Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)
- Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
or sign in to load a different list.
Loading...Saving...
Loading...Saving...
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LOL!!! #1) The green line super-imposed over the site photo, includes the profile angle of the building! This video, is an outright hoax! This is why the truth movement, is in such pitiful decline!
The line extends past the claimed distance!
#2) He asks "Where did the enrgy needed come from to eject the several hundred tons of steel over to the rooftop of the Winter Garden?" It's called compression! It occurs when the larger of any object(s) get's squeezed out of an area that is too small!
GGcaptmandrake 2 years ago
Idiot, you can´t process even simple basic observations, you are too stupid to understand anything...
alienspacecentereast 2 years ago
You are just as screwed as the medias want you to be...
alienspacecentereast 2 years ago
I just have eyes that can see! LOL!!!
GGcaptmandrake 2 years ago
Magic Arabs. lol
ColonelAllan 3 years ago
The Magic Arabs also got an airliner to fly at 500 mph at an altitude at which it should not have been able to do that speed.
Air density at 700 feet is 4 times what it is at 30,000 feet. So the plane would require 4 times as much thrust to overcome the increased drag thru the thicker air. Why would normal airliners be built that over powered?
psikeyhackr 4 years ago
Do you have any source beyond your own opinion that indicates that the planes didn't possess enough thrust to go 500 mph at roughly 1000 feet? That seems quite a statement of applied aerodynamics...and I just don't see you being able to back that up.
palescottsman 4 years ago
Beyond the Pale Scotsman has escaped from FMF.
Is there something stopping anyone from researching it themselves?
What sense would it make for airliners to pay for engines with that capability? The reason for flying at high altitude is the low drag. LOL
psikeyhackr 4 years ago
Which is exactly what I thought. You're making it up as you go along, have nothing to back up these absurd statements, and then expect us to valid date your assumptions with research you've never done. Basis of your 4 times the thrust claim? Nothing. Basis that the plane was unable to reach 500 mph at 1000 feet? Nothing. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
palescottsman 4 years ago
The reason for high altitude flying is fuel efficiency. The higher the drag, the more fuel will be consumed. An issue that the hijackers didn't seem terribly concerned with. You're clearly making this up as you go along, with NO understanding of any of the issues involved. Do you have ANY evidence that it would have required 4 times the thrust at 1000 feet? Anything?
palescottsman 4 years ago
The information on aerodynamics is here:
tinyurl dotcom/3bhgqc
The reason you accuse people of making things up is because you want to believe people are dumber than you. That would be rather difficult actually.
psikeyhackr 4 years ago
One small problem....Joseph Keith...the 'source' in your youtube video was a SOFTWARE engineer. The only folks I consider 'dumber' than myself, are those who never bother to fact check their own claims.
palescottsman 4 years ago
Think this through logically. The minimum take off speed of a 767 is 160mph. If 585mph represents the maximum thrust its engines can produce, and every time the air density is doubled, its thrust is halved, then a 767 would be absolutely INCAPABLE of meeting its minimum take off speed at sea level....per your assumptions . (585mph/4 =146.mph). You may want to rethink what the SOFTWARE engineer says on this issue.
palescottsman 4 years ago
Tell people that you couldn't figure out that the steel got thicker toward the bottom of the WTC so they will be aware of your vast understanding of PHYSICS.
psikeyhackr 4 years ago
A month? You waited a MONTH, you blundered completely on your 'aeronautics engineer who turned out to be a SOFTWARE engineer, you blundered on your '4 times the air resistance' claim that wouldn't even allow the plane in question to take off, and that was the best you could come up with? You're harmless, friend.
palescottsman 4 years ago
Oh right, I am going to listen to someone who knows so much about physics he can't figure out that skyscrapers have more steel toward the bottom.
You hadn't presented your clear demonstration of lack of physics comprehension. Excuse me if you aren't as important to me as you think. LOL
The Empire State Building was constructed before the first jet plane flew so I'm not about to pay attention to what YOU say about jet planes.
psikeyhackr 4 years ago
When your assumptions about how planes fly mandate that every time a 767 takes off at its minimum take off speed, it defies the laws of physics, you may want to rethink those assumptions. And next time, before you blindly follow the conspiracy rantings of an 'aeronautics engineer'....you may want to actually check if he IS an aeronautics engineers. And not a software engineer. Ignore as you will. Your willful ignorance doesn't establish anyone's conspiracy.
palescottsman 4 years ago