15 Years Later: New Scientific Paper in Reputable Physics Journal Argues 9/11 Was An Inside Job - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zyler;51048732]Why do you think that's impossible? What leads you to that assumption? Do you have scientific papers to back up your reasoning or do you just think it's impossible because you want to believe there is a conspiracy?[/QUOTE] I think it's impossible because there is no plane that I'm aware of that can achieve cruising speed at sea level. First off, the engines do not have enough thrust to push it through earth's atmosphere at 1000ft second, the air resistance would tear the plane apart, even if you upgraded the engines.

this guy's shit posts are piercing my brain

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048733]Answer how aluminum can pierce steel. I need this answered. Without violating neuton's third law, explain how this can happen[/QUOTE] OvB already explained this, you aren't listening to anyone at all, are you? [QUOTE=OvB;51048572]Things act differently at speed. Previous example I gave was a water cutter. Water is... well water when it's not moving. Accelerate it though a fast pump and suddenly you can cut metal with it. Or a speeding car crashing into a tree. Or a tornado throwing boards through a concrete wall. [img]http://i.imgur.com/tHBGaLO.jpg[/img] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UvPWny_PBc[/media][/QUOTE] Water can cut through steel, given enough speed. Aluminum is much tougher than water, right? So obviously, if water can cut through steel with enough speed, so can aluminum.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048746]I think it's impossible because there is no plane that I'm aware of that can achieve cruising speed at sea level. [/QUOTE] What? [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048746]First off, the engines do not have enough thrust to push it through earth's atmosphere at 1000ft[/QUOTE] Fucking what? [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048746]second, the air resistance would tear the plane apart, even if you upgraded the engines.[/QUOTE] [b]What?[/b]

snip

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048746]I think it's impossible because there is no plane that I'm aware of that can achieve cruising speed at sea level. First off, the engines do not have enough thrust to push it through earth's atmosphere at 1000ft second, the air resistance would tear the plane apart, even if you upgraded the engines.[/QUOTE] Do you have sources to back up this claim? Where is your evidence? I need statistics, scientific papers, figures and numbers. If you cannot provide those, then I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Why is your theory of a controlled demolition more likely than my theory that the towers were holograms?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048728]Hold on now, how can a 767 go 500mph at 1000ft? Pretty sure that's impossible.[/QUOTE] [quote]At exactly 9:03:02, Flight 175 crashed nose-first into the southern facade of South Tower of the World Trade Center, at a speed of approximately 590 mph (950 km/h, 264 m/s, or 513 knots)[22] and striking between floors 77 and 85 with approximately 10,000 U.S. gallons (38,000 L; 8,300 imp gal) of jet fuel on board.[/quote] [quote]At 08:46:30,[35] Mohamed Atta intentionally crashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the northern facade of the North Tower (Tower 1) of the World Trade Center.[20] The aircraft, traveling at about 404 knots (465 mph; 748 km/h) and carrying about 10,000 U.S. gallons (38,000 L) of jet fuel, hit between the 93rd and 99th floors of the North Tower.[36][/quote] my bad, one of them was almost 600mph.

Barbarian887 do... Do you know how high 1000ft is? The taller of the two towers was 1,368 feet. Most airliners iirc fly around 30,000-45,000 feet.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048003]Why did he not show up to his business meeting at windows of the world on the morning of 9/11?[/QUOTE] Pretty sure if he was about to pull off the largest and deadliest insurance scam in the history of mankind, he wouldn't schedule a fucking business meeting on that day.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51048761]Barbarian887 do... Do you know how high 1000ft is? The taller of the two towers was 1,368 feet. Most airliners iirc fly around 30,000 feet.[/QUOTE] Are you intentionally misunderstanding me? that's my whole fucking point. You can't do 500mph in a 767 at 1000ft, you need to be at cruising altitude, 30 - 40k ft

I'm curious what this "99th percentile" in a science class was for. I strongly suspect it wasn't physics.

[I]At least[/I] Barbarian hasn't resorted to the ultimate conspiracy of "all that information is wrong and fabricated to support the conspiracy!!" yet.

