Loose Change - Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
SRW said:
Yeah like he has to go through all that trouble, obviously he hired the manufacture of the plane to set up a control panel demolition. Or had them fill it with a concrete core to assure it ran out of gas.
Click to expand...
Poking around a bit, I did find a Grauniad article from shortly after JFK Jr.'s death that mentioned some of the frenzied Usenet speculation at the time. Don't see anything about GWB then though, which makes sense since GWB wasn't that big of a figure yet outside of Texas in the summer of 1999, other than for those of us who were already following the GOP primary race. One of the telling signs about conspiracy theories is that they often center around big obvious targets like the president, and only pull in relatively lesser known figures (e.g., Larry Silverstein in the case of the WTC theories) after they start to develop a bit. Only after somebody becomes a household name does anybody care to go back in time and "connect the dots" about them.
 
SRW said:
Yeah like he has to go through all that trouble, obviously he hired the manufacture of the plane to set up a control panel demolition. Or had them fill it with a concrete core to assure it ran out of gas.
Click to expand...

You don't actually believe John-John was flying a plane, do you? I have interviews with Marcel Marceau which say that he was an average to below-average pilot (at least, that's the way I interpret his mimes). Personally I think it was a non-hologram, which sort of shows us how blatant the government can be. Wake up sheeple!
 
Another Amazing Looser Thread

They watch one of those success videos and their jaws drop:

holy hell!

I was just shown this dvd the other day. What a coincidence (or not).

It's message is very powerful, and I think essential to this and other facets of the truth movement, which anyone who has done any real looking into 911 knows goes REALLY deep.

This is a great piece of work to help keep you centered ina worldso full of fear.

I reccommend it 2 thumbs, cause that's all I have.
Click to expand...

Hah, unlike us JREF ninjas who have three thumbs on each hand!

Well, unfortunately this video which unlocks all the secrets of the ancient woo, is no longer on Google Video. Instead you have to go to this website where you will learn to "purposefully activate laws of physics to generate the wealth you deserve".
 
CurtC said:
Yeah, I can just see W ditching his secret service coverage, sneaking out to the airport, finding the right plane, and disconnecting the turn-and-bank indicator his own self. He's a cunning one!
Click to expand...


Bush was in the Air National Guard. He would know EXACTLY how to disconnect the turn-and-bank indicator. It all fits.

-Andrew
 
Brainster said:
Of course, if he were doing it today, blog-stalker Deb Frisch would surely make the list. Oddly enough, she's a CTer who doesn't believe in controlled demolition at the WTC, which has to make her the only one of those I've ever encountered.
Click to expand...

Not me. A friend of mine once told me that the WTC was indeed destroyed by terrorists, but that they were "hired" by Bush, somehow.

I don't see how the ONE added layer of complexity helps at all, though.
 
Huntsman said:
Azazal:

Well, according to http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~astaneh/1-Publications/Astaneh-9ASEC-WTC%20Paper%202003.pdf the exterior columns were about 46cm x 46cm exterior, with varying thickness. The interior columns were either 2" steel or 5" steel, so I'll assume the exterior columns are 2" steel as well.

So, 46cm is 18.11 inches. We'll round to 19 for argument's sake. That gives a cross section of a solid column as (19x19=) 361 in2. The interior "hole" would be 15" x 15", taking up 225in2. That leaves (361-225) 136in2 for our A value.

So, we take P = 3/8A and end up with P = 3/8 * 136 = 51 pounds of TNT, or 23.13kg. And that's an upper estimate.

Realistically, it's 18.11 inch columns likely to be about 1 inch to 1.5 inches thick, which gives a mid-limit A of 68.44 and a P of 25.665 lbs, or 11.64kg.
Click to expand...

Thank you sir, hmm 2 Kg to spare, not bad.

Hutch, any responce from them?
 
kookbreaker said:
Its Microsoft's fault. They shipped it with the settings dafaulted that way.
Click to expand...
I find it helps to run an antigravity scan at least once a day. My computer came preloaded with physical laws, but they left out the speed of light and it took a dozen calls to customer service to get them to send it.
 
azazal said:
Thank you sir, hmm 2 Kg to spare, not bad.

Hutch, any responce from them?
Click to expand...

From slick this morning, and I quote:

You are forgetting one very very important factor. The fact that alot of the kinetic energy would be dispersed and converted into heat before even reaching the core, it's an inelastic collision. I highly doubt that the plane retained its kinetic energy after crashing through the 14 inch facade and everything else in between it and the core. So there's really no way of getting the exact math because of that and factors like friction etc. But one thing im sure we can safely say is this was no ordinary 767. Another thing I would like to add to a previous reply. Sure water can cut through steel, if it's concentrated and traveling at a hight rate, but try to cut through multiple steel plates with air in between. For every steel plate it cuts through, a dramatic amount of kinetic energy would be lost.
Click to expand...

If I am getting him correctly, he has moved the argument to the core columns rather than the other columns. and why wouldn't it have been an ordinary 767, given the KE rate (which does not even count any additional energy from the exploding fuel). And then he brings in the water drills as a obfuscation.

But no math. No math. Very, very seldom do you see anything close to math over there. It is a topic that they are not very comfortable with, IMHO.
 
Hutch said:
But no math. No math. Very, very seldom do you see anything close to math over there. It is a topic that they are not very comfortable with, IMHO.
Click to expand...
They ignore, ridicule, or obfuscate anything related to actual science, math, physics or even logic.

Amazingly, none of them can say who did or how they did it. But they are 100% sure it didn't happen per NIST and the 9/11 report.

They know what they know, they can't say why, but they just know.
 
Hutch. Ask him what else there was of any significance between the facade and the core to disperse the KE. Wall partitions and office furniture wouldn't seem to be much of a hindrance.
 
Hutch said:
But no math. No math. Very, very seldom do you see anything close to math over there. It is a topic that they are not very comfortable with, IMHO.
Click to expand...

It's odd. On one hand, he says how the math is too complex to do an analysis. But then goes on to make conclusions about how things couldn't have happened. If the math is too complicated (which, in fact, I don't really dispute, and lots of simplifications have to be made), then how can he claim it can't happen? He doesn't realize that such a claim is actually a mathematical statement regarding the physics.
 
Hutch said:
From slick this morning, and I quote:



If I am getting him correctly, he has moved the argument to the core columns rather than the other columns. and why wouldn't it have been an ordinary 767, given the KE rate (which does not even count any additional energy from the exploding fuel). And then he brings in the water drills as a obfuscation.

But no math. No math. Very, very seldom do you see anything close to math over there. It is a topic that they are not very comfortable with, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Why am I not surprised, can't counter the arguement, move the goalposts. If you want to make his head go boom, drop this one on him. From the LC PT 2 thread.

From here: Bureau of Transportation Statistics

Jet fuel = 37,626,700 joules/liter

10,000 gallons = 37,854.118 liters

So our energy comes out to 1424325541751 joules.

And I see in that I had the wrong number for the joules per kg of TNT there. 10,000 gallons of JP4 comes out to roughly 340421 kg of TNT not the 308825 kg figure I had said earlier. The KE of impact had more then enough power to punch through the exterior columns and the resulting fire ball dumped massive ammounts of heat into the core columns. Oh well I'm sure they'll ignore that as well.
 
Huntsman said:
azazal:

I think your earlier fuel figure was right, because IIRC estimates were at 9000 gallons (8000 to 10000, I think).

Not that it changes your conclusions ;)
Click to expand...


Excellent, though I should state that I am not a physicist, I just play one on the internet
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom