| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Killtown wrote: | | marky 54 wrote: |
1) i ain't seeing anything that tackles the plane debris found in the street, so cannot take your information seriously untill ALL evidence is accounted for or at least mentioned. should i pretend they were not there just so i can believe your article?
2) ooops sorry for mentioning it, shhhh i forgot, i suppose im a troll now?
{everyone pretend i did'nt ask a question or question the theory} |
1) Which of the plane debris at the WTC was impossible to plant?
2) You're acting like one. |
well at least you have proved and shown evidence you can count to two, its a start. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
there we go, we have to believe the plane parts were planted, even though their is no evidence provided that they were planted its just all on killtowns say so.
if thats not making it up i don't know what is.
regardless, why do you not provide data on the planes debris in your original article? why are they ignored as though they don't exsist?
is it because it goes against your theory and might not convince the gullible if it was included? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alwun
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 282
Location: london
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject: plane debris believers |
|
|
Each and every aircraft machine component is stamped with a unique number which identifies a number of aspects of its manufacture, including where, when and by whom it was made. This is done in part to thwart counterfiet manufacturers. When this infallible ID belonging to the engine which came to rest under the scaffold is made public, then - but only then - can we be sure of the provenance of the engine, for example. If this number is not made public, nay - trumpeted even - in the same manner as the flight manual and Koran 'found' in the car park or wherever, then we are left to wonder why.
Perhaps one of you super confident conspiracy believers (ie the official conspiracy which would have us believe that 19 Arab hijackers etc) will set my doubts to rest by pointing me to where this number has been made public. If not, then I rest assured that you will explain to me why not.
Let's here it from youse please. In other words - put up etc.
cheers Al... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alwun
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 282
Location: london
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:02 pm Post subject: double post |
|
|
| plane debris believers - double post |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:24 pm Post subject: Re: plane debris believers |
|
|
| alwun wrote: | Each and every aircraft machine component is stamped with a unique number which identifies a number of aspects of its manufacture, including where, when and by whom it was made. This is done in part to thwart counterfiet manufacturers. When this infallible ID belonging to the engine which came to rest under the scaffold is made public, then - but only then - can we be sure of the provenance of the engine, for example. If this number is not made public, nay - trumpeted even - in the same manner as the flight manual and Koran 'found' in the car park or wherever, then we are left to wonder why.
Perhaps one of you super confident conspiracy believers (ie the official conspiracy which would have us believe that 19 Arab hijackers etc) will set my doubts to rest by pointing me to where this number has been made public. If not, then I rest assured that you will explain to me why not.
Let's here it from youse please. In other words - put up etc.
cheers Al... |
lets presume they released the serial numbers and they did not match, what would it prove?
IMO it would prove the flights said to of hit did not.
it would not prove "NO PLANE" hit.
if there is any honesty in the NO planes theory then they would included all information and look at all possibilities instead of only including information that fits their point of view and omitting the rest like the famous commission report, and they certainly would steer clear of speculation to prove their point, for example, simply stating they were planted with no evidence of such a thing happening.
also the possibility that serial numbers are being held back to later prove wrong 9/11 truthers once enough believe no planes or at the right time has to be considered also. it fuels the conspiracy theory and makes it easier to believe or jump to conclusions.
no numbers are avialble as far as im aware, but do you honestly think that it is only due to "NO PLANES" when there are still numerous possibilities, unless of course evidence can be shown to exclude the other possibilities, killtown says they planted them, but where is his evidence for this to exclude them coming from a plane that hit the towers but not the plane we were told the parts came from? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | also the possibility that serial numbers are being held back to later prove wrong 9/11 truthers once enough believe no planes or at the right time has to be considered also. |
Like we held back with the no big Boeing at the Pentagon marky!
If the planes of the official story were used why haven't the parts been identified?
Strongly suggest because they were not there in the first place, much like flight 77 at the Pentagon, 6 years later still no identifiable footage.
How long would you think they would wait in order to expose the correct footage,or/and identified parts 10 or 20 years after to trap us.
