yankee451
Master Poster
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2013
- Messages
- 2,794
Has yankee451 explained why he doesn't believe in physics?
Never said such a thing.
Has yankee451 explained why he doesn't believe in physics?
First tell me how much the radome, cockpit and forward cabin impact retarded the forward momentum of the whole plane. We all know a real jet's wings would snap off at that point but there it is on the TeeVee, the whole plane sliding like butter into the building, so be conservative, how much did the fuselage impact slow down the rest of the plane?
<sits in the lotus position>
Oooom
Allowing for whatever retardation you want to claim for the observed impact of the 767 with the building, how fast was the leading edge of the wing still travelling when it was observed to impact the building?
Won't help. You need to understand physics, not just hope it comes to you
in a trance.
I saw zero retardation.
How fast was the leading edge of the wing of the 767 travelling when it was observed to impact the tower?
(BTW: are you now claiming that you witnessed the impact in person?)
Had you watched the video you would know the irony of the moment.
First tell me how much the radome, cockpit and forward cabin impact retarded the forward momentum of the whole plane. We all know a real jet's wings would snap off at that point but there it is on the TeeVee, the whole plane sliding like butter into the building, so be conservative, how much did the fuselage impact slow down the rest of the plane?
I'm bored with your line of questioning. Get to the point.
Good god, man. The wings would snap off? Don't you know anything about airplane construction? The wings are one single piece. They're not bolted onto the sides of the plane. They are the plane, especially in a commercial aircraft of that size. Wings can deform, they can be pulled apart by enough torque, but they do not "snap off".
I'm bored with your inability to answer a simple, factual question.
How fast was the leading edge of the wing of the 767 travelling when it was observed to impact the tower?
Had you watched the video you would know the irony of the moment.
I did watch it.
I did watch it.
I started to. When I got to the bolts being removed bit i stopped. I also skipped past the part where he explained why his detachment from reality is better than the other truthers' detachment from reality.
So you get that your chanting "physics" is akin to a Hindi chanting "om".
Good, thought it missed you.
These are the knife edges I refer to:
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/1-9-2014-1-48-16-PM.png[/qimg]
According to the NIST this is what happened:
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/wing-burst.jpg[/qimg]
But according to the swept-back construction of the wings, they would have struck in a wedge-motion (not at right angles). So the NIST is clearly wrong.
Furthermore, they didn't consider the construction of the columns which the wing would impact one column edge at a time, sequentially from the fuselage-out:
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/animated-MIT-approach1.gif[/qimg]
Considering the steel slicing nature of wings:
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/fuel-tank-1.png[/qimg]
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/spar.png[/qimg]
It's obvious to a barnyard animal a southbound jet would not cause westward bends:
[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/0919birdstrikedamageonaircraft.jpg[/qimg]
I find this statement to be particularly funny:All kinds of graphics and you could still not answer the question....why am I not surprised?![]()
It's obvious to a barnyard animal a southbound jet would not cause westward bends:
I know. Do you think I don't know? Do you know?