It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Nope, it doesn’t make him an expert on holography. But it does make him an eight-hundred pound of a gorilla authority on no-plane theories.
However you don’t give him respect there either. When you should. Holograms or not, John Lear reinforces empirically with his aviation insights what no-planers theorize — that there were no passenger jet crashes on 9-11.
I’m wildly guessing here, but for John Lear — being a very technical person — maybe holograms are his way of explaining all the eyewitness accounts.
When it is possible that this quest of his for a scientific solution to the 9-11 live observations underestimates the innate propensity of human nature to see things as they ain’t — or flat out lie.
Originally posted by Chorlton It was simply a group of Terrorists, and despite what people have said Occams Razor is valid in this case.
Originally posted by GreenFloyd
Dear 23432,
Thanks for the link to the Bearden vids. Yes, it's very complicated; "Time Reversed Waves," "Pumped Full Wave Mixing," a new "general solution?" Amazing stuff and frankly way over my head. And that was 20 years ago... What can they do today?
At any rate, did you catch the last sentence? Here it is:
Mr. Bearden:
Using pumped full wave mixing, as much energy as one desires can be placed into the distant hologram.
This raises the interesting speculation that not only could the hologram present a visual image, it could also pack a powerful destructive force.
Originally posted by 23432
Originally posted by GreenFloyd
I once built a s/vtol uav ; using nasa grade aluminium , i.e specially hardened.
It burns easy but it would never cut off a steel beam on impact .
I wonder what happens if one punches a boeing on it's nose ?
Do you think there would be dents , knuckle prints left behind ?
Nasa grade aluminum. Thats funny. What grade and temper of Aluminum did you use? I work with the stuff every day, you would be amazed how strong an aluminum structure with .030" walls can be. Add some radiuses to the roots of the walls and it gets even stronger. You'd break your hand if you punched it.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Hello, new guy here...
It's been very entertaining reading all of this for the last hour+
Looks like my understanding of Physics and Science is still sound (whew!). Mr. Lear's assertions just cannot hold up since there is never any evidence offered, sounds like pure conjecture.
BTW I am type-rated in the B757, B767, B737 and DC-9/MD-80. I have 23,000+ hours, 18,000f in transport-category jets, both left-seat and right-seat. So I'll go out on a limb and declare that I have some experience with airplanes.
Airplanes were deliberately flown into the buildings by Muslim extremists as part of their continuing 'struggle', whatever and howver twisted that sounds to reasonable people. Were the Towers pre-rigged with bombs? I seriously doubt it, but that's not part of my contribution to this discussion.
Every airliner has a distinct 'in-house' number, in addition the the FAA registered 'N' number. Now, four jets are missing. Either AA and UA were paid off and/or the Gov't stole them, or they were indeed used in horrific terrorist attacks. The CVRs and FDRs were completely destroyed EXCEPT in the case of UA93. All four impacts produced G-forces that were unprecedented in other airline crashes. Three were accompanied by tremendous fires. UA93 impacted into open ground, in a very nearly 'lawn-dart' attitude. Therefore, the CVR and FDR were sufficiently readable to know about the passenger's valiant attempts to take out the bad guys. MAYBE it would have been intercepted by fighters before reaching its target - but with only a 'skin paint' or what's known as a Primary Target on RADAR it would be very difficult to direct the Air Force in time.
Someone else here cited Occam's Razor. I think that still applies.
Thanks.
The CVRs and FDRs were completely destroyed EXCEPT in the case of UA93.
All four impacts produced G-forces that were unprecedented in other airline crashes.
Three were accompanied by tremendous fires.
UA93 impacted into open ground, in a very nearly 'lawn-dart' attitude.
Therefore, the CVR and FDR were sufficiently readable to know about the passenger's valiant attempts to take out the bad guys.
MAYBE it would have been intercepted by fighters before reaching its target - but with only a 'skin paint' or what's known as a Primary Target on RADAR it would be very difficult to direct the Air Force in time.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
The fire - a Trans-Con trip westbound is about 6 hours, off to on. Typical fuel quantity would be 105,000 to 120,000lbs, depending on destination WX requirements. 6.7lbs/gal - about 15,000 gallons on the low side. Nothing else in the buildings was combustible? The plastics and furnishings in a typical jetliner cabin are still a huge concern during in-cabin fires.
Originally posted by sr71b
Nasa grade aluminum.
yep , that's what the seller told me , I had no idea about it .
I was told that the Nasa had designed a specially hard aluminium which they have used in shuttles.
I was told that a batch of surplus was in store , so I bought some .
Thats funny. What grade and temper of Aluminum did you use?
All I can remember is that it was 0.4 mm in thickness . It required some kind of hot press to shape some parts .
I work with the stuff every day, you would be amazed how strong an aluminum structure with .030" walls can be. Add some radiuses to the roots of the walls and it gets even stronger. You'd break your hand if you punched it.
I do not profess to be an expert on aluminium .
I also understand the argument about structured strength .
.
Why didn't the wing tips leave no marks or dents on the columns ?
If the wingtips have just folded onto themselves ; why is that not visible on the video ?
In any case , does aluminium travelling at 500 m/ph have enough mass to cut thru a steel column ?
Evidently , yes is the answer .
but . . .
aren't the wingtips also travel at the same speed ?
Originally posted by 23432
Nasa grade aluminum.
Yep , that's what the seller told me , I had no idea about it .
I was told that the Nasa had designed a specially hard aluminium which they have used in shuttles.
Beralcast (Be-Al) MMC let NASA drop part weight 22% (3/8 lb) which saves $7,500 to $9,400 in payload costs per satellite.The Be-Al part is three times stiffer than its aluminum predecesso. Secondary operations included black anodizing and alodine coating for flight hardware, and machining.
The Beralcast 363 MMC casting in a sun-sensor bracket for satellites withstands static-load testing in excess of 20 g and random vibration tests of over 17 g rms. The casting also exceeded NASA Grade C X-ray requirements for castings with a Grade B X-ray rating.
Originally posted by sr71b
I work with the stuff every day, you would be amazed how strong an aluminum structure with .030" walls can be.
Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
In the first video of interest the cameraman was on W. Broadway, which was right in line with where the the plane debris was ejected from the opposite side of WTC2. At around time 7:00 the impact occurs. You can hear pandemonium and loud noises as if large things are crashing down around him. Then, as he turns back, you can see plane debris that had apparently landed and killed a pedestrian.
911blogger.com...
www.lib.utexas.edu...
As we've all been covering inother recent threads, other large bits of plane debris were found including a 'still smoking' engine that landed on a street corner not too far from our above cameraman.
While I haven't done an advanced analysis on the raw source video presented above, it does seem to debunk the "MIB Flashy Thing" Theory for how they placed the plane debris on the streets, once and for all.
www.abovetopsecret.com...