That's some cunning plan Baldrick 
You never know some partial truth may come out like "It's all about the oil" some day 
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/glassasylum2
Dave Sherlock's:
http://www.myspace.com/GlassAsylum
http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailsuk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Quote: | | also the possibility that serial numbers are being held back to later prove wrong 9/11 truthers once enough believe no planes or at the right time has to be considered also. |
Like we held back with the no big Boeing at the Pentagon marky!
If the planes of the official story were used why haven't the parts been identified?
Strongly suggest because they were not there in the first place, much like flight 77 at the Pentagon, 6 years later still no identifiable footage.
How long would you think they would wait in order to expose the correct footage,or/and identified parts 10 or 20 years after to trap us.
That's some cunning plan Baldrick
You never know some partial truth may come out like "It's all about the oil" some day |
where did i meantion the pentagon or say that footage is being held back to prove people wrong? the evidence at the pentagon is not consistant with a boing.
the evidence at the WTC'S is. even where debris landed match up with where parts exited the towers.
i was talking about wtc plane debris, and people presuming because the serial numbers have not been made public that somehow proves it's no planes.
the fact is it dos'nt, untill there is evidence proving otherwise not speculation.
none release of serial numbers could easily mean a differant plane hit just as much as no planes.
and if you think goverments do not with hold information to fuel conspiracy theorys into asking the wrong questions which they can later silence everyone by presenting their information withheld on purpose in order to make people see things that are not true, then most people could be in for a shock.
it is wise to suspect something along those lines even though i do not know which information they are hiding on purpose or which they are hiding to stop exposure, but you can gaurentee both are possible and being done at the same time, and only presenting evidence for claims can rule out which information is being withheld due to exposure.
as yet ive seen no proof that debris were planted, hence its still a possibility as far as im concerned in that area that information is being withheld on purpose.
i did not say they "WAS" holding it back and it is certain and that i have proof, only it could be a possibility which cannot be ruled out along with other possibilities untill such evidence is presented to exclude it.
which proof of planting parts would do, because it would answer the reason for withholding serial numbers and prove the parts did not come from anything that hit the towers, do you have any?
ive so far only got killtowns say so or should i say speculation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
my left bollock
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello Marky
May I ask what you do for a living? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Killtown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 438
Location: That Yankee country the U.S.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | well at least you have proved and shown evidence you can count to two, its a start. |
Troll.
_________________
killtown.blogspot.com - 911movement.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Killtown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 438
Location: That Yankee country the U.S.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | regardless, why do you not provide data on the planes debris in your original article? why are they ignored as though they don't exsist? |
If you don't like my article, feel free to write a better one.
_________________
killtown.blogspot.com - 911movement.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Killtown wrote: | | marky 54 wrote: | | regardless, why do you not provide data on the planes debris in your original article? why are they ignored as though they don't exsist? |
If you don't like my article, feel free to write a better one. |
it has nothing to do with disliking your article, it has more to do with avoiding information that goes against your theory rather than tackling it and being truthful.
anyone can make things up and only include information to paint a certain picture by leaving out other information.
just see the commission report as an example.
now most of us are here as a result of the commission report leaving out information etc. so why should i stand for it regardless of where it comes from, as a member of the public, i have a right to voice my opinon and concern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| my left bollock wrote: | Hello Marky
May I ask what you do for a living? |
no. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Killtown wrote: | | marky 54 wrote: | | well at least you have proved and shown evidence you can count to two, its a start. |
Troll. |
sorry i was simply pointing out the only things you provided evidence for in your comments i was replying to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Killtown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 438
Location: That Yankee country the U.S.
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | it has nothing to do with disliking your article, it has more to do with avoiding information that goes against your theory rather than tackling it and being truthful. |
My article was about why they didn't use planes to hit the WTC, not how the plane debris was planted.
_________________
killtown.blogspot.com - 911movement.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Killtown wrote: | | My article was about why they didn't use planes to hit the WTC, not how the plane debris was planted. |
Still presenting your speculations as if they were fact then, Killtown?
What a "researcher".
