Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[phunk]

No amount of debris falling is going to create this.

You don't seem to have any idea what that is, so how do you know?

 

[Dcdrac]

What is your evidence to back your assertion what hard facts I mean real ones not scientific sounding mumbo jumbo to you have to back anything you have presented in any of the threads

 

[brazenlilraisin]

Why not?

She's posted already that she thinks that's one of the beams. The whole lump.

 

[Tomtomkent]

No amount of debris falling is going to create this.

As a scientist would you care to hazard a guess why a finite amount of debris may indeed cause that sort fo deforming?

Little hint. Blacksmiths have managed to twist metal to such angles for thousands of years. Industry has managed to produce comparable angles of deformation with comparable amounts and sizes of metal with pressures and mechanical means that are less than those found by dropping a building on the piece of metal.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

It amazes me these threads make it as long as they do.

I thinks its more of an entertainment thing at this point, No one takes anything dusty or any truther for that matter seriously.

It does bother me on a personal level how they can so nonchalantly toss aside the deaths of the passengers and crew aboard flights 175,93 and 77.

Small inner thought; I've been thinking for awhile that perhaps truthers do accept the events as they are reported but the crushing realization of all the death and destruction is too much to bear for them, so they have to fabricate these elaborate fantasies to ease their minds.

 

[LSSBB]

She's posted already that she thinks that's one of the beams. The whole lump.

Still doesn't answer the question though.

 

[abaddon]

Still doesn't answer the question though.

Well, she doesn't. Ever.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I don't have an answer to every question that might be asked
about 9/11. If you ask questions about airplanes, I won't have
the answers.

Interesting. So your "theory" is based on a concept, the lack of aircraft, that you are completely unqualified and unable to determine.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Bending them? I think half a million tons of collapsing building can manage that.

Too obvious, The real answer was an unseen energy weapon and holograms.

 

[Mudcat]

Dust somehow my question about your proposed advanced weapon has gotten moved to AAH, despite the fact that advanced weapons is kind of the point of this otherwise pointless thread.

So allow me to repeat myself.

Don't confuse advanced technology with magic.

You claim that you believe that some kind of advanced weapon destroyed the WTC buildings but disbelieve the notion that it was some kind of directed energy weapon. If it wasn't a directed energy weapon that supposedly destroyed the WTC than what was it? Was it some kind of gas? Was it a compact fusion bomb? Was it a horde of nanites? Was it some kind of plasma projectile? Was it a neutron star dropped on top of the WTC? Was it a field effect weapon? He'll, was it the blooming HAARP?

 

[Craig4]

No amount of debris falling is going to create this.

Once again not good enough; show your work.

 

[Craig4]

A medical examiner takes a small sample of a cadaver's body tissue
to make certain determinations about the cause of death.

The few leftover beams are the equivalent of a tissue sample.
Whatever destroyed the WTC, it has to be capable of doing
that to large steel beams.

How much steel was removed versus how much steel was in the WTC. You are once again not good enough. Show your work.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

How much steel was removed versus how much steel was in the WTC. You are once again not good enough. Show your work.

This is an intersting point. Roughly what proportion of the WTC's steel frame is claimed to have been turned to dust?

How many thousand tons of steel dust versus how many thousand tons of broken and mangled but otherwise intact bulk steel should we expect to have seen in the remains of the buildings?

 

[dafydd]

What's "dustification"?

A science fiction term used by non-scientists.

 

[dafydd]

deleted

 

[abaddon]

Do you believe in the existence of her super dooper energy beam dustification weapon? Do you believe in impossible hologram planes? Do you give any credence to Ms. Blevin's statements? Are you a bigfoot and fake Moon landing delusionist too? Why the scare quotes?

Cos we are all ebil gubmint robots.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

No plane debris bouncing backwards means no collision took place.
You cannot get around this.

Ignorance coupled with arrogance makes for a rancid stew.

You are 100% wrong. Not 99, not 99-3/4... 100%. It's simply breathtaking to witness.

 

[dafydd]

I'm still waiting to hear whether Clayton believes that the steel was turned to dust by an energy beam weapon or not.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Ignorance coupled with arrogance makes for a rancid stew.

You are 100% wrong. Not 99, not 99-3/4... 100%. It's simply breathtaking to witness.

Why do you think a relatively light per square ft. mostly aluminum jet could enter a building without visual signs of a concussive event?

The nose should have been scrunched. It was not. Not even a tad.

The wings should have been repelled but no they slipped into the tower unconcerned alongside of the 6000lb. engine(s).

Two Boeing 767s Vanish into Twin Towers

How could two large wide-bodied aluminum jetliners penetrate massive steel towers and disappear with no deceleration visible, no plane wreckage visible in gashes and none knocked to the ground below the impact zone?
Expressed another way, no confirmed debris exists from two alleged 767 high-speed crashes into skyscrapers within 17 minutes of each other, a stunning lack of evidence to support the official 767 theory. Given long experience with airplane crashes, it is difficult if not impossible to accept the proposition that a wide-body jetliner can smash into a dense steel-concrete tower and disappear virtually without a trace, much less do it twice within 17 minutes in the same city block. Yet the NIST (pdf pg 38) states about the south tower, “the aircraft completely disappeared into the building in a fifth of a second.”

Tower walls were composed of high-strength steel beams approximately 14 inches square on one-meter centers (39.37”) surrounding windows with each column beam secured to others by steel spandrel plates about 52 inches x 10 feet forming a belt around each floor (see p. 8 pdf). Steel beam thicknesses varied from 4” at the base and tapered from 5/8” to ¼” in the WTC 1 impact zone and 13/16” to ¼” in the WTC 2 impact zone. WTC floors were grids of steel topped by four inches of steel reinforced lightweight concrete in corrugated steel pans. Walls effectively were dense webs of nearly 40% steel covered by aluminum and backed by steel and concrete floor grids mated to an incredibly strong and dense core of 47 cross-braced steel columns, stairwells and elevator shafts.

A key question regarding each jetliner’s disappearance is:
Would wing tips and tail break off against each steel wall or disappear entirely inside each building?
Ordinarily the answer would be that wing tips and tail would shear off on impact and bounce to the ground below. Wing tips have enormous forward momentum at impact but begin to decelerate as the nose and fuselage collides with a steel wall, five floors of steel-truss-steel-reinforced-concrete, and a steel inner core. This would wreak complete havoc on the plane, although the plane in the south tower videos looks like an invincible hot knife going through a soft butter tower. Localized force applied by the wing tips was insufficient to fragment steel columns or spandrel plates and we should have seen video footage of the repelled wreckage bounce to the ground. There are no reports of such wreckage that I can find. A decelerating tail section would slow down and break off too, yet we saw no trace of it. “The impact of the inner half of an empty wing significantly damaged exterior columns but did not result in their complete failure,” the NIST concedes (pdf, p. 105). In plainer terms, the hollow sections of the wings may damage steel columns but not fragment them (complete failure). Instead, the dense steel exterior of each tower would “reject” or “bounce back” so-called empty aluminum wings, especially wing tips, the outer sections.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Why do you think a relatively light per square ft. mostly aluminum jet could enter a building without visual signs of a concussive event?

The nose should have been scrunched. It was not. Not even a tad.

The wings should have been repelled but no they slipped into the tower unconcerned alongside of the 6000lb. engine(s).

[qimg]http://i44.tinypic.com/wmbo5.gif[/qimg]

Two Boeing 767s Vanish into Twin Towers

Argument From Personal Incredulity is not your friend.