You forgot: When presented with cockamamie theories put out by proven liars looking to sell the latest book or DVD, you (9/11 Deniers) buy it hook, line, and sinker.
The lunacy of this theory beats itself down. It is noted that you'll go out of your way to defend it though. Taking one for the team Fraud?
well these people are believers! who's the idiot now? LOL corrected version : Here is another one that trusts fox news and cnn and abc well all of them LOL they call people who do not believe planes can fly through concrete fantasy? just like freefall is not demolition equivalent speed is not speed global is only a portion and it gets more (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up as they go, but its becoming a great comedy LMAO from the hezerkoni video who is sworn to silence by the gubafia or they will kill him. that is AFTER the alleged plane went through LMAO .
"International Journal of Impact Engineering" Volume 28, Issue 6, July 2003, Pages 601-625 How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center T. Wierzbicki, and X. Teng Department of Ocean Engineering, Impact & Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 5-218 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA Received 20 April 2002. Available online 11 December 2002. Abstract The problem of the airplane wing cutting through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center is treated analytically. The exterior columns are thin-walled box beam made of high strength steel. The complex structure of the airplane is lumped into another box, but it has been found that the equivalent thickness of the box is an order of magnitude larger than the column thickness. The problem can be then modeled as an impact of a rigid mass traveling with the velocity of 240 m/s into a hollow box-like vertical member. The deformation and failure process is very local and is broken into three phases: shearing of the impacting flange; tearing of side webs; and tensile fracture of the rear flange. Using the exact dynamic solution in the membrane deformation mode, the critical impact velocity to fracture the impacted flange was calculated to be 155 m/s for both flat and round impacting mass. Therefore, the wing would easily cut through the outer column. It was also found that the energy absorbed by plastic deformation and fracture of the ill-fated column is only 6.7% of the initial kinetic energy of the wing." Source
YOU WOULD QUOTE RETARDS WHO CANNOT EVEN TRANSMIT ELECTRICTY? MIT is one big corporate failure, and laughing stock of academics. They were busted faking data on cold fusion screwing ponds flishchmann out of their rightful patent. Everyone else in the world got it to work but MIT, shocking. The retards cannot even do what whas done over 100 years ago and that is what you use for your source? Well I want to see every dam bit of their data pal. There are kids on youtube and professor meyl of course in germany not retard america, that have successfully transmitted power in the far field. Why fly with the can do eagles when we can run with the corporate retards. no legitimate Source would put out that kind of trash. those beams were about t16" wide spaced 22" and and 1/2" thick steel. .
Ask them for it. T. Wierzbicki, and X. Teng Department of Ocean Engineering, Impact & Crashworthiness Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 5-218 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
waste of time just like that other (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) from MIT eager or whatever his name was, another fraud that wrote another fraud paper regarding 911. I tore his ass to ribbons. The interesting things about flunky debunkers from retard county is that in the real world, little birdies rip planes to shreads. NOT IN DEBUNKER LAND! Not in deflunky land! Why those same planes fly right on through 16" wide 1/2 thick steel I beams spaced 22" apart like butter. Man I wish I could find drugs that good!
and understanding how the flunk ***** think, "oh but its not a BIG plane" LMAO thats what little bitty birdies do! LMAO
there ought be a law against birds! They should be licensed! EVIL SUPER BIRDS DESTROY PLANES NOT PANSY WEAK ASS STEEL!
More science from GA Tech: From the 20th International Symposium on Ballistics, Orlando, Florida, 22-27 September 2002 COMPUTER SIMULATION OF IMPACT AND COLLAPSE OF NEW YORK WORLD TRADE CENTER NORTH TOWER ON SEPTEMBER 11 X. Quan, and N. K. Birnbaum Century Dynamics Incorporated 1001 Galaxy Way, Suite 325 Concord, CA 94520
The destructive power of dynamic energy is demonstrated in small, hollow boned, feathered creatures causing massive damage to a larger, metallic structure by colliding at a high velocity. The destructive power of dynamic energy is also demonstrated in relatively hollow, largely aluminum passenger aircraft causing massive damage to a larger, metal and glass structure by colliding at a high velocity.
may as well be trying to teach 5 year olds about nuclear physics. models with guessed and or massaged numbers the flunkies think mean something. and worse they even believe it. and of course the numbers used are all secret. you cannot get a wingtip to go fast enough to go through and or cut this. only a retard flunkie debunker would dream up that kind of crap, or someone feeding at the trough. Now they pretend that a bird flying into alum is remotely the same as alum into steel because they have no freaking idea what the hell the operating physical differences between the properties between to the 2 that again shows they are flunkies may as well be trying to teach 5 year olds about nuclear physics.
more flunkie fraud go to conclusions, they admit they lack material details and its nothing more than a big fantasy to give some ******* time on a cad system.
To Koko science is pictures of ducks and TV screen shots. Koko doesn't bother with models, numbers or calculations at all. Everything he needs to know about the subject he read on an internet blog. I think the folks at MIT should feel privileged to be called idiots by the likes of him. Hmm. The borderline illiterate properties of that sentence aside, can you explain how F=ma is different for birds then aluminum or steel? If the F of a bird is equal to the F of a piece of aluminum, can you please explain how they would affect the shear stress of a piece of steel differently? Shear stress is Force / Cross sectional Area (just in case you forgot)
Once you figure out how to explain how a bird and a piece of aluminum cannot apply an equal amount of force, we'll talk about beam shear. That's the total shear force at the point of impact times the static moment of area, divided by the area moment of inertia times the thickness of the material perpendicular to the force.
Oh gee, another unfounded assumption. It's totally outside the realm of possibility that someone could know something that you don't know. Why don't you go ahead and find where I cut and pasted that from. fair warning though, you're going to be searching a long time because I did not cut and paste that post. The only thing you explained was that you have no clue what you are talking about. You can cut through steel with butter if the butter is moving fast enough. You can cut through steel with a feather if the feather is moving fast enough. In fact, we use water to cut steel all the time. It just has to be moving fast enough. F=ma. Force equals mass times acceleration. The property of materials that you're lamely attempting to describe is called shear modulus. What you didn't know is that a object with a higher modulus can still be sheared by an object with a lower modulus. There's just a higher velocity required. A high modulus material cuts a low modulus material with less velocity then a low modulus material cuts a high modulus material. Think of a bullet. If you throw a bullet at someone it will bounce right off them, despite the bullet having a higher shear modulus then skin. If you fire a bullet at them the bullet with shear the skin and become highly deformed in the process. You can shear a bullet with skin, but the skin has to move at a much higher velocity then the bullet has to move in order to shear the skin. Good because you're clearly not qualified to do so.
I've lost track of how many times I've had to post that most basic of formulas for truthers. a is the one that always seems to throw them for a loop.
Okay. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrhe716NJ84&feature=related"]Shear Stress in Composite Beam.MP4 - YouTube[/ame] The above shaped beam has a shear stress of 62013 pascal at the point indicated. A 101 kg stick of butter moving at 620 m/s (1 386.9005 miles per hour) can generate enough force to shear that particular beam at that particular place.
Wow. Look at that math, data, and model you used to refute my post with. You've clearly demonstrated that you know what you're talking about. I especially like the part where you infer that 101k of melted butter has less energy then 101k of solid butter. That's some good solid science right there. Those idiots who claim to use high pressure water cutters must all be liars, or wizards, or something. They couldn't possibly cut steel with a liquid. Not after that proof you just posted.
