OK like wow YOU have to see this video really it's nuts

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Scrapman and sushi,
I personally have forgotten more about the aircraft then you two will ever know. Scrap keeps quoting me shit he saw on a video as if it is scientifically conclusive. If you two want to believe that the government did it, then have the fuck at it. The border is straight south or north don't let the door hit you in the ass. Just because you two believe it, doesn't make it true. The wings aren't strong enough to hold fuel? The plane won't put a hole in the side of the building? A missile hit the Pentagon, blah, blah blah. So when a plane does put a hole in a building, it's a missile and when it doesn't it's a 747 flown by scrappy do. You know what is a true mystery, how the fuck you two ever got out of fourth grade.

Sushi, specifically you, I'm smarter than you by a long measure, that I can assure you. You want to tell me about aircraft technology and how I have no clue yet in your first paragraph you show your ignorance by talking about a clacker that don't even know how it works?! The clacker goes off huh? At 360 knots huh? Get that straight out of the "new technology that only you know about handbook", or Google. Why don't you explain to me in lay terms what powers the clacker? Where is the clacker located and what does it collect its data from? What happens when the clacker goes off? Is it integrated into any other systems? Does the master warming horn and light come on? Can it be silenced if it does? What is it powered by?
Hey you better get busy oh great knower of knowledge and technology that's a lot to Google.
I, however, already know the answer to all those questions and didn't even have to turn on my computer. I also know that the flight plan and manifest where classified the following day, therefore no longer available to the public. Idiot.

Tell me more about the wings not being strong enough to hold fuel? Being that the wings are where is all held I'm curious as to where all those ones that fell off are being held.

Here's the difference between you two and myself. I don't think that my expert opinion is the only one. You have drawn several conclusions based on objective supposition, just because everyone doesn't jump to the same conclusion doesn't mean you're right. On the contrary, it's you that is wrong when you refuse to listen to others simply because they don't fall in line.

In closing, blow me, both of you. I am done arguing with you half wits. Scrapman thinks the fucking airplane flew from Boston to New York at 300' (that's the understood abbreviation for feet in case you didn't see that on you tube). Yet the hostile takeover didn't start until the fasten seat belt light went off?

How gullible do you have to be to get in your guy's dumb club?

Hope this helps,
FDC



your right Fat Daddy Cool :142smilie you are a smarter than me...


and I brought the clacker because it very distracting to fly the plane with the clacker going off... I'm sure these alleged highjackers.. didn't even know what a clacker is..not much to a clacker. let me explain briefly since you didn't do a very good job...

The clacker is an faa safety device meant to go off in a pattern that annoys the pilot when the pilot has reached the vmo of the aircraft. .. and I simply said the 767 can't go over 400 at sea Level. .. at vmo which is 360 for a 767 the clacker would go off to alert the pilot to slow down... I mention the clacker because it's very annoying and would probably disrupt major concentration needed to descend that fast trying to hit a building... almost dead center... not much to the clacker Fat Daddy Cool. Man you are fukin smart.



like I've said before, these terrorist from the up and coming countries of the middle east who are so far advanced must have some amazing flying instructors


Fuck me :facepalm:
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Scrap,
I'm not putting myself above you in intelligence. I'm putting the majority of people ahead of you in intelligence based on all your posts not just this one. Unlike you, I prefer to ascertain a good amount of tangible evidence on a subject prior to making a hypothesis. You have a significant number of posts and none of them really lend themselves to having a misunderstood genius behind them. Ya feel me?

Good.

Hope this helps,
FDC


tangible evidence? You want to open your mouth about tangible evidence?
Did you know the investigation wasn't allowed until 400 fuckin days after 911? Explain to me how that makes any sense? Especially in a horrific event like 911... do you know anything about the funding for the 911 investigation?

go back and refresh your smart brain on the events that actually took place that day....

ya feel me?

Who speaks like that?

Holy shit, I feel like a dummy responding to you... like I said before an intelligent conversation about 911 with someone who has no knowledge of our technology is just not going to work...

have a good one Fat Daddy Cool
Sushi, hope this helps

:facepalm:
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Scrapman and sushi,
I personally have forgotten more about the aircraft then you two will ever know. Scrap keeps quoting me shit he saw on a video as if it is scientifically conclusive. If you two want to believe that the government did it, then have the fuck at it. The border is straight south or north don't let the door hit you in the ass. Just because you two believe it, doesn't make it true. The wings aren't strong enough to hold fuel? The plane won't put a hole in the side of the building? A missile hit the Pentagon, blah, blah blah. So when a plane does put a hole in a building, it's a missile and when it doesn't it's a 747 flown by scrappy do. You know what is a true mystery, how the fuck you two ever got out of fourth grade.

