Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 08:47am PT
|
don't forget to count the light switches and memorize their locations.
"to turn on the light in a darkened room, one must first find the switch on the wall." -- sigmund freud
---
hey, locker--love that pic! lookit that relatively weak framework in the building, how it has obviously been devastated by fire, and yet it crumples slowly, coming apart in small jerks, nothing like freefall speed.
also, notice how the raging fire has burned through to the outside shell of the building before this even begins to happen. you can actually see through to the building skeleton before it starts to come apart.
----
klimmer, you don't understand washington. for one thing, arab terrorists have a lot better spy network than we do. they knew all those war games were going to be going on, and they also knew that the military would be having so much fun with them that they wouldn't even bother to leave, say, two F-16s back at andrews afb to guard the pentagon, the capitol and the white house. heck, they could've run airliners into a hundred buildings in d.c. that day if they'd'a had enough utility knives.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 08:48am PT
|
Naw, not personal. The way the post was written, it looked like that was your phrase. Later, I saw your link and realized that you were quoting the article. (see bold above)
What, do you read from the bottom up? It's the 2nd line in her post.
It would make sense if you do, read from the bottom up, considering what it is you believe (convoluted, contrived consipracy), and what you dismiss (rational, plausible, verifiable science)... No Occam's Razor there. Hell, much of what you guys believe is nebulous, and can't even be pinned down, as you guys continually move the goal post, and just add on more "what if's".
Honestly... I think the bulk of you just scan through suff, rejecting and dismissing what doesn;t fit what you already believe.
Jolly has done this repeatedly with some of my posts, as I had to constantly quote myself to show him what I had already said since he missed it the first, and often second, time.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 08:57am PT
|
= A small crater in the ground with not a single airplane part, yet portrayed as an airliner crash site http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
Look at the pics, then do as you suggest here:Go ahead and try this out. Look at the [few] pictures of the Flight 93 crash site, and try to imagine that nobody has yet told you the pictures are of an airliner crash site. Look at the pics and think "What am I looking at?" Then, pretend that somebody tells you a big commercial airliner crashed there.
Although, you can;t mislead them by simply saying:Then, pretend that somebody tells you a big commercial airliner crashed there.
You must tell them all of it... That the airliner crashed at an incredibly steep angle (greater than 40 degrees), at over 500 MPH, and that the plane was seen by a local witness, coming directly to the ground, just before she heard it crash.
You must have missed the obvious when you were:I do look at all the CT debunking articles...
So, now what? Care to admit that you are wrong?
Don't be one of these:...the Believers cannot for a second alter their stance, too much is at risk--belief in the system cannot falter.
As to:= An incredibly small hole in the Pentagon with virtually no plane wreckage, yet we are told an airliner crashed there
If the hole was "incredibly small", what happened to all the stuff that wouldnt fit through the whole? The answer to that is why there is so little recognizable debris, although I can post pics of debris there as well if you like.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 09:15am PT
|
Btw, K...
Go ahead and try this out. Look at the [few] pictures of the Flight 93 crash site, and try to imagine that nobody has yet told you the pictures are of an airliner crash site. Look at the pics and think "What am I looking at?" Then, pretend that somebody tells you a big commercial airliner crashed there.
What is your first reaction?
Do you know the reaction of the news folks who saw that site that day?
Now amplify this by having debris falling from the air, loudly impacting muti-ton beams, sirens, smoke, fires, choking dust so bad you cant see 5 feet in front of you in places, screaming and fleeing people, and knowing that terrorists have just attacked us.
Not too unlikely that someone in charge may fail conservative and say something like: "Everybodyu evacuate, there are secondary explosives/explosions"
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 09:18am PT
|
it's not the clicking on links that brings knowledge, but reviewing the content that the links bring.
See above posts...
Irony is the opposit of wrinkly, just like denial is a river in Egypt, huh?
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Somewhere halfway over the rainbow
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 09:39am PT
|
And YOU think the official 911 ommision report was...
" (rational, plausible, verifiable science)..."
YOU must also think Faux Noise is fair and balanced.
Pffffffftttttt.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 09:45am PT
|
"speed made him want to rrrap all day ..."
from "baba fats, or the perfect high" by shel silverstein.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 10:07am PT
|
You may wish to read this, although I'm certain that you will NOT understand it:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10626367
You may want to read it too, Jolly.
And that would be why it is so hard to explain these simple concepts to you all. Thank you for explaining what we are dealing with.
Not to get you to recognize your limitations.
