What caused the damage to columns 145 through 152?

page: 34
8
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic


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



I thought it was your JASSM missile septic. What else could have caused it if it wasn't from a plane?

Oh wait- I get it- a rhetorical question. Cool.

Which reminds me... Aren't you going to answer my question (not rhetorical btw) regarding which part of the alleged missile you believe made initial contact with column 152? Surely you have a thought about this.

Come on, lets focus more on your theory of how it happened. Mainly, how multiple missiles punched and carved out perfectly shaped airplane holes into two buildings.

And perhaps we could get into some more of the specifics, such as:

*Where they were launched from (direction: north, south, east, west? air?, sea?, land?)
*How many were used (2, 6, 12? more?)
*What types were used (JASSM, Tomahawk, something else?)
*What angles did they strike the buildings to be able to carve out airplane holes
*The evidence for missiles (i.e. videos, witnesses, missile fragments, etc....)

And perhaps we could use a fresh picture:


What do you say?




posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
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.





www.flickr.com...



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowcrash911


What do you say?


I'm guessing he's going to say it was launched from a submarine in the Hudson River.

edit on 12-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)


Don't give him any ideas.
edit on 12-12-2011 by WASTYT because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by septic
 


That is described, per the "Flickr" account description, as the wingtip of a Boeng 767-300 series.....specifically, one of Delta Airlines.

I have to say to you.....I am Type-Rated on the B-757 and 767 (and also the B-737, and DC-9/MD-80).

I have walked around a lot of airplanes in my time.

That is NOT the wingtip of a Boeing 767.

The many static wicks (those black things) give it away, for one thing.....and, the arrangement of the Navigation lights, for another!! To include the strobe lights.



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


How many jets have you seen fly through steel like it wasn't even there? Two?



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by ProudBird
 


How many jets have you seen fly through steel like it wasn't even there? Two?


The topic was the wingtip. It isn't from a 767 which makes your example incorrect. Why are you changing the subject, septic?
edit on 12/12/2011 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 






The topic was the wingtip. It isn't from a 767 which makes your example incorrect. Why are you changing the subject, septic?


Huh? The guy's a pilot who blathers on about how many jets he's piloted, as if that makes him an authority on flying jets through steel buildings as if they weren't even there. We have all seen two jets slice through buildings like they weren't even there, haven't we; making us all just as experienced.

The subject hasn't changed, nor has your inability to answer how a lightweight, aluminum wingtip can slice columns of steel; an impossibility in the real world. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and so far no one from Bezant to NIST has been able to provide that proof.

Jets can't slice through steel buildings in the real world any more than "terrorists" exist in the real world. If all it takes is a couple hijacked jets to wipe out the entire WTC complex, how valid is the threat of "international terrorism"? Hijackings appear to be the most effective way to wipe out large areas of major cities, yet they seem content with suicide bombings and beheading folks.

Golly if terrorists didn't exist, NATO would need to create them; otherwise there might be Peace on Earth and no need for such a military alliance. Oops...there I go changing the subject again.

What caused the left-to-right damage to columns 145-152? You say a lightweight wing tip did it by striking from a different direction of travel, something none of you will bother trying to explain; something even MIT, Bezant, Purdue, NIST, et all couldn't accomplish.




I take it your calculations are still giving you trouble.



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by septic
 


That is described, per the "Flickr" account description, as the wingtip of a Boeng 767-300 series.....specifically, one of Delta Airlines.

I have to say to you.....I am Type-Rated on the B-757 and 767 (and also the B-737, and DC-9/MD-80).

I have walked around a lot of airplanes in my time.

That is NOT the wingtip of a Boeing 767.

The many static wicks (those black things) give it away, for one thing.....and, the arrangement of the Navigation lights, for another!! To include the strobe lights.



Your fellow in belligerence, varemia provided the link earlier in the thread; have you read it?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Perhaps you can show us all a better image of the the kind of wing tip that is designed to slice steel, so we don't make this same mistake again.



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by septic
 


When the missiles hit the buildings why didn't they get thrown off course?

I know you can't answer why nobody saw them or recorded them, but you might at least try to consider some of the implications of your extraordinary fantasies.



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by septic
 


When the missiles hit the buildings why didn't they get thrown off course?