-snip-

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048746]I think it's impossible because there is no plane that I'm aware of that can achieve cruising speed at sea level. First off, the engines do not have enough thrust to push it through earth's atmosphere at 1000ft second, the air resistance would tear the plane apart, even if you upgraded the engines.[/QUOTE] The plane didn't take off and immediately reach that speed. It was bound for L.A. International Airport taking off from Boston and had already reached cruising speed when the hijack occurred. The plane was in flight for roughly 15 minutes before the hijacking even took place. [url]http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm[/url] I'd really suggest you actually read the 9/11 Commission Report, it'd probably answer all these nutty conspiracies you're throwing out.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048765]Are you intentionally misunderstanding me? that's my whole fucking point. You can't do 500mph in a 767 at 1000ft, you need to be at cruising altitude, 30 - 40k ft[/QUOTE] That doesnt make any sense. At all.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048765]Are you intentionally misunderstanding me? that's my whole fucking point. You can't do 500mph in a 767 at 1000ft, you need to be at cruising altitude, 30 - 40k ft[/QUOTE] It was crashing into a building, I don't think they were following proper take off procedures.

[QUOTE=Pops;51048760]my bad, one of them was almost 600mph.[/QUOTE] It is probably possible to discern this from a video as well. If you're contesting the speed, Barbarian, watch some videos of the impact, put down some markers for distance, and count the seconds.

[QUOTE=WitheredGryphon;51048770]The plane didn't take off and immediately reach that speed. It was bound for L.A. International Airport taking off from Boston and had already reached cruising speed when the hijack occurred. The plane was in flight for roughly 15 minutes before the hijacking even took place. [url]http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm[/url] I'd really suggest you actually read the 9/11 Commission Report, it'd probably answer all these nutty conspiracies you're throwing out.[/QUOTE] This.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51048769]What I don't understand is how he jumped to the assumption that planes cannot travel higher than 1000 feet? Did he just make it up on the spot or did he hear it somewhere? How can someone who knows so little about something claim to know so much? How many times can he be disproven before he realizes that he doesn't know as much about stuff as he thinks he does?[/QUOTE] ok sorry i meant to say [b]at 500mph[/b]. im getting tired

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048765]Are you intentionally misunderstanding me? that's my whole fucking point. You can't do 500mph in a 767 at 1000ft, you need to be at cruising altitude, 30 - 40k ft[/QUOTE] the only thing stopping a 767 from traveling that speed at that height is the fucking pilot. fuck man, i didn't even take a physics class and i understand this shit better than you.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51048774]It was crashing into a building, I don't think they were following proper take off procedures.[/QUOTE] no it's [b]impossible[/b] the engines cannot provide the thrust needed to push the airplane 500mph at 1000ft and even if they did the plane's aerodynamics would be overcome by the dense atmosphere at 1000ft

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048777]ok sorry i meant to say [b]at 500mph[/b]. im getting tired[/QUOTE] If you're feeling tired, maybe stop arguing so forcefully and posting so quickly, take your time and read the science stuff that Aaron and OvB posted and read the Commission Report that WitheredGryphon posted. Take your time and learn and read things instead of going off on tangents and getting flustered at people on the internet. [editline]14th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048782]no it's [b]impossible[/b] the engines cannot provide the thrust needed to push the airplane 500mph at 1000ft and even if they did the plane's aerodynamics would be overcome by the dense atmosphere at 1000ft[/QUOTE] Sources?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048746]I think it's impossible because there is no plane that I'm aware of that can achieve cruising speed at sea level. First off, the engines do not have enough thrust to push it through earth's atmosphere at 1000ft second, the air resistance would tear the plane apart, even if you upgraded the engines.[/QUOTE] You are easily the dumbest mother fucker I've seen in months. Like on a physical and meta-physical plane you've achieved such a vast amount of stupidity either from your parents or cosmic rays. That you must ignore any an all factual evidence debunking any of your so called theories and proofs. Look back all the post you made in this thread, read your posts carefully. Then say them out loud to your friends and family(if you have any) or even to yourself. Then ask the question "Does that make any sense?" Now look at the dozens of counterexamples,points,arguments, and facts that you deliberately ignored because this something that's so strong in your life that you feel the need to think the US government was the most competent organization ever to organize the collapse of a building and killing thousands of people to enter a war that ended up putting our country in debt, as well as companies loosing millions and billions of dollars to fix the damage. Please I fucking pray for you, that you actually gain a semblance of an intelligence.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048782]no it's [b]impossible[/b] the engines cannot provide the thrust needed to push the airplane 500mph at 1000ft and even if they did the plane's aerodynamics would be overcome by the dense atmosphere at 1000ft[/QUOTE] What? How in gods name do you think planes fly?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048782]no it's [b]impossible[/b] the engines cannot provide the thrust needed to push the airplane 500mph at 1000ft and even if they did the plane's aerodynamics would be overcome by the dense atmosphere at 1000ft[/QUOTE] don't even care if i get a ban for this [img]http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/016/555/12d.jpg[/img] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Image macro, and knew it" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51048773]That doesnt make any sense. At all.[/QUOTE] ok so this the facts and scientific evidence that i have been bombarded with for the past several hours.

It's pretty obvious that Barbarian cannot accept the facts and is becoming defensive because a core belief of his is being threatened. Let's ask a hypothetical: What would it mean to you, Barbarian, if 9/11 was a true terrorist attack, and was not an inside job? How would that affect your world view? How would that make you feel? The idea that random people can group up and decide to murder thousands of innocents is a terrifying thought. It makes people feel less secure because it undermines the law, order, and predictability we rely on in our daily lives. The idea that our government cannot protect us from these random acts of violence gives us less confidence in our own safety. We feel threatened because we are not in control of our environment, and we are faced with the notion that the world is chaotic and unpredictable which frightens us because as humans we need to have control of our environment and our lives. The idea that our government is so powerful that they could plan an inside job (so involved that defies reality) in a way is comforting, because it makes us feel that our government is in complete control. They planned it all out, they knew it was going to happen, they weren't caught with their pants down. If some foreign/domestic terrorist group attacks us our government will be able to protect us because there's no precedence for them failing to protect us if we believe 9/11 was an inside job. If you understand 9/11 to be an act of terror then it means our government couldn't protect us, and it implies that they might fail to protect us again. The truth is that the world is chaotic. Any day now conflicts could escalate with Russia and we could have mutually assured destruction, and there's nothing we citizens could do about it. A meteroite could slam into Earth before we could even predict its trajectory and billions would die. A random person could buy a black market pistol and start a killing spree in a mall without going through any of the red tape that is normally required. And another terrorist attack like 9/11 could happen again. But we protect ourselves from thinking of these terrible possibilities. We trust our government to shoot down nukes, negotiate peace, avert impending disasters, and catch criminals/terrorists before they act. But our government is not omnipotent and omniscient. So the way some people stay comfortable is to use defense mechanisms. Conspiracies, ignoring facts, avoiding troubling information, sticking to a rigid dogma, trusting others' information as true without researching it. Facing the dark, terrible truth of how little control we have in our lives in the face of disasters is extremely difficult, so avoiding it is how people cope.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048792]ok so this the facts and scientific evidence that i have been bombarded with for the past several hours.[/QUOTE] Most planes including passenger jets fly USING AIR. Aircraft generally USE THE ATMOSPHERE TO FLY. How does it make even a lick of sense for something to have a HARDER time moving faster when the means in which they move are more plentiful?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048782]no it's [b]impossible[/b] the engines cannot provide the thrust needed to push the airplane 500mph at 1000ft and even if they did the plane's aerodynamics would be overcome by the dense atmosphere at 1000ft[/QUOTE] What's your source, though?

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51048787]What? How in gods name do you think planes fly?[/QUOTE] a lot slower at low altitudes, correct me if im wrong, or keep insulting me, whatever makes you happy i guess