You know, I asked several mechanical and structural engineers out here at the nuke yesterday to look at this post, specifically the math video that you cite, and our discourse regarding it and the physics of the collapse... They want to know where you got your degree, as they agree that he (and you) have no understanding of how to calculate the dynamic loads acting upong the structure, and that it is plain garbage. They ALL asked where you got your degree, and 1 asked what company you work for. If you want to know what was done wrong, read my post, as they pretty much agree on what I wrote, but corrected some of my nomenclature.
But hey, what do they know?
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 10:13am PT
|
And YOU think the official 911 ommision report was...
" (rational, plausible, verifiable science)..."
I never said that... You said that's what I believe.
The limited arguments I have made, mainly regarding a relatively few physical things are rational, plausible, verifiable science... As is the probability of a HUGE conspiracy, involving thousands of people, taking multiple government agencies and civilian conspirators, takeing all the time to pull it off, can after 10 years not have been leaked, or even pulled off given it's Rube Goldberg complexity.
I've even said that I believe there is a lot that we don't know, and that it is likely that a lot is being covered up, BUT I believe it is limited to "who knew what and when", to cover their asses when they (intelligence and investigative agencies) failed at doing their jobs.
But hey... That's only like the 3rd or 4th time I've said that, so it's not like I think your gonna get it this time. You continue to believe what you believe, even when shown you are incorrect, as I've done repeatedly quoting your own words and showing you where you are directly wrong, once with your own source. And you assume too much, like what I think, as even when I tell you what I think, you insist I think something else.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 10:27am PT
|
Do you think this piece was doing 500 MPG when it hit the ground?
Everything your wrote above it suggests that you do... Perhaps you just haven't thought it all the way through. You have accurate pieces of what happened, but not all of it. Or, perhaps you just cannot think it all the way through. I think if you try, you can.
Looks like you ARE one of these:...the Believers cannot for a second alter their stance, too much is at risk--belief in the system cannot falter.
Even when shown you are wrong. You just won't concider it. Deny it; Ignore it, but NEVER admit it.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 10:32am PT
|
rrrAdam, the video itself explains that he was not using the proper math, to accurately calculate the scenario. I brought that to your attention by quoting it, as you apparently missed it way back when you asked people to tell you what was wrong with his math... Saying that "math is definate". Yes, his is "definately" crap.
So, even when shown that he is using bunk math, you still accept it, worse, PROFESS it as proof, and will not budge.
GIGO! 42 seconds.
If in fact you did speak to someone, you surely won't come out and say were you were wrong, or were I was wrong. But, I would like to hear, since you are so confident. Wow... Now it's reading comprehension fail.
I wrote:
You know, I asked several mechanical and structural engineers out here at the nuke yesterday to look at this post, specifically the math video that you cite, and our discourse regarding it and the physics of the collapse...
See bold... What does that mean? "Speak"? No.
I also said they corrected me in my nomencluature, so they saw both of our arguments... But hey, I said that too, and you missed that.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 10:42am PT
|
adam, i don't think you're a bad guy in spite of owning a boat i could never afford. but you're just too much here--you post too much, babble too much, and that quotation about speed was for you. maybe i can put it in context:
speed made him want to rap all day
reds laid him too far back
cocaine rose was sweet to his nose
but the price nearly broke his back
he tried PCP, he tried THC,
they didn't quite do the trick
poppers nearly blew his heart
mushrooms made him sick.
acid made him see the light
but he didn't remember it long
hash was a little too weak
smack was a lot too strong
quaaludes made him stumble
booze just made him cry
then he heard of a cat named baba fats
who knew of the perfect high.
(and that's just a fragment of the best poem ever written.)
:-)
but, seriously, bud, we gotta get you calmed down a little and civilized. if you were bringing up things i didn't know about, it'd be a different story. i try to follow this thread and interject when i know something that would pertain. you're making an effing mess of it, but you won't discourage the ol' bulldog of truth. he's an ugly-looking sucker who knows how to do only one thing well: clamp down and hang on to the end. he knows that if he barks too much he'll lose his grip, and i'm thinking that's your big trouble here.
now i hate to go ad hominem on you, but you haven't told about your sailing trip and i'm frankly a tad more interested in that, especially if one of the crew had to take off her bikini top and go up in the bosun's seat to fix a halyard.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 10:48am PT
|
it'd probably be easier to follow you if you didn't quote so much and if ST's software didn't develop a disease about a week ago that makes quotations larger and more important-looking than the regular text. i stopped using their quotation field for that reason--gotten to be so effing irritating. i suggest you work a little harder and synopsize the references--you can really do it in a sentence or two and it'll make it all a lot easier to follow.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 11:56am PT
|
i can't figure out what adam is trying to tell us with that picture. we've never seen a chunk of airliner like that from any of the four airplanes. one of the excuses being given at the pentagon--originally at least, because it's so stupid it won't stand the test of much time--was that the extreme heat "vaporized" the metal. but it didn't seem to vaporize enough body parts to preclude the alleged dna testing.