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Killtown wrote: | | marky 54 wrote: | | it has nothing to do with disliking your article, it has more to do with avoiding information that goes against your theory rather than tackling it and being truthful. |
My article was about why they didn't use planes to hit the WTC, not how the plane debris was planted. |
exactly you are another commisson report.
your are convincing people there were no planes whilst ignoring all evidence of a plane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lets be strictly accurate Marky: your last post should have read
"exactly you are another commisson report.
your are NOT convincing people there were no planes whilst ignoring all evidence of a plane."
and then, with the NOT convincing people part, the 9/11 commission analogy is complete
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Killtown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 438
Location: That Yankee country the U.S.
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | your are convincing people there were no planes whilst ignoring all evidence of a plane. |
You mean ignoring all evidence of planted plane pieces.
_________________
killtown.blogspot.com - 911movement.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Killtown wrote: | | marky 54 wrote: | | your are convincing people there were no planes whilst ignoring all evidence of a plane. |
You mean ignoring all evidence of planted plane pieces. |
Ok, that's a very definite statement.
Good for you.
I'm assuming that you are still able to distinguish between fiction and reality, so: your evidence for your definite statement is.............?
(And saying, 'everybody at 911bowelmovement knows it for a fact' doesn't count, just to make that clear)
Go Killtown, your reputation (chortle) is riding on it.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gruts
Major Poster
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | Lets be strictly accurate Marky: your last post should have read
"exactly you are another commisson report.
your are NOT convincing people there were no planes whilst ignoring all evidence of a plane."
and then, with the NOT convincing people part, the 9/11 commission analogy is complete |
not quite....
it is really easy to say "ooh look - i think i've seen an anomaly in a video so this proves that no planes were used" - while ignoring (or deliberately misrepresenting) all the evidence for planes at the wtc. it doesn't prove anything of course, but killtown & his socks don't just ignore the evidence - they also generally avoid explaining how the many implausibilities of the NPT scenario were actually carried out.
just one example....
if you believe that there were no planes, then how were the external columns of the wtc towers rigged with explosives (or whatever) to account for the impact damage? specifically - how were the explosives necessary to create the impact holes planted in a way that was invisible to the people working on the affected floors? and how would such explosives need to be positioned in order to create the holes while bending steel girders inwards and simultaneously sending large amounts of debris at high speed in the same direction as the fake plane? and where did all the jetfuel that is seen crashing through the windows of the adjacent and opposite sides of the south tower before exploding into a fireball come from? and how it did acquire the necessary momentum in the required direction? etc etc....
has anybody in the NPT club provided a convincing explanation of the above? just wondering.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ain't ever gonna happen gruts because it's not a theory in the accepted scientific sense: it's a faith cult with all the trappings you'd expect. There's little mental effort in believing abstract b*llocks.
NPT'ers go through the motions of examination, but really questioning the basic tenets makes you a troll and you're out of the loop. You either buy it or you don't - there's no intellectual argument other than the most specious kind. Ideally a moment of 'revelation' will be involved.
Like examining chicken entrails (which must have been quite the 'science' at one time, it's a faith based on interpretations of media pushed beyond their design envelope. This is repeatedly pointed out, but they really don't care, because that's beside the point, doubtless the same as modern day chicken entrail readers would.
It's no accident there's no intellectual heavyweights or professor types (other than the highly questionable, dubiously motivated and in any case non-scientific Fetzer and Reynolds) lending it their backing.
It's a redneck faith that finds all the reason it needs to in a junk version of science - just like its neocon grassroots redneck mirror image.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gruts
Major Poster
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the simplest way to prove that no planes hit the towers would be to demonstrate mathematically that it actually would be impossible for real 767s to cause the observed impact damage to the wtc.
and such a calculation wouldn't be too difficult - because all the variables that need to be included in the calculation are known. we know all the required details about the wtc's construction, ditto for the 767 and we can make accurate estimates of the plane's speed and how much fuel was in the wing-tanks.
there must be thousands of people on this planet who are capable of doing such a calculation and I'm sure that they're not all being mind controlled by the perps.
so after several years of looking at images and saying "I think it's fake!" while endlessely repeating the mantra that real planes could not have penetrated the towers, the fact that nobody in the NPT club has even tried to prove this claim in any credible way speaks volumes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
my left bollock
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you look at slow motion replays of all available footage, in every instance there is no resistance from the building, there is zero wreckage falling down the side or bouncing off the building and no fireball on impact.
