Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Car disentigrates against bridge

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


No. It is about how a plane crashing into a building is the same as a plane crashing into a tree or other solid object.


In other words it is about people who think they know physics demonstrating that they do not.




posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Ok want parts from Pentagon.......

Quite a bit of debris here - looks like parts off airplane.....



What do we have here? A plane part with a serial number......



Wow - whole alley few of aircraft parts.....



Lawn full of aircraft parts



Part with green primer paint.......




posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Yawn.

We all know there was some debris thedman, we don't need reminding.

It doesn't change the PHYSICS of the impact.

Debris is not proof a Boeing hit the pentagon. Solve the problem with the physics, that has been pointed out, and you might be making a worthwhile contribution to the thread.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


wow ive never seen a car crumble like that before. Thats crazy!



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by thedman
Is this one of those delusional "plane cant penetrate steel" nonsense.....?


Where is the evidence a plane can penetrate steel? If it was steel foil then yes, but massive 4" thick box columns?

But no, the OP was talking about the pentagon, if you missed that.

Let's not exaggerate. Those "massive 4" thick box columns" were hollow, the walls averaging .37 inches in thickness.
edit on 28-3-2012 by lunarasparagus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Oddly enough there's more pieces of the car left than there was of an airliner several hundred times the size of the car.
What's your point exactly?

It's about speed. Kinetic energy increases with the square of the speed i.e., an object doubling its speed has four times as much kinetic energy. So a car traveling at 500 mph would impact with 25x the kinetic energy of a car traveling at 100 mph.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by thedman
 


Yawn.

We all know there was some debris thedman, we don't need reminding.

It doesn't change the PHYSICS of the impact.

Debris is not proof a Boeing hit the pentagon. Solve the problem with the physics, that has been pointed out, and you might be making a worthwhile contribution to the thread.



the nose of the aircraft which penetrated the initial wall would have disintegrated, another part of the aircraft would have continued through causing further havok etc. etc.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Perhaps it is relevant to post this old clip again :-

www.youtube.com...

Where are the wings, the pilot's seat, the tail ? must be a conspiracy.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by plube
Yes what was even more amazing is the guy driving the car lived....saw a documentary on it


That's amazing.

Now I can watch it with a clean conscience.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by imherejusttoread
 


yeah, ditto, i had to look it up.
he had just been released only 15 minutes before from a night in jail on a "trace" pot possession/para. and alcohol possession charge(he was only 19 years old, but he tested neg for alcohol anyway), and he didnt get any sleep and had worked all the day before. he says he cant remember what happened but he believes he must have just fallen asleep.

lol, that sucks. but is awesome at the same time.
i can imagine being pumped full of adrenalin all night freaking out because your in jail, then getting released after only one night and being so happy to finally go home that you relax and suddenly all that fatigue hits you like a ton of bricks (actually i know EXACTLY how it feels, i had a nice wild youth too, haha.. but i had to work the next morning too, and when i FINALLY made it *safely* to bed i slept for 12 straight hours... even with my mother and grandmother coming in my room to yell at me every few minutes)
edit on 28-3-2012 by BohemianBrim because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by BohemianBrim
 


here is the full story...THE INDESTRUCTIBLES......it is amazing....the analysis is even better of how he lived.



as for thedman......He did hit the bridge...he launched off the barriers.
edit on 043131p://f00Wednesday by plube because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 04:50 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I'm not quite sure what exactly it is you're saying... Are you disagreeing with me or supporting what I'm saying?


The video you just showed certainly seems to back up what I was saying, so I will assume that is what you were doing?

The hole in the pentagon was too small for the plane. The hole in the video you provided fits the plane you described, it wasn't round either. It was rectangle (as you would expect).

My point was that no matter which way it went the engines would not disintegrate and would most definitely leave holes.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Wow, that's a boeing 757 hitting a wall equal to that of the pentagon! Awesome! You just convinced me!... Oh wait, what's that? It's not a 757? Oh and that is not a wall equal to that of the pentagon? What? In that video the plane does not make a hole? Oh... I see.

Also some other guy is showing images of plane parts etc! But you're saying that the plane would "atomize" (or rather the video you provided says that)... So which is it? Atomize or plane parts?

Now I'm even more confused!



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by mee30
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Wow, that's a boeing 757 hitting a wall equal to that of the pentagon! Awesome! You just convinced me!... Oh wait, what's that? It's not a 757? Oh and that is not a wall equal to that of the pentagon? What? In that video the plane does not make a hole? Oh... I see.

Also some other guy is showing images of plane parts etc! But you're saying that the plane would "atomize" (or rather the video you provided says that)... So which is it? Atomize or plane parts?

Now I'm even more confused!


You are just trying to play dumb.

The point of the clip is to demonstrate the extreme destruction that can arise from a high speed collision and helps to show why cries of " where are the wings " or " where is the tail " in relation to AA 77 at the Pentagon are fatuous.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   
This was in Ohio, I saw this crash take place...it was nasty. IIRC the driver was near-death...if not killed in the crash.

As for relating to planes crashing into the WTC...different materials, and vastly different masses, velocities, and elevation plays a huge factor...too different to compare. Sorry.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   
all i can say about that video is WOW thats 1 bad crash
was horrified to see it but very glad that person survived
alltho how one survives such a horrendous crash defys logic

as for planes hitting pentagon...im not informed enough on such things so cannot contribute a valid comment for that

as i said tho Insane video thanks for sharing o.p



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
The car hardly "disintigrates".

The couple of pieces on the right of the pillar is merely some smaller components from the car, scattered all over the place.

There is still some rather large pieces of the car left.

vvv



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by mee30
 



My point was that no matter which way it went the engines would not disintegrate and would most definitely leave holes.


The hole in Pentagon Exterior wall (E Ring) was about 96 ft wide - corresponds to the area between the jet
engines. This space also contains wing ribs and spars, the fuselage keel beam (strongest part on an aircraft
which support the cabin/cargo bay floors), jet engines and lets not forget the fuel tanks. The fuel at that speed
acts like a solid mass

You are right about the engines - at Empire State Building one of the B25 motors smashed completely through
building to emerge on other side - landing on roof of adjacent building



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 



Debris is not proof a Boeing hit the pentagon. Solve the problem with the physics, that has been pointed out, and you might be making a worthwhile contribution to the thread.


Which is why aircraft componets have part and serial numbers .......



This is from a Boeing 757 - the emergency light power module



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


Hi all! I am new here and wanted to post this video because I think this wreck caught on a police dash cam is much worse. I hope this works!

rmirror.net...






top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join