|
sleazy -> RE: Hold the true terrorists responsible (2/1/2007 11:53:05 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Hey i made an error in there too and no one caught it either! Welcome to the magicians world :) While you are looking left things are going to the right. That doesnt mean i would disqualify you or anyone else however for not catching it as its easy to get side tracked when so many issues are up in the air at the same time..
Without wanting this to come across as a personal attack.....
I inserted a deliberate error of grade school physics into a post, I even highlighted it to draw attention to it, to not notice implies either a lack of observation in general, or a determination to only pick on points you think you have an answer for. Honestly now, how long have you been analysing your pictures and data? Only just now (over 5 years after the event has a very simple and obvious fact been pointed out to you, something that has appeared on websites that are both pro and anti the official version. Namely that 5-3=2. I would have expected that a dilligent observor or analyst would have noticed the discrepancy almost immediately.
quote:
Granted i agree that to expect a wile-e-cyote imprint every time something goes through a wall is not a practical or logical assumption, however at the same time to think that the only thing that went through a given hole is a plane because the pattern looks like a plane is equally non conclusive.
Research liquid dynamics.
By ring three there was no aircraft as such, just an awful lot of debris flying in formation. Heck there would have been no aircraft after the first few columns.
quote:
Its only conclusive if all the evidence of the scene follows through with expectations along those lines. When the evidence deviates from the expectations then there are other avenues that must be explored to properly conclude the events that the evidence supports. Or the reality of the event. The evidence *IS* the reality of the event!
And again, I have yet to see any credible evidence to point to an alternative event. Just a lot of conjecture, mis-information, lack of observation and sometimes bad maths/physics
quote:
There are several possibilities that can make a round hole through a wall, from a shaped charge to an engine block, to any number of objects of appropriate mass accelerated to the appropriate speed to punch through a wall, even an air column as rule said is within the realm of possibilities if it can be accelerated to an appropriate speed.
So bearing in mind that pictures of said hole show a goodly scattering of aircraft components and the usual crap found in an office why is it not intelligent to assume that office furniture and airplan pieces made such a hole? Bearing in mind that I am unaware at this time of a published picture that shows a good view beyond the hole.
quote:
Now i didnt do the math on your 45 ft per second car because i know its possible for a car to ram through a brick wall and bottom line i agree with the point that it works that way all things considered.
Well I think we can agree 3000lb is not a particularly large or heavy vehicle, and 45f/s is not far removed from 30mph, no need for maths, just watch a show of cop chases, plenty real-time video records of similar events
quote:
The problem i have is that there is a no damage, or techincally a very "small damage" zone between ring 2 and the outer wall of ring 3.
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/asce-illus-2.gif
i gave an example in my last post on the subject.
<snipped for brevity and bandwidth>
That hole in ring 3 wall is not possible without a previously connected red dot as can be easily seen demonstrated throughout the expected damage zone. Damage has to be connectable to previous damage of greater magnitude as the deceleration occurs. Decelerating objects just do not magically speed up and like the jfk assassination zig zag through objects while doing no damage so it can accelerate again to go through the wall.
You are apparently making the mistake of assuming a solid mass, rather than a group of objects that are actually behaving as a fluid.
Excerise for class, results to be presented in class next week.
Items required, 1 piece of 2x4, 1 slingshot, 1 sheet of paper or glass, one handful of steel BB shot.
Stand piece of wood upright in front of paper/glass with approximately 1ft seperation. Stand 3ft from wood and use slingshot to propel handful of BB shot towards paper.
Those with time and access to the right equipment can repeat this with many 2x4 uprights in a suitable pattern and a suitably scaled model made of a susbstance such as ice that will fragment appropriately
quote:
i will step way out on a limb here and say that "Anyone" can see this is a physical impossibility based on the damage evidenced by the government themselves, which begs the question, how was that hole created.
how did the glass break or paper get peppered in the above experiment
quote:
We know it was created at the time of the fire since we can see the charred outer wall hoever what created it is a mystery and for the sake of an argument a plane alone could not have done this as a result of a simple crash using the governments own data.
JP4+office contents+heat=????
Clue, answer begins with F and ends in IRE
quote:
Why was this not investigated? Simple, its a conspiracy and they want to insure no evidence is found leaving in its wake disinfo engineers arguing with real ones for ever and ever and with the evidence destroyed no one or nothing to be held accountable for it.
I rarely investigate my nose except to note that it has not fallen off in the night.
DISINFO? Bonus class for students, explain exactly why the hotel and gas station tapes have never been released as many theorists claim.
|
|
|
|