i do want to see sailing pictures. but maybe they were too busy to take any.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 12:33pm PT
|
i dont get this. RJ believes all kinds of spew on the internet but wont believe the general populace of ST when they call him an a$$.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 12:46pm PT
|
not definitive proof at all, DB, but an indication of something pretty powerful holding it all together, against all normalcy. Yea... "God". This is the same thing said by many Fundies who deny direct evidence ("not definitive proof").
Same goes for this:jennie, that's all well and good, but a lot of us don't trust that information.
Fundies don't "trust the information either"... Makes it easier to deny and dismiss.
It leads them to flawed thinking, and making absurd statements such as:bottom line? [Flight 93] shot down out of the air by our own air force, for whatever reason.
Just try to think about what you just said for a second... What would the debris field look like if a large airliner was shot down while flying miles up in the sky at 500 MPH?
Think about it... I know you won't answer, but at least think about it then ask yourself: "Why did I so confidently believe and say something so stupid?"
The answer is in the Cornell Paper I linked a few replies back.
PS... My boat was only $7K, as I got it for less than the asking price.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 01:20pm PT
|
See this is what I mean... I can easily show that the physics behind much of what you guys believe is impossible, as this is what I generally limit my arguments to. This is also the same reason that I directly quote what I am refuting.
Regarding this piece:
I asked you if you believed that piece hit the ground at 500MPH.
To which you replied:... what, you think they were slowing down and about to land all those chunks?
Lets see:
The official Locabie crash description says that 46.5 seconds from the explosion, the entire craft was on the ground. It also says radar says the plane broke up into at least 4 major pieces, and was moving vertically within a few seconds after the explosion (I.E., forward speed virtually nil...)
But lets just deal with vertical speed.
31,000 feet/5280= 5.87 miles in 46.5 seconds (or point .775 minutes)
I think that makes it about 450 (plus) mph average speed, straight DOWN. I could be wrong ... am I? It would have to be actually considerably greater than that, it started from ZERO MPH straight down ... an estimate might be more like 900 mph vertical, given that 1/2 the time would have been from 0 to 450 (half slower, and half faster ...) (presume gravitational constant acceleration from ZERO verts until impact)
So, YES, those pieces must have been traveling just about as fast as the Penn crash. Yet they didn't just disappear into the ground. Isn't Scotland famous for their soft peat soil? Is Pennsylvania famous for soft soil? I would expect similar crashes in many way at any case.
Now, let's review...
Flight 93 still had engines doing "work" to overcome "terminal velocity", which for a skydiver is ~122 MPH. Now that big piece has much more surface area than a skydiver to interact with the air which would imediately start to slow it down, as it had 45.6 seconds to do.
You may wish to review this before continuing so as not to shoot yourself in the foot AGAIN:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)
Now, that big piece had no engines doing "work" to overcome this resistance from the air, so how again was it traveling at ANYTHING above terminal velocity?
Curious... Are you the guy in Jolly's 'math' video? As you too have left out some pretty important stuff... GIGO! Hell, you even think it would be 900 MPH if it started at 0 MPH, so you may want to look at a wiki link for balistics [gravity+resistance) as well.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 01:37pm PT
|
Tony... Sorry I come across as an ass often, but I just don't suffer fools well.
As Thomas Jefferson wrote:
"Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them."
And, I get frustrated and on my period when I start repeating myself.
Before you take exception to my quote, you may wish to look up the precise definitions to: "distinct".
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 01:39pm PT
|
I know what flight it was from dumb-ass, reread my reply, as you just stuck your foot in your mouth again.
I'd ask Jolly to validate what it is that I'm saying BUT:
1) He may not be able to
2) He may not wish to point out a flaw in an 'ally'.
3) Both 1 and 2.
You didn;t click the link did you? That's just 1 reason why you have no idea what you are talking about...
Here's a hint: What is it that slows a skydiver once he opens his parachute?
How does that work?
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010 - 01:45pm PT
|
So what exactly was wrong with the Video. Can't wait to hear. I've already posted this in a reply #'s 2 and 4, and even expounded on it... Since you just aren't getting it.
You just aren't 'listening'. On one hand, you agree that his math is bunk, since you can't deny what I pointed out that he himself said... And, this after you said his math was good, and that "math was definate". But then, on the other hand, you ask what's wrong with it, and you can't wait to hear it.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!