It kind of is seeing that the majority of the world does not agree with you.
When your trick involves fooling thousands of eyewitnesses and involves mocking up dozens of videos (including some live videos) whilst mananging to hide any videos that might have shown a WTC without a plane hitting it, etc. you’ve gone well beyond the magician’s code and into bizzaro realm.
This is Great Debates. It kind of* is *your problem. You came here seeking a debate but are upset because you are not allowed to let your unsupported ideas go unchallenged.
I hear ya. We need to hold them all responsible for this cover-up. I’m just a little bit fuzzy on why they colluded to commit this crime. Could you explain that a bit more?
The contents of the plane are moving forward at the same speed as the plane itself. So they are going to tend to travel in the same direction as the rest of the plane. If the plane penetrates, they are also going to tend to penetrate.
You can test this rather easily - fill a water balloon with water, and throw it against the wall. Most of the water splashes against the wall - it doesn’t drop to the ground directly.
You are correct that the force of impact broke up the airplane, but that doesn’t make its contents drop directly downwards. That’s why people without seat belts tend to smash into the dashboard when their car hits something head-on. Their inertia makes them continue to travel forward even though the front of the car is decelerating.
however, is it a guaranteed certainty that a suitcase or for that matter a body
traveling at aprox 540 mph could impact the WTC tower wall and penetrate?
since the object in question are smaller than the airliner, they have much less KE, and as such will not have the penetrating power.
But none of that matters now because you’ve established that there were no planes. Let’s really focus on the heart of the matter - why the cover-up and who besides Bush, Obama and Trump was in on this?
Nitpick: The momentum of a fluid is calculated somewhat differently … the aluminum part of the airplane did some damage but it was the av-gas that brought the towers down …
Well, I didn’t want to get into that, though after I posted I realized that he wouldn’t understand what a newton was and wanted to put it in terms of kilojoules, so, yeah, it wasn’t an optimal choice in equation. I was using acceleration=delta V over delta T, roughly based on going from 540 MPH to 0 in 5 seconds based on the video.
“lying eye witnesses” ONLY the ones who state that they saw the airliner ( or rather the alleged airliner ) penetrate the skyscraper wall, all of the others may be mistaken or whatever, but the individual witnesses are the least of our problem here.
& Yes by all means include indictments against the media.
and pleas do not say “the military” there may be specific individuals in the military who were responsible for covering up, but you can’t bust the whole military for something tat a few individuals are responsible for.
It went into the building that it hit, knocking a hole in the side. Some was distributed as heat, although that was minor compared to the heat of the jet fuel, the rest as kinetic energy.
It wasn’t - it also damaged the floors, support structures, and so on.
Yes. The building hit the plane as hard as the plane hit the building, depending on your frame of reference. The plane was destroyed, and the building had a hole blown in it, and then the floors collapsed down onto each other and then the whole building collapsed.
Surely all the furniture and cubicle walls had some part? We know from Charleston on 18 June 2007 that ordinary furniture can reach in excess of 1300°F and bring down a steel frame the size of the average Tower floor in less than an hour.