The new Pentagon video

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Skywise" wrote in message
...
wrote in news:1147928450.364812.197730
@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

cjcampbell wrote:

As I said, most of these conspiracy buffs are a bunch of holocaust
deniers and other enemies of the United States. In a just world they
would be tried and hanged as the terrorists and traitors that they are.

I differ with you somewhat here. The scenario you describe is
dangerously similar not to a just but an intolerant world. We should do
everything we can to preserve freedom of everything, speech included,
so stifling a dissenting voice is no solution. The best way to beat
such people down is with objective, irrefutable evidence although I
agree it'd involve the precious time of many.

The only problem is that these folks are "true believers". There
is nothing you can give them as evidence that would dissuade them
from their "truth".

CJ is a true believer too, albeit in a different bizarre mythology than
that of the conspiracy theorists. But unlike the conspiracy theorists, CJ
literally wants to kill people for espousing nonsense that's in
competition with his own.

CJ rationalizes his bloodlust by asserting that his would-be victims
themselves harbor such homicidal desires (they're "terrorists"). But he
makes that claim without a shred of evidence, because true believers don't
need any.

--Gary

I appreciate your thoughts and your prose. I think you may appreciate this,
particularly the quotes of Shaw and Schopenhauer.

http://www.rense.com/general70/tjere.htm



In this issue there seems to be too many 'experts' refusing to answer valid
questions. These 'experts' attempt to use bluster and attacks on character
as a substitute for reason. IMHO many are afraid that at least some of the
answers may be uncomfortable to prior belief and force the reevaluation of
core values.



Socrates taught that the pursuit of truth can only begin once they start to
question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If a certain
belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it should be
kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but the
thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the erroneous



The very use of the term 'conspiracy theorists' to denigrate those who dare
to question the 'approved' 'conspiracy theory of 19 Arabs with box cutters
is an attempt to discredit by attack on character to avoid talking about
truth which in this as in all wars is the first casualty.



"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we
don't believe in it at all." -Noam Chomsky

Skywise wrote in
:

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in
ups.com:

Dean
What is the difference in size and payload between the F4 and Flight
77?

You need to go back to high school and sit in on the physics
class on kinetic energy. This time, pay attention instead of
wanking off over the cheerleader sitting in front of you.

Damn. If I were rich, I would pay for a re-enactment of the
Pentagon and Twin Towers crashes into re-creations of both

In the absence of copious amounts of money, would the following help?

http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/....Pentagon.html

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/cgvlab/projects/pentagon.htm

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/cgvlab/pape...gonVIS2003.mpg

--
A. Sinan Unur
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)

In article 1Z4bg.174799$WI1.109727@pd7tw2no, "Private"
wrote:

In this issue there seems to be too many 'experts' refusing to answer valid
questions. These 'experts' attempt to use bluster and attacks on character
as a substitute for reason. IMHO many are afraid that at least some of the
answers may be uncomfortable to prior belief and force the reevaluation of
core values.
[snipperoo]
The very use of the term 'conspiracy theorists' to denigrate those who dare
to question the 'approved' 'conspiracy theory of 19 Arabs with box cutters
is an attempt to discredit by attack on character to avoid talking about
truth which in this as in all wars is the first casualty.

like the use of term "experts"?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

wrote in news:1147886939.141698.306060
@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

This airplane hit a solid stone building at very high speed. The
aluminum in the airframe was obliterated. Have you never seen the
video of the F4 phantom slamming into the concrete barrier to test the
containment vessel of a nuclear power plant? The F4 literally
vaporizes. Nothing left but the wingtips that miss the outside edge of
the concrete...

Jay Honeck has this video on his website. Watch it and you will
understand what happened to Flight 77.

http://www.sandia.gov/media/mov_mpg/

http://www.sandia.gov/media/mov_mpg/...sh%20Tests.mpg

--
A. Sinan Unur
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in
oups.com:

Brian
High School classes and aircraft crash investigations? Wanking off?
Surely you jest? My post asked some questions. Do YOU have the
answers?

Have you seen the footage of the F4 crashing into the conrete wall?

QED

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article 1Z4bg.174799$WI1.109727@pd7tw2no, "Private"

wrote:

In this issue there seems to be too many 'experts' refusing to answer
valid
questions. These 'experts' attempt to use bluster and attacks on
character
as a substitute for reason. IMHO many are afraid that at least some of
the
answers may be uncomfortable to prior belief and force the reevaluation
of
core values.
[snipperoo]
The very use of the term 'conspiracy theorists' to denigrate those who
dare
to question the 'approved' 'conspiracy theory of 19 Arabs with box
cutters
is an attempt to discredit by attack on character to avoid talking about
truth which in this as in all wars is the first casualty.

like the use of term "experts"?


touché - valid point

Doesn't matter. A pound of aluminum in and F-4 weighs the same as a
pound of aluminum in a 757. Energy = 1/2mV^2 At over 400 knots,
there is a lot of energy in every pound of aluminum.

It is not necessary to melt the aluminum either to make the airplane
indistinguishable. Ablation is a process in which the aluminum is
pulverized by impact with a solid object. It is essentially ground up.
If you look at the video of the F-4, you will see that he aluminum is
literally being ground up by the impact with the concrete barrier. The
Pentagon is a very substantial stone building, and the 757 still
managed to punch through several of its rings. I am not surprised that
there are not many distinguishable pieces left. Also remember that
there was a post crash fire, and aluminum does burn when it gets hot
enough.

Same thing with flight 93. It went straight into the ground at high
speed. This is unlike the U.S. Air 737 that crashed on approach due to
a rudder hard over. The airspeed at impact was much higher for these
intentional crashes than for the unintentional crashes due to starting
the dive from a much higher alitude, and going straight in in a clean
vs. dirty drag configuration...

Am I just casting my pearls here, or does this make sense to you?

Dean

Ol Shy & Bashful wrote:
Brian
High School classes and aircraft crash investigations? Wanking off?
Surely you jest? My post asked some questions. Do YOU have the
answers?
I HAVE NEVER been to an aircraft crash site, especially a jet aircraft,
that didn't leave big pieces of wreckage. The pieces that I saw in the
video were not impressive and hand held. The wreckage I am accustomed
to needed to be picked up by tow trucks and put on flat beds. Airspeeds
at time of impact varied but the only one I can think of off hand that
was really FAST is the space shuttle which was going how fast?
What is your contribution to making this country better? Talk is cheap.

The conspiracy web sites are very selective in which pictures they
show. There are plenty of pictures showing aircraft engines, landing
gear, and pieces taller than a man, but the conspiracy sites will not
show them. You can find them in any serious publication dealing with
the attacks, however.

"cjcampbell" wrote

The conspiracy web sites are very selective in which pictures they
show. There are plenty of pictures showing aircraft engines, landing
gear, and pieces taller than a man, but the conspiracy sites will not
show them. You can find them in any serious publication dealing with
the attacks, however.

Why, I'm surprised at you, CJ. You know darn full well that all of those
big parts were trucked in there for those pictures! bfg
--
Jim in NC