Excuses about poor video quality are pathetic.
Ace Baker has started a petition for the tv companies to release the original broadcast quality footage, no doubt this will not be released because they have something to hide. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| my left bollock wrote: | | If you look at slow motion replays of all available footage, in every instance there is no resistance from the building, there is zero wreckage falling down the side or bouncing off the building and no fireball on impact. |
Untrue, but when did that ever prevent cult believers believing what their leaders have told them to believe?.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/Boeing767DecelerationTowers .pdf
| my left bollock wrote: | | Excuses about poor video quality are pathetic. |
..but true. However they do require some understanding of the process which is maybe over your head.
| my left bollock wrote: | | Ace Baker has started a petition for the tv companies to release the original broadcast quality footage, no doubt this will not be released because they have something to hide. |
Arse Baker is a technically inept charlatan who only impresses those who know less than he does.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/h/NPTrebuttal.pdf
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gruts wrote: | the simplest way to prove that no planes hit the towers would be to demonstrate mathematically that it actually would be impossible for real 767s to cause the observed impact damage to the wtc.
and such a calculation wouldn't be too difficult - because all the variables that need to be included in the calculation are known. we know all the required details about the wtc's construction, ditto for the 767 and we can make accurate estimates of the plane's speed and how much fuel was in the wing-tanks.
there must be thousands of people on this planet who are capable of doing such a calculation and I'm sure that they're not all being mind controlled by the perps.
so after several years of looking at images and saying "I think it's fake!" while endlessely repeating the mantra that real planes could not have penetrated the towers, the fact that nobody in the NPT club has even tried to prove this claim in any credible way speaks volumes. |
snowygrouch attempted exactly this type of analysis. His conclusion. Yes the plane would penetrate. Needless to say his results were not uncontested
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=36769&highlight=towe r#36769 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Classic post:
| Snowygrouch wrote: | Well I`m sorry people but your work and theories are utterly worthless.
You have been conned by a couple of very very badly put together websites (I note that you NEVER produce your own credible analysis but use reams of weblinks).
The theory is pitiful to anyone with a grounding in Materials science or mechanical engineering. Unluckily for you lot I have both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Strength of structural steel used in perimeter columns = 551MPa or 551N/mm2
Number of columns sheared (WTC1) = 33
Cross sectional area of columns at impact height of planes = 16130mm2
Total cross sectional area of steel sheared by impact= 1,064,580mm2
Velocity of plane at impact=500mph or 222m/s
Mass of plane at impact = 145,000kg (100,000kg dry weight + 10,000 gallons fuel)
Energy of plane@ impact velocity = 4 Giga-Joules (4x10^9 joules)
If the plane is to bounce off the building it must decelerate to zero meters/second over a distance near zero. We shall use a very generous figure of 2 meters (the smaller the figure the greater the force expended), this allows the building to instantaiously move 2 meters at impact which is highly unrealistic. If an object were to bounce off the distance figure would be much closer to zero, giving many; many times the instantaionus force I use here.
1 Joule = Amount of energy needed to apply a force of 1 newton over a distance of 1m
4 GJ/2meters = 2 Giga Newton’s must be expended in doing so.
Stress = force/ area
= 2GN/ 1,064,580mm2
= 1868N/mm2
Thus in order to “bounce off” the side of the world trade centre the steel would have to be over 3.5 times stronger than the steel actually used.
The above analysis is naturally simplified a great deal as I don’t have sufficiently accurate computer models (or the time) to run a finite element analysis routine.
Hence I used extremely generous figures in favour of a “bounce off” scenario and still fell short of the required stress figures by a very considerable margin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
What follows are simulations of wing impact and engineering schematics of the fuel tank layouts in a 767-200.
Of course an EMPTY plane will not penetrate with anything like the effect it did. Trouble is it WASNT empty and had 10,000 gallons of fuel in, or about 40 tons of fuel if you prefer my mass.
This is a fact ignored by the patheticaly absurd attempts at a serious analysis on the NPT websites which normally consist of "aluminium is soft and steel is really hard so it COULDNT go through". B********S.
