evidence of "no-planes"

Discussion in '9/11' started by n0spam, Jan 26, 2014.

  1. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    According to some you are obviously lying, same as the auto engineers who have crumple zones designed into cars etc etc.
     
  2. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well I was in an old '73 chevy pickup.
     
  3. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow too bad for that sign lol
     
  4. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I left this comment yesterday morning. genericBob still hasn't replied.

    I'll assume he's diligently researching the documentation of his claim to share with the forum.
     
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    89,281
    Likes Received:
    21,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe they all went to Russia like Snowden.
     
  6. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Step 1 is a joke, right?
     
  7. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Only to those who dont understand it.
     
  8. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So just exactly how do you use "E=MC^2"
    when KE=.0.5MV^2 very well works in defining the energy of a moving object
    be that object an airliner or a section of a skyscraper.

    also, do you assert that there was no damage to the wing
    when running into a 200 lb pole?

    it breaks off, therefore it has no inertia?
     
  9. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because with a falling piece of skyscraper or pole you have to account for the gravity energy being released as well. Or in this instance the inertia of the pole itselfl. You are simply calculating the kinetic energy of the plane without any reference to the pole.
     
  10. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    that can easily be accounted for, but what still puzzles me
    is WHY would you cite a formula that includes "C" that is a constant
    for the speed of light, are you thinking that you should reference the
    speeds encountered on 9/11 with that of light? or is this simply yet another
    time wasting tangent?
     
  11. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    to illustrate the point, What if somebody had video of Snidely Whiplash buggering your children,
    that would be very bad and you would have to be convinced that it was a sick joke & the video was
    fake, to not want to take action against Snidely Whiplash.

    In the case of the video evidence of the alleged FLT175, it is very clear that either
    the video is fake, or there had been some very extraordinary things going on,
    suggesting even the violation of the laws of physics.

    If the alleged FLT175 videos actually do show a real airliner penetrating a wall,
    then how can it be explained that the aircraft penetrates without slowing down?
     
  12. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who says it wasn't slowing down inside the building?
     
  13. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This proves that the debunkers want to have their cake & eat it.
    Really its not possible for only the bit inside the building to have slowed down
    without showing some indication on the outside like breaking up of the aircraft.
    the analysis of the progression of the alleged aircraft penetration into the wall
    given the swept wing design of the airliner, would indicate very clearly that its
    impossible for the wings to have completely penetrated without breaking off
    at very least the last (aprox) 15 ft of wing at the tip, People can shout
    "oh but the plane was going SOOO fast" but that doesn't work, the physics
    of this bit are NOT supporting the idea that the wings could have penetrated
    even out to the tips of the wings penetrating as was alleged by the official story.

    It takes force, energy ( whatever you gotta call it... ) to penetrate a wall, the only
    energy available is the KE of the moving aircraft and it would have to give up a
    significant amount of that KE in order to penetrate the wall. People expect that the
    WTC wall was made of cardboard .... or?
     
  14. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why don't you provide some numbers and calculations to PROVE how much the plane should have slowed down and if the amount of slow down would have been detectable during the amount of time the plane was impacting the perimeter columns.

    How about some math for once?

    Here's an experiment for you. Take a look at this video. Tell me if you see the tail of this jet slow down upon initiation of impact until it's gone. There's even slow motion shots for you to utilize.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUwfj8-bcsc

    You keep saying things SHOULD have happened, put never provide anything to back it up. Now's your chance.
     
  15. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nope.

    You're COMPLETELY wrong. I have provided FEA analysis for both impacts and it shows the jets would have penetrate like we saw. The fact that none of the truthers and/or all of their supporting engineers in the past 12+ tears cannot come up with their own FEA or calculations to show that it was NOT possible just goes to show you that they have NOTHING.
     
  16. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Knife through butter..And it STILL isn't an 'alleged aircraft'

    As for the wings,they hold the structure of a multi ton airplae while it's flying,it would have no trouble going through the facade that consisted mostly of WINDOWS

    Weak answer
     
  17. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Doesn't look like it perceptively slowed down at all,what say,nospam?
     
  18. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    PROVE IT n0spam!

    Give us an analysis and calculations that show it was NOT possible for the plane to penetrate the perimeter facade? 12+ years and the engineers that support the conspiracy theories have provided NOTHING. That's because they have NOTHING. It's because they know that if they do perform calcs, they'll arrive at the same conclusion as the FEA I posted in another thread.

    It's that simple. It not about the truthers finding the truth. It;s about keeping the "I hate the government" train going at all costs. Nobody from the truther movement wants to be known as the guy who derailed that train by posting TRUTH.
     
  19. LogicallyYours

    LogicallyYours New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    His claim is based on nothing more than personal incredulity or an argument from ignorance.
     
  20. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The alleged FEAs are no more than cartoons,
    The fact that people really don't get the basic physics
    and instead say things like " oh but the airplane was going SOOO fast"
    right..........
     
  21. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The FEAs are data, not cartoons. The animations were made from the provided data.

    You continue to broadcast your ignorance of even the most basic of science.
     
  22. n0spam

    n0spam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2014
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mostly of windows that we all know are made of 1/8 plate glass and will break easily.
    + made of "windows" & what, what else was there besides windows, please elaborate.
     
  23. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Still waiting for your math ...
     
  24. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Given that UAL175 entered one wall of the WTC, and basically none exited the opposite wall of the WTC, one would have to conclude that the aircraft did indeed slow down.. a lot..
     
  25. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Still waiting for your proof that the plane wouldn't have went right through the outer wall..ALL of it.
     

Share This Page