WTC1/WTC2 perimeter columns vs. plane impact, math discussion...

Discussion in '9/11' started by Gamolon, Apr 30, 2014.

  1. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you believe there were not steel box columns supporting the
    outer wall? is that it? Please show a reference to a document
    stating that the floors were cantilevered off of the central core.
     
  2. LogicallyYours

    LogicallyYours New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lets see......

    [​IMG]

    What else would have caused this specific damage? column sliced and bent inward, sharp angle of damage?

    It's simple, a jetliner...just like we on the ground saw...just like the ones in the video and photos. No need for any nutter hypothesis.
     
  3. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You can even see the dihedral of the wings...
     
  4. LogicallyYours

    LogicallyYours New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly, how do "explosives" cause that? how do "explosives" get the columns to bend inward?...
     
  5. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    what you are speculating about is the gash in the side of the building and
    with the assumption that explosives can not produce the result observed
    you say that then it must have been an airliner causing the gash,
    however, why is it that the only video record of the event shows an
    impossible penetration of the WTC wall?
    and in fact, where are the aircraft bits that would indicate that an airliner
    had crashed there, where is the inventory of bits?
     
  6. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The penetration was very possible.
     
  7. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And why would they do and 'inventory' on scrap metal?,they knew what plane it was
     
  8. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    only because you said so?

    The physics disagrees in that an aircraft striking a wall would undergo
    at least 15g deceleration and no airliner yet built can withstand that
    magnitude of forces, the aircraft would have broken up before it had a
    chance to disappear inside the building.
     
  9. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, the math says so.

    You make a claim again without math to back it up.
     
  10. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gee,You think bob understands the airliner DIDN'T withstand those forces
     
  11. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The speed reduction possible to be indistinguishable on 30 fps video
    is 125 mph, at 125 mph reduction in speed over the length of the airliner
    that is 28 g of force on the airframe, therefore, given the angle that the
    aircraft was alleged to have penetrated, the vector forces would have
    broken up the aircraft before it had a chance to enter the building.
     
  12. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But the mass keeps moving forward. Newton. Law one.
     
  13. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    keeps moving forward until something stops it, and there in lies the problem,
    The wall gives resistance to forward motion and also given the angle of the
    alleged strike, why should the aircraft keep its shape, rather than breaking up?
     
  14. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're fighting a losing battle here Bob (you must have realized that by now). There is but one goal, which is to promote the 'official' boloney (regardless of the facts) and dilute, ridicule, or otherwise attempt to discredit anyone who doesn't play along (That ignore feature comes in handy).
     
  15. LogicallyYours

    LogicallyYours New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, the "one goal" is to hold the twoofer's feet to the fire to back your absurd claims. Something you are unable to do.
     
  16. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The ridicule there must have been by accident. I stand corrected.
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because of the force in which it hit.
    No one is saying the aircraft didn't break up.

    Stndown wants you to give up. Wonder why that is?
     
  18. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    89,263
    Likes Received:
    21,335
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It did break up in a rather spectacular fashion or did you miss that.
     
  19. LogicallyYours

    LogicallyYours New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What was the elapsed time from the moment the left wing hit the building to the moment the right wing hit the building?
     
  20. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is a definitions problem here, the fact is that people insist on
    defining things on their terms, I had an email dialog with another user
    here and was given this
    Thank you ever so much......
     
  21. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    May I point out the Margot2
    made an assertion that there were no perimeter columns,
    and failed to back it up. There were perimeter columns and
    the columns would have offered up significant resistance to
    penetration.

    - - - Updated - - -

    the ones that have been clearly documented in all of the material describing
    WTC tower construction.
     
  22. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yep, no way the plane survived that crash.
     
  23. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Forgive me for borrowing a bit of text from another poster:
     
  24. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's about the size of it Bob, no doubt.
     
  25. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, of course. Only the government is telling the whole truth here.
     

Share This Page