Moderated What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole

[yankee451]

Let’s pretend, why not? You’ve been pretending for 19 pages now. So, were the floors removed, or what?

Well, I would say the only way the two big wall panels that we see here could be curled in like that would be if there were not floors behind them. After all, each one allegedly had three floors on each panel, top, bottom and middle.


Also, each spandrel plate was connected with two plates of steel with 16 bolts per spandrel, making 32 bolts per seam. So those bolts were obviously removed too.
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/these-two-big-wall-panels.png

Edited by LashL: 

Changed oversized image to link.

 

[Kid Eager]

We're still examining the scene of the crime, step one in any criminal investigation. Don't get ahead of yourself.

Quoted for irony.

 

[DGM]

Well, I would say the only way the two big wall panels that we see here could be curled in like that would be if there were not floors behind them. After all, each one allegedly had three floors on each panel, top, bottom and middle.


Also, each spandrel plate was connected with two plates of steel with 16 bolts per spandrel, making 32 bolts per seam. So those bolts were obviously removed too.

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/these-two-big-wall-panels.png[/qimg]

You would say?

Why would we listen? You yourself said you can't do the work needed to determine what it would take to pulverize the floors.

So you base this claim on nothing.

There's another one of your claims gone.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

So without any "math" to back up the official story, let's examine the evidence for clues as to what really happened.

Here we have the famous plane shaped hole:

<pics snipped to save space>

We can see the left "wingtip" was caused by something much smaller than the right:

The damage begins here with this little "pinch":

Moving to the right we can see it get progressively worse, bending this steel column sharply to the right (west):

And the next:

I can't agree that we can compare the two wingtips using your photo since the right wingtip impression is cropped out.

The right wingtip is shown in one of robrob's pictures (aside: the markings on that picture are way off scale. It only shows the outer portion of the wing impression, not anywhere close to the main body of the plane.) Comparing that picture with your picture of the left wingtip, there's nothing that suggests to me that the two wings were not symmetrical.

Regarding your claims that damage caused by the left wing appears to have bent parts to the right, is that actually true? Are those items you highlighted actually bending to the right or are they in fact bending inwards? From where was that photograph taken and, more particularly, at what angle to the face of the building?

If we are to consider your alternative explanation, have you considered at what angle the missiles would have had to strike the building in order to make a gash the full length of the wing without simply disappearing into the building, and what would then cause the penetrators to stop when they got to the middle of your intended faked plane impact?

In essence it appears to me that you would need to have the missiles skim across the face of the building at a very narrow angle before impacting and scoring a gash across the surface. But you need them to impact at precisely the point where the wingtip ought to have hit. Can you do sufficient geometry to work out how far off target the impact could have been if a missile track could have been even a single metre off target? Can you explain why there is no visible damage caused by the wings of the missiles as they would have been smashed off while they skimmed across the face of the building?

 

[yankee451]

The documents are real, the claim you make about them is a lie.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

From page 3:

The Air Force's April 1996 schedule for JASSM development and early
production calls for
-- a 24-month competitive program definition and risk reduction
phase beginning in June 1996 (milestone I);
-- a 32-month engineering and manufacturing development phase
beginning in June 1998 (milestone II);
-- production of 75 low-rate initial production missiles beginning
in January 2000;
-- production of 90 full-rate production missiles beginning in
April 2001 (milestone III); and
-- initial JASSM deployment in June 2001.

 

[yankee451]

You would say?

Why would we listen? You yourself said you can't do the work needed to determine what it would take to pulverize the floors.

So you base this claim on nothing.

There's another one of your claims gone.

Hey, I just figured you guys would be just as interested in this stuff as the next guy now that you don't have a leg to stand on. If you have a better interpretation, please have at it. It's refreshing to not hear cries of "physics" anymore though.

 

[fess]

Is that what I said and retracted? which post was that?

Sorry, my apologies. You retracted your statement, so I'll retract mine.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

We're still examining the scene of the crime, step one in any criminal investigation. Don't get ahead of yourself.

That's funny, because you're way ahead of yourself with this. You've reached a conclusion that flies in the face of all the evidence you're ignoring -- the consistent video images taken by randoms scattered all over Manhattan and the plane ejecta.

Oh, and the absolute, complete and total lack of any evidence of either explosives or cruise missiles.

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

See if you can come up with the difference between "production" and "deployment".

The Airforce had several dozen JASSMs by the end of 2000, and the fact that they weren't officially deployed yet means nothing. They wouldn't have been very smart to use missiles that were deployed and in inventory would they?

Ever heard of plausible deniability? That's the crutch you're leaning on right now.

what happened to the passengers and crew from the planes? Funny how you no planers never want to address that detail

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Well, I would say the only way the two big wall panels that we see here could be curled in like that would be if there were not floors behind them.

How many square yards of concrete floor would have to be smashed out of the way in order for the panels to move back that far? Doesn't seem like an impossible task for tens of tons of stuff arriving at 500 mph to do that.

 

[fess]

From earlier in the thread:The Airforce had at least 35 pilot production JASSMs before 9/11:
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...n-missiles.png

False information as I stated before. The Air Force did not HAVE 35 of these missiles, thet were trying to acquire them. The number that they finally did get for testing was quite a bit lower.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

You keep using what was planned in 1996 as if it was what actually happened by 2001. I do not think that they achieved what they had hoped to achieve.

 

[JSanderO]

He is wrong about the bolts and the wall thickness of the facade columns on the floors of the plane impact.

 

[DGM]

Hey, I just figured you guys would be just as interested in this stuff as the next guy now that you don't have a leg to stand on. If you have a better interpretation, please have at it. It's refreshing to not hear cries of "physics" anymore though.

You weren't listening anyway. The math did not go away.

Do you have anymore claims you can't support?

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

Yes, some sections obviously were, good point, but let's pretend for a moment they were there...I mean, if there really WAS a plane, the floors HAD to have been there, right? If not Marsh McLennan has some explaining to do, eh?

Are you aware the planes were tracked by radar, we know the people boarded the planes all died, scores of people live with the heartache of lost loved ones, plane debris and body parts were identified at the site, thousands of eye witnesses in NY and NJ saw the planes hit the WTC, as did survivors from inside the towers, as did millions on tv....

Do you have evidence that contradict any of this?

I think you are just making these conspiracy theories up as you go along

 

[yankee451]

False information as I stated before. The Air Force did not HAVE 35 of these missiles, thet were trying to acquire them. The number that they finally did get for testing was quite a bit lower.

So you'd expect them to report that they diverted many of these missiles to be used on 9/11?

 

[yankee451]

Are you aware the planes were tracked by radar, we know the people boarded the planes all died, scores of people live with the heartache of lost loved ones, plane debris and body parts were identified at the site, thousands of eye witnesses in NY and NJ saw the planes hit the WTC, as did survivors from inside the towers, as did millions on tv....

Do you have evidence that contradict any of this?

I think you are just making these conspiracy theories up as you go along

No way, radar?

Have you checked out the damage evidence?

 

[yankee451]

He is wrong about the bolts and the wall thickness of the facade columns on the floors of the plane impact.

Citation, blueprints? Anything?

 

[JSanderO]

Citation, blueprints? Anything?

I posted two PDFs post #739

 

[LSSBB]

The OP and its defense in this thread have to be the ultimate exercise in per argumentum rerum facitis I have ever seen.*



* argument by making things up.