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 psikeyhackr
I am not going to provide a background to explain grade school physics.
What is stopping you from explaining anything wrong with my Python program using the Conservation of Momentum? I would be happy to see a PhD physicist try to explain something wrong with it that might cause as much as a 5% error.
Originally posted by samkent
Since you admit to not having all the construction data how could your Python program be anything but speculation?
No certifications + missing data + incorrect model = wrong conclusion
Imagine you being on trial and the prosecutor presents missing data and incorrect model and no certifications against you. What would you want the jury to do??
But constant mass still takes 12 seconds and Dr. Sunder of the NIST says the north tower came down in 11 seconds.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I am not going to provide a background to explain grade school physics.
If you have zero practical training in physics then how do we know this "grade school physics" is real world physics and not cartoon physics? In real world physics, objects dropped at the same time fall at the same rate regardless of size. In cartoon physics, Wile E. Coyote always falls faster than an anvil.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
But constant mass still takes 12 seconds and Dr. Sunder of the NIST says the north tower came down in 11 seconds.
Can you show me where in the official record the exact collapse time is recorded? You can't because no one knows exactly. The collapse was obscured by an enormous dust cloud. Collapse times were infered from, among other things, seismic records. Too bad for you. Your python is a waste of time.
Originally posted by windsorblue
reply to post by hooper
Honestly mate, dont continue this chat because he will just go around in circles and say the same thing. I have even asked him on this thread that if he has proof then why doesnt he go to the press, i've even offered to have engineers look at his work. You have to admire the way he sticks to his guns, but if challenged he will not give you a direct answer.
Go on, I dare you to ask him why he hasnt took this to the press or had his formula published in a physics journal.
Originally posted by windsorblue
reply to post by Apocalypse1
'Maybe something like that did happen. Remember WTC 7 did fall without being impacted by a plane. Could be that maybe a plane was suppose to hit WTC 7 but flight 93 was grounded in Pennsylvania and the FAA grounded the rest of 'em around 10:00am that morning.
But thanks to 9/11 we now know that if a skyscraper is damaged and then catches fire, it will collapse. On the other hand if a skyscraper catches fire, which causes damage, the building will stay standing. FYI'
But theres the flaw, if the plan needed a plane to hit WTC 7 and it didnt take off, there back up plan was to just set the bombs off and hope no one would notice that it just fell down?
If it was a plan wouldnt it better to have carried it out at night? no witnesses, no videos, you could have launched your dummy planes (i'm not saying you believe in that theory) crashed them anywhere in the towers, blew them up and you wouldnt have any one going 'hang on a second,thats not right' when the towers and WTC 7 fell.
Originally posted by windsorblue
reply to post by psikeyhackr
Are you not saying that your python program using the conservation of momentum is proof that something is amiss with the official explanation of what happend that day?
Are you not the one saying that every single person who knows anything about physics is wrong or does not understand what happend with the WTC collapse on that day?
Originally posted by windsorblue
reply to post by psikeyhackr
We have been around the block with this subject on this thread, you have said you're piece, I have said mine. I wish you good luck on your travels and I hope you have great chats on this matter with other members. so live long and prosper...happy St. Patricks.....and may the force be with you.
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by msdesertrat
And if the beam existed in 2001 Why didn't they use it to pulverize BinLadens compound last year?
No secret chopper to loose.
No risk of loosing any Delta troops.
No pissed off Paki's because we invaded.
Originally posted by windsorblue
reply to post by Apocalypse1
If it was a plan wouldnt it better to have carried it out at night? no witnesses, no videos, you could have launched your dummy planes (i'm not saying you belive in that theory) crashed them anywhere in the towers, blew them up and you wouldnt have any one going 'hang on a second,thats not right' when the towers and WTC 7 fell.
Originally posted by Canned2na
I think I'm a lot like yourself. I was nine when the attacks occured, very shortly after my birthday. I remember being in school and all the teachers were freaking out. Next thing I remember was that idiot Bush getting on declaring war on terrorism and whatnot.
At the time I didn't think much of it, until I was about 14 or so. That's when I first started hearing about that Loose Change doco. I never took a side, because of that heated debate between the Loose Change folks, the MSM and those Popular Mechanics "experts". Hell I never really cared about the world as a whole until I was 16, then politics early last year.
Now, my position on this is:
The towers were hit by planes, remotely controlled of course, as well as being rigged with thermite. WTC 7 was a total controlled demo. The Pentagon was either hit by a missile or drone, but I'm really on the fence about it until they release the footage that is being withheld. As for the "plane" in Pennsylvania, it probably didn't even exist, and the "crater" was probably dug up or blasted to make it look like so.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Governments can't keep secrets?
Look up The Manhattan Project.
Regarding 9/11 -
Don't worry about finding the truth or discovering all the "facts", it won't happen.
We'll likely never know them due to the amount of destruction of evidence.
That should tell you something important.
That's rather an unrealistic attitude. By Richard Gage's own admission, he has the formula of the explosives that were supposed to have been used, he has the blueprints of the towers, he has miles of video footage of the collapse taken from every conceivable angle, he has 1,500 supposed experts in the fields of physics, demilitions, engineering, and others, AND he has enough disposable cash to be making movie after movie that pushes his controlled demolitions claims. It would take him and his bunch about a month to hold his OWN investigation and reverse engineer exactly how controlled demeolitions were used to bring down the towers in the way we all saw- their exact placement, the area in the buildings that needed to be compromised, how much explosives were needed, how their detonations were coordinated with each other, all of that. He wouldn't even need to explain how the demolitions got into the building. Once he mapped out where the demolitions were placed in the building he would irrefutably prove conspiracy...BUT, he isn't doing this. How do you explain this?
The explanation *I* see is that Gage knows what he's peddling is just conspiracy snake oil and trying to calculate out how controlled demolitions brought down the towers is akin to trying to prove two plus two equals five, so he simply spins his "witnesses heard explosions" innuendo while collecting his speaking fees. You're right when you say we won't see any new information. It isn't in the best interest of the truthers.