What caused the damage to columns 145 through 152?

reply to post by septic


septic,

What part of the missile initiated contact with column 152? Was it the foam core wing tip or the warhead?

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by WASTYT
reply to post by septic

 

septic,

What part of the missile initiated contact with column 152? Was it the foam core wing tip or the warhead?

Dunno.

Oh come on now septic. Don't lie.

Go back and look over your notes.

Originally posted by septic

Oh, so you CAN read.

Now now. Why go off your own topic with the cheap childish banter..

I'm only asking you a very simple question.

What part of your JASSM initiated contact with column 152?

Or can't YOU read?

reply to post by Varemia

It doesn't seem to stop your pure speculation either. At least the videos show planes. There hasn't been a single video out there with a missile.

The videos are real. Life is fake.

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by Varemia

 

It doesn't seem to stop your pure speculation either. At least the videos show planes. There hasn't been a single video out there with a missile.

The videos are real. Life is fake.

It's easy to see now that you have no proof to show, and so you stall and attempt to steer the conversation away from proving your point. You have been given every opportunity, and yet you have not offered anything other than your opinion about the direction of the damage. You can hold this belief until the day you die, because it is only a belief, and will not impact the real debates going on about the real conspiracy behind 9/11. Even explosives are more likely than this. This is about as close to impossible as it gets, due to the sheer volume of evidence to the contrary. One must literally live in a fantasy world where only their opinions are fact, in order to believe that there was no plane, and that a missile carved an irregular gash into a wall in order to give the impression that a plane crashed there, somehow matching the exact dimensions of a 767 that was caught on video and witnessed crashing into that exact location. I'd say anyone with a brain is done here. Cheerio.

reply to post by Varemia


Since all my opponents don't know squat about physics and throw temper tantrums when they're proved wrong, can anyone out there explain how a hollow, lightweight aluminum wingtip like this:



Could bend this:



like this:

reply to post by septic


Already told you. It's not hollow. Elsewise, the structure of the wing would not be stable or flexible enough to fly. It's not light-weight either. The internal structure against the tower wall caused the bends. Why do you think some of the damage is not left-to-right (the damage which you choose to blatantly ignore, of course, or deny altogether though it is right in front of your eyes).

You should be seeking to prove how your theory is possible, and how the steel would have fully resisted every 250,000 units of energy per gram of mass in the wings. If you don't know, then you aren't certain. If you aren't certain, then you can't make the claims you are making about the impossibility of a plane impact. If you can't make those claims, then you are a liar and you are trying to mislead people with your lies.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by Varemia

 

Prove something or get the hell off the thread.

Hah! We've got a joker here! I'm asking him to prove his claim and he says, "no, you prove it!" This must be a comedy.

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by Varemia

 

Prove something or get the hell off the thread.

Hah! We've got a joker here! I'm asking him to prove his claim and he says, "no, you prove it!" This must be a comedy.

It all boils down to I've had enough of your hypocrisy. You pissed me off when you told me to "get the hell off this site", so kiss me.

Anyone. What caused the damage to columns 145-152?

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by ANOK

 

Your physics makes no sense to me. How come a small lead bullet can punch a hole in a big steel sheet ?

Can it?

Regardless of what makes sense, and your baseless claim...

...The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object. The direction of the force on the first object is opposite to the direction of the force on the second object. Forces always come in pairs - equal and opposite action-reaction force pairs.

www.physicsclassroom.com...

A collision is an interaction between two objects that have made contact (usually) with each other. As in any interaction, a collision results in a force being applied to the two colliding objects. Newton's laws of motion govern such collisions. In the second unit of The Physics Classroom, Newton's third law of motion was introduced and discussed. It was said that...

... in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the force on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object. The direction of the force on the first object is opposite to the direction of the force on the second object. Forces always come in pairs - equal and opposite action-reaction force pairs....

www.physicsclassroom.com...

Express your understanding of Newton's third law by answering the following questions. Click the button to check your answers.

1. While driving down the road, a firefly strikes the windshield of a bus and makes a quite obvious mess in front of the face of the driver. This is a clear case of Newton's third law of motion. The firefly hit the bus and the bus hits the firefly. Which of the two forces is greater: the force on the firefly or the force on the bus?

Answer...

Trick Question! Each force is the same size. For every action, there is an equal ... (equal!). The fact that the firefly splatters only means that with its smaller mass, it is less able to withstand the larger acceleration resulting from the interaction. Besides, fireflies have guts and bug guts have a tendency to be splatterable. Windshields don't have guts. There you have it.

www.physicsclassroom.com...

That is not me making a wild claim, it is physics.

If that makes no sense to you then it's not my problem.

Yes, the bullet can :-

www.youtube.com...

You are completely ignoring the kinetic energy of the speeding bullet.

Originally posted by septic
Anyone. What caused the damage to columns 145-152?

The plane.

reply to post by septic


The plane.

reply to post by septic


The airplane wing.

Please explain.

reply to post by PhotonEffect

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by Varemia

 

Since all my opponents don't know squat about physics and throw temper tantrums when they're proved wrong, can anyone out there explain how a hollow, lightweight aluminum wingtip like this:

Could bend this:

like this:

edit on 12-12-2011 by septic because: (no reason given)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by septic


Da Plane boss! Da Plane! Da Plane....

Originally posted by septic
Please explain.

What's to explain?

The wings are not hollow. They are composed of metal, mechanical components, and fuel. That makes them very massive, and a force to be reckoned with when being hit by them at a very high velocity.

In this particular case we're talking about one metal component striking another one at 500 mph. The wing tips did not sever the columns it struck. Remember? They merely damaged them. Why is that so impossible to believe in your mind?

Did you really expect that absolutely ZERO damage would be done by the wing tip after it struck the steel columns at 500mph? It's not going to pulverize into pixie dust ya know. It's going to leave a mark every time.

Remember too- that the steel columns at that height were composed of lighter gauge steel. So it's not that farfetched to think they might bend a little or at least sustain some damage if a plane wing hits them.

Have you seen one of those wings in person? They're impressively huge.

reply to post by PhotonEffect

Have you seen one of those wings in person? They're impressively huge.

And that wingtip in the photo is not from a Boeing 767-200. Looks more like a smaller commuter Regional Jet to me, like the Embraer or Canadair models of jet.

It is more complicated, also, since many modern versions of those jets mentioned have been modified with the "winglets" on the tips, so this can confuse those not familiar with aviaiton