Sushi, specifically you, I'm smarter than you by a long measure, that I can assure you. You want to tell me about aircraft technology and how I have no clue yet in your first paragraph you show your ignorance by talking about a clacker that don't even know how it works?! The clacker goes off huh? At 360 knots huh? Get that straight out of the "new technology that only you know about handbook", or Google. Why don't you explain to me in lay terms what powers the clacker? Where is the clacker located and what does it collect its data from? What happens when the clacker goes off? Is it integrated into any other systems? Does the master warming horn and light come on? Can it be silenced if it does? What is it powered by?
Hey you better get busy oh great knower of knowledge and technology that's a lot to Google.
I, however, already know the answer to all those questions and didn't even have to turn on my computer. I also know that the flight plan and manifest where classified the following day, therefore no longer available to the public. Idiot.

Tell me more about the wings not being strong enough to hold fuel? Being that the wings are where is all held I'm curious as to where all those ones that fell off are being held.

Here's the difference between you two and myself. I don't think that my expert opinion is the only one. You have drawn several conclusions based on objective supposition, just because everyone doesn't jump to the same conclusion doesn't mean you're right. On the contrary, it's you that is wrong when you refuse to listen to others simply because they don't fall in line.

In closing, blow me, both of you. I am done arguing with you half wits. Scrapman thinks the fucking airplane flew from Boston to New York at 300' (that's the understood abbreviation for feet in case you didn't see that on you tube). Yet the hostile takeover didn't start until the fasten seat belt light went off?

How gullible do you have to be to get in your guy's dumb club?

Hope this helps,
FDC

The fuel held in a 767 is no where near the tip of the wings... not even close you fukin idiot.... and if the Bureau of transportation says it has no record of the two planes taking off what does that mean?

