I'm Amazed !

Discussion in '9/11' started by Don Townsend, Aug 31, 2014.

  1. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Purdue cartoon is indeed a cartoon because it has NO data to provide a foundation for it.
    I stand by what I said in that 60 milliseconds is plenty of time for the aircraft to react to the forces involved and break apart. There are PHD types who are in agreement that there could not possibly have been hijacked airliners used in the attack, however, even if I'm a lone voice here, I stick with what I have stated.
     
  2. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,705
    Likes Received:
    419
    Trophy Points:
    83
    P
    care to name some of those PHD types?
     
  3. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This of course leads to the ever so infamous game of "my experts are better than YOUR experts" sorry I'm not playing today and you can ASSUME anything you want, but the facts speak for themselves .... with or without papers published at MIT or anyplace else!
     
  4. Blues63

    Blues63 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,096
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Incorrect. Are you really going to push that Purdue just made it all up? Seriously?

    Perhaps, and they did break up, but inertia carried the debris forward into the edifices.

    Who Bob? Rob Balsamo? Could you please provide links to these sources by these 'PHD types' you claim exist? I would be very keen to peruse them, but I suspect I may have seen them before.

    Well, it can't be said you don't have the courage of your convictions.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Come on Bob, the provision of sources is just a part of the debate process. I feel it is quite rude when they are not provided, but that is the opinion of someone who is used to seeing supporting evidence for contentions, and probably invalid in this arena.
     
  5. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You say "PERHAPS" and then assert that inertia carried bits of a totally wrecked aircraft forward so as to create the wing shaped gashes seen in WTC1, & 2 ..... do you realize just how completely mad that is?

    The courage of my convictions is founded on having stated awake during not only SCIENCE 101, but subsequent physics lectures and much experience in the field of applied physics.

    I am totally serious when I state that the current crop of papers from places such as Purdue, MIT (etc.... ) are destroying the peer review process and promoting exactly the sort of warpage as in "BIG BROTHER SEZ 2 + 2 = 5" and people say "all hail BIG BROTHER"! what a crock!
     
  6. Blues63

    Blues63 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,096
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, I didn't explain myself that well. In the Purdue reconstruction, the planes break up upon impact/penetration, and the momentum carries the plane right through the floor with debris emerging from the opposite side. I hope that clears it up.

    Fair enough, and many of those who don't agree with you have far greater qualifications. Do you see the problem?

    I'm quite convinced you believe that Bob.
     
  7. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just for an experiment, what if you set up a plate glass window pane such that its horizontal and you drop a brick on it and of course it breaks, now take an equivalent weight of sand and have the sand in a loose bag, and drop the bag on an equivalent pane of glass and what happens, is it as likely to break? My illustration is to show that the airliner, if broken up, and simply a loose collection of bits, could not possibly do the same damage as would be expected to have been done by the complete aircraft. Not only that, but as a loose collection of bits, the pieces could NOT be expected to produce the sort of gash that was done in both towers.
     
  8. Blues63

    Blues63 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,096
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, the sand in a loose bag would still be able to break the glass if dropped.

    Watch the Purdue simulation to see my point. You assume it would break up immediately and bounce off, and inertia wasn't invited? That smacks of comic book physics.
     
  9. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have seen the Purdue "simulation" and I have this to add, if the aircraft broke up upon impact, and this is to be expected, then what we see is a collection of bits headed for the wall on inertia, however because the bits are disconnected, they must rely on their own KE (KE = 0.5 • M • V^2)
    Therefore, with only small mass to work with, the individual bits will have small KE and can not be expected to penetrate the wall.
     
  10. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No Bobthe pieces would share a spatial proximity to one another,as to make it act as one solid mass,just like the bag o9f sand,
     
  11. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Where is the support for that argument, stuff is either connected to something else or it is NOT, and in the case of its not, there is NO benefit from proximity to having the bits function as a single mass when in fact they are independent.
     
  12. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh,you figure they still wouldn't be connected by miles of cable,wire and tubing that make up the jets assembly?

    Are you even thinking before you post,Bob?
     
  13. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you believe that two masses connected by a piece of flexible wire or cable will act as one solid mass when striking a stationary object? what?
     
  14. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    37,731
    Likes Received:
    10,566
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If people always based their opinions on evidence, there would never have been these silly "inside job" claims regarding 9/11, because evidence for such claims is entirely lacking.
     
  15. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Evidence...... where is the evidence of any of the 4 airliners?
    Snap-shots of piles of wreckage, but NO documentation.....

    And that video of the alleged "FLT175" disappearing into the WTC wall like B movie ghost.
    oh my!
     
  16. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    37,731
    Likes Received:
    10,566
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And then there are people who clearly have such a difficult struggle with reality that evidence has no effect anyway.
     
  17. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do YOU really & truly consider the video of "FLT175" disappearing into the WTC wall like a B movie ghost, to be evidence of an airliner having crashed there? WHAT?
     
  18. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What type of evidence do you need?

    You making the comment that it looks like a B movie doesn't mean squat unless you can back up why you think it's not possible. You have presented zero evidence that shows it was not possible. None of your truther engineers have shown it was not possible. Why is that?
     
  19. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    37,731
    Likes Received:
    10,566
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Who knew you were an expert in what happens to airliners when they slam into buildings?
     
  20. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It disappeared about as much as you would walking in your front door.....And there WAS evidence!

    The dihedral of the wings was even evident!
     
  21. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and it doesn't strike you as crazy the idea that the aircraft should retain its shape as it crashes into a wall so as to make a plane shaped hole in the wall? oh well .....
     
  22. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No,What's crazy,is your thinking that it shouldn't....And it was only a rudimentary plane shaped hole
     
  23. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What do you think was supposed to happen to the shape of the plane when it hit the perimeter columns? What SHOULD we have seen?
     
  24. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    in the case of an airliner striking a wall, the airliner would undergo HUGE stress and because of this huge stress, have damage to the aircraft that is not confined to the nose or the part of the aircraft that is in the process of penetrating the wall but the entire aircraft would react to the stress by breaking apart and colliding with the wall in bits rather than a whole airplane.
     
  25. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Speculation. Show your math, back up your claim.
     

Share This Page