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

[Andy_Ross]

The government also said ground zero was safe.

What the heck has this got to do with any of the questions I asked?

All the Airports they landed at have flight records, all the Pilots have records of the aircraft in their logbooks. Alll the service companies that worked on them have records, all the parts suppliers have records.
If there's one thing you can be sure of it is that the Civil Airline industry has comprehensive records of everything that is done to any aircraft and all the parts ever used on them.
So, we know the aircraft existed up until 911.
All the passengers and crew that were on them that day are also missing.

They have families and friends and work colleagues all say they are missing, their DNA was found at the crash sites

If the aircraft didn't crash as seen on 911, where did they go? Where are all the people? How did their DNA get to the crash sites?

 

[Justin39640]

They didn't.

This picture is full of fail.

 

[Redwood]

Force = Mass multiplied by the Velocity

Learn it. Understand it. Now figure out what would happen to a 120,000kg mass moving at 245ms impacting a building.

Actually, that's momentum, not force. It's OK, Yankee didn't get it, either. Force is the time-derivative of momentum.

 

[yankee451]

It seems odd the video has the alleged plane entering the building as if the plane was a solid mass not an object with varying densities and angles. Those varying densities of the plane met varying densities of the tower. Certainly at least the rudder should not have entered the tower.


[qimg]http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/Images/airplane.jpg[/qimg]

I don't see the reinforced steel slicing leading edges of the wings on this diagram, nor the dense-metal encased battering ram radome. Do you?

 

[LSSBB]

I don't see the reinforced steel slicing leading edges of the wings on this diagram, nor the dense-metal encased battering ram radome. Do you?

And yet, the plane DID enter the tower, like all the physical evidence, eyewitness testimony and radar show. Why should anyone take you or Mr. Holocaust Denier's disbelief as proof of anything?

 

[BasqueArch]

 

[dafydd]

What the heck has this got to do with any of the questions I asked?

All the Airports they landed at have flight records, all the Pilots have records of the aircraft in their logbooks. Alll the service companies that worked on them have records, all the parts suppliers have records.
If there's one thing you can be sure of it is that the Civil Airline industry has comprehensive records of everything that is done to any aircraft and all the parts ever used on them.
So, we know the aircraft existed up until 911.
All the passengers and crew that were on them that day are also missing.

They have families and friends and work colleagues all say they are missing, their DNA was found at the crash sites

If the aircraft didn't crash as seen on 911, where did they go? Where are all the people? How did their DNA get to the crash sites?

Answer please, Clayton.

 

[yankee451]

I think he needs to add another 7 inches to the left hand side, this allows for the measurements taken from the centres. So it looks like the wing over lapped the furthest left column by 3 inches.

I'm happy to correct the record. What's the latest concensus on the measurements?

 

[dafydd]

I don't see the reinforced steel slicing leading edges of the wings on this diagram, nor the dense-metal encased battering ram radome. Do you?

''Randome''? This has gone beyond typos. Is English your first language?

 

[yankee451]

And yet, the plane DID enter the tower, like all the physical evidence, eyewitness testimony and radar show. Why should anyone take you or Mr. Holocaust Denier's disbelief as proof of anything?

Did not.

Can you do this without getting too far off topic? You'll be calling me a pedophile before you know it, but it won't make me wrong.

 

[beachnut]

Did not.

Can you do this without getting too far off topic? You'll be calling me a pedophile before you know it, but it won't make me wrong.

That is more likely than your crazy theories on 911.

Empirical data for Flight 175.
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Flight_Path_Study_UA175.pdf

You can use the old first grader "did not", as much as you want, but your word is worthless in reality; you have to have evidence. You have fantasy.
But RADAR beats millions of, "did not".

Here is the math proof of , "yes it did". lol
Based on your Hard Knocks Schooling, your fantasy has you debunking MIT. Your silly comment prove you don't understand physics.
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Chapter-IV-Aircraft-Impact.pdf
And, you ignore the very thing you want, empirical data. You push fantasy. You mess up and post photos of a KE impact by a 767.

 

[yankee451]

''Randome''? This has gone beyond typos. Is English your first language?

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

Edited by LashL: 

Edited for civility.

How's my spelling now?

 

[dafydd]

Did not.

Can you do this without getting too far off topic? You'll be calling me a pedophile before you know it, but it won't make me wrong.

There is no need to call you anything, you are wrong. All you have is a fixation and no evidence to support your far-fetched claims. Are you going to say goodnight again?

 

[TheRedWorm]

Did not.

Can you do this without getting too far off topic? You'll be calling me a pedophile before you know it, but it won't make me wrong.

How about you prove yourself right with math. You wouldn't be so sure of yourself unless you had already done it, right?

 

[dafydd]

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

Edited by LashL: 

Edited for civility.

How's my spelling now?

I was wrong. It must feel good to be right, for once.

 

[dafydd]

How about you prove yourself right with math. You wouldn't be so sure of yourself unless you had already done it, right?

"O Diamond, Diamond, thou little knowest the mischief thou hast done."

 

[beachnut]

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

Edited by LashL: 

Edited for civility.

How's my spelling now?

What is 451? Is that from the book?

I don’t care if you’re a firm believer in the official government story with planes, box-cutters and those Scary A-Rabs or if you’re a “no-planer” like me, you will be welcome here. http://yankee451.com/about-me-2/

Are you a racist too?

What did MIT say about your comments?
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Chapter-IV-Aircraft-Impact.pdf

Silly comments you can't back with evidence; you don't do physcis.

From here they go into some detail about the construction of the planes and buildings and how they calculate the masses for their math problem. If I get bored I might comment on the rest of the document but I think you see where it ends. They are tying themselves into knots in an effort to explain mathematically how it was possible, but in order to do so they need to ignore the laws of nature.

Wow, a comment based on, nothing. Which laws did they ignore. They proved your claim is a lie.

 

[dafydd]

I love this comment from his site. ''No one has heard of me, yet.'' Or ever.

 

[beachnut]

I love this comment from his site. ''No one has heard of me, yet.'' Or ever.

He reminds me of Heaven's Gate leader, maybe safer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZnBkdFooFU

 

[LSSBB]

Did not.

Can you do this without getting too far off topic? You'll be calling me a pedophile before you know it, but it won't make me wrong.

I won't be calling you a pedophile, and you have yet to prove any of your theory. So far its:
{Tons of evidence of planes} > {some guys can't believe they were planes because of, well, the School of Hard Knocks, whatever that means, although they never ran planes into buildings or did accident investigations so how they learned that who knows}

Theory of planes hitting buildings wins. By the way, > means Greater than, in case that wasn't taught in HKU.

ETA: Check the Holocaust Denial thread for why I provided that label.