I know you can't answer why nobody saw them or recorded them, but you might at least try to consider some of the implications of your extraordinary fantasies.


I welcome a serious question from a serious reader.



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by septic
 


When the missiles hit the buildings why didn't they get thrown off course?

I know you can't answer why nobody saw them or recorded them, but you might at least try to consider some of the implications of your extraordinary fantasies.


I welcome a serious question from a serious reader.


Are you saying that because you consider me to be 'unserious' you won't answer? Sounds awfully close to an ad hominem method of reasoning. And also rather like a dodge.

Look, it's as plain as the nose on my face that you know nothing about aeroplanes or whether they can go through buildings, or about the nature of the damage, or even how a missile works. You choose not to investigate these things because they would invalidate a fantasy that for some reason you enjoy.

There are dreadful and pressing problems with the US, its government and its notions of terrorism. But your thinking is just an elaborate method for you not to have to do anything about it.



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by septic
 


When the missiles hit the buildings why didn't they get thrown off course?

I know you can't answer why nobody saw them or recorded them, but you might at least try to consider some of the implications of your extraordinary fantasies.


I welcome a serious question from a serious reader.


Are you saying that because you consider me to be 'unserious' you won't answer?


When petulant children post lines like "your extraordinary fantasies", it's easy to identify who is "unserious".



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by septic
Your fellow in belligerence, varemia provided the link earlier in the thread; have you read it?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Perhaps you can show us all a better image of the the kind of wing tip that is designed to slice steel, so we don't make this same mistake again.


You know, distracting from the math and science is nice and all, but you have to come up with some real points, and not this "designed to cut steel" rhetoric. All you do is avoid the questions and distract from the points by making idiotic rhetoric that only the likes of youtube would accept as evidence. Get some proof, like seriously.

And I was wrong about that photo. Blame Google images for lying to me. Here's a better picture, not as close, but that shows that it is most certainly a 767-200ER




posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Was that your attempt at explaining the damage?



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by septic

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by septic
 


When the missiles hit the buildings why didn't they get thrown off course?

I know you can't answer why nobody saw them or recorded them, but you might at least try to consider some of the implications of your extraordinary fantasies.


I welcome a serious question from a serious reader.


Are you saying that because you consider me to be 'unserious' you won't answer?


When petulant children post lines like "your extraordinary fantasies", it's easy to identify who is "unserious".


You think that lower Manhattan was empty on September 11, that it's odd nobody photographed the insides of the burning building, that a missile can cut columns without deflecting, that despite the presence of missiles nobody saw them, that an unreported charge disabled every TV in New York despite nobody mentioning it ever.

I think it's pretty obvious who is unserious.



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by Varemia
 


Was that your attempt at explaining the damage?


Well, when are you going to explain it? Or would you rather debate it?

You seem to keep dodging a simple question - What part of the JASSM struck column 152 first?

Come on, lets delve deeper into your missile theory to see if it's actually feasible. Why won't you?

edit on 20-12-2011 by WASTYT because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by WASTYT
 





You seem to keep dodging a simple question - What part of the JASSM struck column 152 first?


This question has been answered, so I don't know why you're acting like the cat's pajamas. If the missile strikes at a glancing angle, the wing would likely strike first, would it not?




posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by septic
 


Yes, but the JASSM wing wouldn't be strong enough to cut any columns. It would tend to turn the missile inward. Given the charge and the time delay on a JASSM warhead, how far would it go before explodiing and what damage would it do at its normal impact speed?



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by septic
 


Yes, but the JASSM wing wouldn't be strong enough to cut any columns. It would tend to turn the missile inward. Given the charge and the time delay on a JASSM warhead, how far would it go before explodiing and what damage would it do at its normal impact speed?


This has also been answered repeatedly. If anything the wings would only damage the cladding before being snapped off. Are you saying the missiles would have been wildly deflected in the fraction of a second before the warhead, traveling at 500 MPH, impacted the columns?


The 900-pound warhead, which is 60 inches long and 12 inches in diameter, penetrated a thick reinforced concrete target at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., and left a clean exit hole as it continued another half mile down range, with no adverse effect on the warhead's casing or fuze. Elmer Leuker, the JASSM integrated product team leader at Boeing's Phantom Works,

Source





new topics
 
8
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in

join