, why should I answer your question?
You achieve this by coming here?My prime objective is to expose the truth, whatever it is. What's yours?
Incredulity, ad hominem. And, yes, I do believe a wing with sufficient velocity and the right type of construction, both of which I believe were present on 9/11, would be able to and did sever the exterior columns of WTC 1 and 2, regardless of what it was originally designed for. I can use an iron as an effective bludgeon, if need be, and screwdrivers and toothbrushes are often used as murder weapons. Also:
[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/xpUBswX.jpg[/qimg]
This probably wasn't in the design specs for that car.
Also, quote-mining now? Are you sure you're not Ergo?
We already said we have no problem with him doing it. We have a problem with him not revealing his math until he does it, however, especially since he now admits he doesn't have any.
I'd like to introduce you to something called a Stundie.
No one asked you to give us your name.
Funny. You dropped the question of pressure and energy all of a sudden, because you know MIT clearly calculated that. MIT clearly said they didn't crunch the numbers because they couldn't simulate it in enough detail.
It can and has been proven one way or another without the test. Using math. Which you refuse to do. Because you can't.
On the other hand, you've effectively admitted your "layman's terms" explanations from earlier weren't because you were dumbing it down for the masses, but because you are unable or unwilling to perform more complex analyses.
Isn't it a wee bit hypocritical to demand others use math to prove their case, but you don't have to?
And it did. Show where he denies this.A pilot would know the jet would get creamed.
Ok you have the courtesy to tell me what's in the video
Does the video contain your math? If it does, reproduce it here, if it doesn't then don't bother.
And it did. Show where he denies this.
It's 11 minutes - will it kill you to watch the video this thread is about?
My prime objective is to expose the truth, whatever it is. What's yours?
A pilot would know the jet would get creamed.
No it wouldn't kill me, would it kill you to tell me your proposed test?
A pilot would know the jet would get creamed.
Ours is to help stop your retarded ideas (and others like it) from poisoning minds. The more you post, the worse your ideas look to rational people.
Look at the leading edge from the side. Then reconsider your statement here.
I made a video to explain it. That's why we're here.
The only people who could be threatened by this test are those who know what the results will be.
The jet and the columns creamed each other.