Robrob
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 5,497
Why bother?Seriously, I'll write to Purdue, but you need to tell me what format you want. Bar chart? Half inch tape? Doctoral thesis?
Well golly gee, we have the hijacker, but they were only murderers, DNA for Flight 77 and 93.The damage evidence indicates something other than a plane struck, and from a completely different direction than what we were shown on the TeeVee.
No plane = no hijackers.
Yes, and you ignored the answers.
Why would this not be consistent with a 767-200 hitting the building.
Got something better than your (admitted) layperson opinion?
Why should we believe you?
Why bother?
He hasn't shown the need to go through the trouble. I can get the data if he shows a legitimate need (a source through WPI).
The ball is in his court.
Since the planes weren't traveling precisely N-S, your point would be?I'm speaking to laypeople, therefore it is appropriate I use language we can all understand. The damage is directional, but not in the direction the jet was traveling:

Since the plane did not strike perfectly flat, your point?in addition to the directional damage, there is the difference in size from the little "pinch" on the left with the larger gash on the right. Last I checked a jet's wing was pretty uniform from left to right.

Why are we responsible for your homework? If you don't believe the study, it should be quite easy for you to request the data.I'd like all of it in digital format please. But you won't write and if you do, they won't give it to you.
I'd like all of it in digital format please. But you won't write and if you do, they won't give it to you.
Well golly gee, we have the hijacker, but they were only murderers, DNA for Flight 77 and 93.
Nothing you say is true. And pre-debunked. Is this the best the school of hard knocks produces? Exactly where did the hard knocks hit you?
As opposed what, lollypops? You have no clue what you're even talking about.
Crime? You can't figure out RADAR, or aircraft impacts, who can you figure out the crime?So you'd suggest ignoring the evidence at the scene of the crime and believing the "proof" used to justify America's longest war by the people who profit by it?
Good plan.
Since the planes weren't traveling precisely N-S, your point would be?
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_5245852db1b3265618.png[/qimg]
Since the plane did not strike perfectly flat, your point?
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_5245852db1e8e584ea.gif[/qimg]
Please elaborate on your belief the hole should have been a perfectly symmetrical cut out of the aircraft.
[qimg]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/__Exl9-i4mCs/TCe0S5imivI/AAAAAAAAAdw/4z7nkkIyEjY/s1600/Wile%2BE%2BCoyote%2Bhits%2Brock%2Bbottom.JPG[/qimg]
Why are we responsible for your homework? If you don't believe the study, it should be quite easy for you to request the data.
Please elaborate on your belief such studies routinely release all their raw data?
The aircraft flew almost straight toward the north
tower, banked approximately 25 degrees to the left (i.e.,
the right wing elevated relative to the left wing) and
descended at an angle of about 10 degrees at impact.
Moving at about 440 mph, the nose hit the exterior of the tower at the 96
th
floor.
There are finite element analyses that don't require a super-computer to run.
Here's a start:
http://yankee451.com/2013/12/23/shanksville-crater-finite-element-analysis/
Holy crap, you think a page of math symbols you don't understand are a "finite element analysis?" And gave him money for that? Good grief.
Apparently this is one of those "teaching algebra to goldfish" threads.
I'm speaking to laypeople, therefore it is appropriate I use language we can all understand. The damage is directional, but not in the direction the jet was traveling:
I'd like all of it in digital format please. But you won't write and if you do, they won't give it to you.
So you're capable of technical discussion but you choose to dumb it down so we'll understand? Hows that working for you?
Exactly what is digital format in this case?![]()
You behave like DGM and don't think the math is necessary, that the TeeVee was all the proof you need.
Anything you can provide, any format you can muster. How about that? Will you give me the link now?
The damage is directional, but not in the direction the jet was traveling:
in addition to the directional damage, there is the difference in size from the little "pinch" on the left with the larger gash on the right. Last I checked a jet's wing was pretty uniform from left to right.
Then point me to the link of the math that proves the Jet did what we were told.
Anything you can provide, any format you can muster. How about that? Will you give me the link now?