According to some you are obviously lying, same as the auto engineers who have crumple zones designed into cars etc etc.
I left this comment yesterday morning. genericBob still hasn't replied. I'll assume he's diligently researching the documentation of his claim to share with the forum.
So just exactly how do you use "E=MC^2" when KE=.0.5MV^2 very well works in defining the energy of a moving object be that object an airliner or a section of a skyscraper. also, do you assert that there was no damage to the wing when running into a 200 lb pole? it breaks off, therefore it has no inertia?
Because with a falling piece of skyscraper or pole you have to account for the gravity energy being released as well. Or in this instance the inertia of the pole itselfl. You are simply calculating the kinetic energy of the plane without any reference to the pole.
that can easily be accounted for, but what still puzzles me is WHY would you cite a formula that includes "C" that is a constant for the speed of light, are you thinking that you should reference the speeds encountered on 9/11 with that of light? or is this simply yet another time wasting tangent?
to illustrate the point, What if somebody had video of Snidely Whiplash buggering your children, that would be very bad and you would have to be convinced that it was a sick joke & the video was fake, to not want to take action against Snidely Whiplash. In the case of the video evidence of the alleged FLT175, it is very clear that either the video is fake, or there had been some very extraordinary things going on, suggesting even the violation of the laws of physics. If the alleged FLT175 videos actually do show a real airliner penetrating a wall, then how can it be explained that the aircraft penetrates without slowing down?
This proves that the debunkers want to have their cake & eat it. Really its not possible for only the bit inside the building to have slowed down without showing some indication on the outside like breaking up of the aircraft. the analysis of the progression of the alleged aircraft penetration into the wall given the swept wing design of the airliner, would indicate very clearly that its impossible for the wings to have completely penetrated without breaking off at very least the last (aprox) 15 ft of wing at the tip, People can shout "oh but the plane was going SOOO fast" but that doesn't work, the physics of this bit are NOT supporting the idea that the wings could have penetrated even out to the tips of the wings penetrating as was alleged by the official story. It takes force, energy ( whatever you gotta call it... ) to penetrate a wall, the only energy available is the KE of the moving aircraft and it would have to give up a significant amount of that KE in order to penetrate the wall. People expect that the WTC wall was made of cardboard .... or?
Why don't you provide some numbers and calculations to PROVE how much the plane should have slowed down and if the amount of slow down would have been detectable during the amount of time the plane was impacting the perimeter columns. How about some math for once? Here's an experiment for you. Take a look at this video. Tell me if you see the tail of this jet slow down upon initiation of impact until it's gone. There's even slow motion shots for you to utilize. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUwfj8-bcsc You keep saying things SHOULD have happened, put never provide anything to back it up. Now's your chance.
Nope. You're COMPLETELY wrong. I have provided FEA analysis for both impacts and it shows the jets would have penetrate like we saw. The fact that none of the truthers and/or all of their supporting engineers in the past 12+ tears cannot come up with their own FEA or calculations to show that it was NOT possible just goes to show you that they have NOTHING.
Knife through butter..And it STILL isn't an 'alleged aircraft' As for the wings,they hold the structure of a multi ton airplae while it's flying,it would have no trouble going through the facade that consisted mostly of WINDOWS Weak answer
PROVE IT n0spam! Give us an analysis and calculations that show it was NOT possible for the plane to penetrate the perimeter facade? 12+ years and the engineers that support the conspiracy theories have provided NOTHING. That's because they have NOTHING. It's because they know that if they do perform calcs, they'll arrive at the same conclusion as the FEA I posted in another thread. It's that simple. It not about the truthers finding the truth. It;s about keeping the "I hate the government" train going at all costs. Nobody from the truther movement wants to be known as the guy who derailed that train by posting TRUTH.
The alleged FEAs are no more than cartoons, The fact that people really don't get the basic physics and instead say things like " oh but the airplane was going SOOO fast" right..........
The FEAs are data, not cartoons. The animations were made from the provided data. You continue to broadcast your ignorance of even the most basic of science.
Mostly of windows that we all know are made of 1/8 plate glass and will break easily. + made of "windows" & what, what else was there besides windows, please elaborate.
Given that UAL175 entered one wall of the WTC, and basically none exited the opposite wall of the WTC, one would have to conclude that the aircraft did indeed slow down.. a lot..
Still waiting for your proof that the plane wouldn't have went right through the outer wall..ALL of it.