I`m bloody SICK of spending months doing serious research only to have my (and the efforts of others who are ACTUALLY SERIOUS about DOING someting) undermined by unresearched UNsubstanciated UNCALCULATED "net nonsense". |
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gruts
Major Poster
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
thanks for the link....
I see snowygrouch's analysis was contested with the usual sticks, stones, straw men and trolling - but not with science, that's for sure. it would be great to see the same kind of analysis from killtown & co - but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
interesting comment:
| Snowygrouch wrote: | For those interested in "common sense visualisation" the impact of the 767 weighing about 145 tons at 500mph gives EXACTLY the same energy impact as the followng.
SIXTY FOUR Challenger 2 Main Battle tanks (62.5 Tons each) driving into the side of the WTC tower at ONE HUNDRED miles per hour all at the same time. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
my left bollock
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | Classic post:
| Snowygrouch wrote: | Well I`m sorry people but your work and theories are utterly worthless.
You have been conned by a couple of very very badly put together websites (I note that you NEVER produce your own credible analysis but use reams of weblinks).
The theory is pitiful to anyone with a grounding in Materials science or mechanical engineering. Unluckily for you lot I have both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Strength of structural steel used in perimeter columns = 551MPa or 551N/mm2
Number of columns sheared (WTC1) = 33
Cross sectional area of columns at impact height of planes = 16130mm2
Total cross sectional area of steel sheared by impact= 1,064,580mm2
Velocity of plane at impact=500mph or 222m/s
Mass of plane at impact = 145,000kg (100,000kg dry weight + 10,000 gallons fuel)
Energy of plane@ impact velocity = 4 Giga-Joules (4x10^9 joules)
If the plane is to bounce off the building it must decelerate to zero meters/second over a distance near zero. We shall use a very generous figure of 2 meters (the smaller the figure the greater the force expended), this allows the building to instantaiously move 2 meters at impact which is highly unrealistic. If an object were to bounce off the distance figure would be much closer to zero, giving many; many times the instantaionus force I use here.
1 Joule = Amount of energy needed to apply a force of 1 newton over a distance of 1m
4 GJ/2meters = 2 Giga Newton’s must be expended in doing so.
Stress = force/ area
= 2GN/ 1,064,580mm2
= 1868N/mm2
Thus in order to “bounce off” the side of the world trade centre the steel would have to be over 3.5 times stronger than the steel actually used.
The above analysis is naturally simplified a great deal as I don’t have sufficiently accurate computer models (or the time) to run a finite element analysis routine.
Hence I used extremely generous figures in favour of a “bounce off” scenario and still fell short of the required stress figures by a very considerable margin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
What follows are simulations of wing impact and engineering schematics of the fuel tank layouts in a 767-200.
Of course an EMPTY plane will not penetrate with anything like the effect it did. Trouble is it WASNT empty and had 10,000 gallons of fuel in, or about 40 tons of fuel if you prefer my mass.
This is a fact ignored by the patheticaly absurd attempts at a serious analysis on the NPT websites which normally consist of "aluminium is soft and steel is really hard so it COULDNT go through". B********S.
I`m bloody SICK of spending months doing serious research only to have my (and the efforts of others who are ACTUALLY SERIOUS about DOING someting) undermined by unresearched UNsubstanciated UNCALCULATED "net nonsense". |
|
I could not say whether the calculations above have any truth, I do not dispute that a plane could penetrate in part, but to penetrate as though it was docking like a space shuttle in the Starship Enterprise is clearly an impossibility |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| left bollock wrote: | | I could not say whether the calculations above have any truth |
Well bye then until you've gone and found out
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Killtown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 438
Location: That Yankee country the U.S.
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| my left bollock wrote: | If you look at slow motion replays of all available footage, in every instance there is no resistance from the building, there is zero wreckage falling down the side or bouncing off the building and no fireball on impact.
Excuses about poor video quality are pathetic. |
Yes, it's something the planehuggers hate to address.
Exactly, when I was on Mike Chambers show debating about no-planes and he kept whining about that I can make good judgments on the videos because they are all in "poor quality", I said better quality video are just going to make people see the wings and tail section do the impossible more clearly!
_________________
killtown.blogspot.com - 911movement.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