this little piece is interesting




I choose your site as the first to take this important and very disturbing information because you are one of the few who keeps questioning your government about the terrible events of Tuesday, September 11th.Only parts of those lists were given by the FBI to the Associated Press. Those so-called victim lists were published by the big new agencies from the 12th september 2001 onwards.Those lists were never complete. Even more astonishing - the hijackers were never mentioned on those lists.Within 48 hours the FBI made public the names of 19 hijackers. But the FBI never released the complete passenger lists.Fortunately, people in the US started to create net site to honor those lost on the planes. On those sites, people were invited to make contributions to those who perished.As I said, the numbers were given straight away by United Airlines and American Airlines:On the 11th of september, United Airlines gave a total number of 45 persons. This was corrected the 12th after UA learned that one passenger had purchased 2 tickets.This led the airline initially to report that there were 45 people onboard, when there were, in fact, 44 people onboard.Very strange! See their site below.Those numbers were later never disputed, not by the FAA or the FBI. So, we suppose those numbers are CORRECT.The FBI gave the names of 19 hijackers:As I said, those names were never on any PUBLISHED passenger list. Of course, they must be on the ORIGINAL passenger manifests, as the FBI knows.This means, if we count all the names on the PUBLISHED passengerlists and we add the hyackers onboard of each plane, we get the total numbers (given above) of persons on those planes. I hope you agree.I started to search on the internet for those passenger lists. Practically all news agencies copied the lists published initially by the Associated Press. This list was updated several times but it still contained many mistakes, double-counting, etc.But with help of some VICTIM sites, made by the friends of the victims themselves, I managed to get all the names.I assure you, these lists are the complete lists . You can check this easily. If you see another passenger list with different names, please type those names on the Google search engine and you will find out if he or she was on another plane or was a victim in the WTC.Flight 93 40 persons , plus the number of hyackers given by the FBI, makes 44 persons. This number matches the number above, given by the airlines and the FAA, so this is correct.Flight 77 59 persons , plus the number of hijackers given by the FBI, makes 64 persons. This number matches also, so this is correct.Flight 175 58 persons, plus the number of hijackers given by the FBI, makes 63 persons. This number is not the same as given by the FAA and UA.Flight 11 89 persons, plus the number of hijackers given by the FBI, makes 94 persons. This number, too, is not the same as given by the FAA and AA.So we have 2 numbers WRONG.MR. MUELLER FROM THE FBI AND ASHCROFT FROM THE GOVERNMENT ARE LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.WHAT IS THE GOVERNMENT HIDING ?PS. I give you permission to change lay out and sentences as my English is not very accurate. BUT THE CONCLUSION MUST BE : THERE WERE 7 SO-CALLED HYACKERS ON FLIGHT 175 AND 3 ON FLIGHT 11.I GAVE YOU THE PROOF. MUELLER AND ASHCROFT ARE LYING.THE CLUE IS THIS: THE NUMBERS WERE RELEASED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, WHEN THE HYACKERS WERE NOT KNOWN YET,SO THE NUMBERS INCLUDED THEIR NAMES. A FEW HOURS LATER MUELLER AND ASHCROFT TOOK OVER AND THEY RELEASED A PASSENGERLIST WITHOUT THE NAMES OF THE HYACKERS.FROM THAT MOMENT THEY STARTED TO MANIPULATE EVERYTHING.JEFFREY COLLMAN, 41, Novato, Calif., flight attendant.SARA LOW, 28, Batesville, Ark., flight attendant.KAREN MARTIN, 40, Danvers, Mass., flight attendant.Flight 11. Rick DeKoven, administrator at the church, said McGuinness waswere with his wife when she was notified Tuesday morning. A prayer servicewas held for him Tuesday night. DeKoven called him "a devoted family man,"who was active in his community and church. He was also a former swimmer atBoston University.11. He was also a farmer who loved the land. His brother Jim Ogonowski saidhis 150-acre property would be preserved as open space, as his brother wouldhave wanted.BETTY ONG, 45, Andover, Mass., flight attendant.DAVID ANGELL, 54, was executive producer of the NBC television showAngeles with his wife Lynn, according to Angell's brother, The Most Rev.Kenneth Angell, bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington, Vt. TheBishop Angell and other relatives had just spent a joyful family weddingLYNN ANGELL, Pasadena, Calif., David Angell's wife.appeared in such movies as "Cat People," "Winter Kills" and "Remember Mya Cape Cod vacation. Her spokeswoman, Susan Patricola, called her "one ofthe loveliest, greatest people on the Earth." Berenson, whose husband diedin 1992, is survived by two grown sons.PATRICK CURRIVANBRIAN DALE, 43, Warren, N.J., leaves behind a wife and three children.DAVID DIMEGLIO, Wakefield, Mass.ALEX FILIPOV, 70, Concord, Mass.PETER GAY, 54, Tewksbury, Mass., vice president and general manager,EDMUND GLAZER, 41, Chatsworth, Calif., CFO and vice president of finance andadministration of MRV communications, a manufacturer of optical networkcomponents and systems. He was aboard American Airlines Flight 11. A nativeStates when he was 17. He is survived by his wife, Candy, and son, Nathan.development, eLogicDAVID KOVALCIN, 42, Hudson, N.H., Raytheon Co.Market Perspectivesreturning from visiting her family near Boston when their plane, AmericanUniversity of California at Los Angeles, where he attended college. Hisfather, a former U.S. Marine and Vietnam veteran, said the United Statesshould not take revenge against the terrorists. "It's not going to bring myofficer and a board member. Lewin is survived by his wife and two sons.University in 1998. He went into finance and was working for AltaTuesday morning. "The loss of our son has changed our lives," said hisknow there are so many other people who died. If you live in New York, youknow someone who's not there anymore." Mello is also survived by his father,MILDRED NAIMAN, Andover, Mass.RENEE NEWELL, 37, Cranston, R.I., customer service agent at AmericanJANE ORTH, 49, Haverhill, Mass., retired from Lucent TechnologyEntertainment Television, was headed home to his pregnant wife on AmericanFlight 11. "Tom made everyone laugh," a family statement said.SONIA MORALES PUOPOLO, 58, lived in Miami for six months out of the year andDAVID RETIK, Needham, Mass.PHILIP ROSENZWEIG, Acton, Mass., executive with Sun MicrosystemsDOUGLAS STONE, 54, Dover, N.H.XAVIER SUAREZJAMES TRENTINI, 65, Everett, Mass., retired teacher and assistant principalMARY TRENTINI, 67, Everett, Mass., retired secretaryPENDYALA VAMSIKRISHNA, 30, Los Angeles, project manager for consulting firmMARY WAHLSTROM, 75, Kaysville, Utah.passengers, two pilots and seven flight attendants. It crashed into theFangman said her brother was a fun-loving man who enjoyed dancing, gourmetworked for Verizon Wireless before taking a job with United Airlines inMICHAEL HORROCKS, first officer, and a native of Hershey, Pa.VICTOR SARACINI, 51, Lower Makefield Township, Pa., pilot of Flight 175.ALONA AVRAHAM, 30, Ashdot, Israelthe director of pro scouting for the Kings. He spent the previous 13 yearsas a scout with the Edmonton Oilers, who won five Stanley Cups during thatMARK BAVIS, 31, of West Newton, Mass., a scout for the Los Angeles Kingsprofessional hockey team, was aboard United Flight 175. Bavis attendedBoston University, where his twin brother, Michael, is an assistant coachfor the school's hockey team. Bavis is survived by his mother and twoTOURI BOLOURCHI, 69, of Beverly Hills, Calif., a retired nurse born inTehran, was a passenger on United Flight 175. She moved to the United Stateswith her daughters in 1979 following the Islamic revolution. Her husband,Akbar Bolourchi, joined them two years later by moving his medical practiceto Beverly Hills. Touri Bolourchi, who was fluent in six languages, hadKLAUS BOTHE, 31, chief of development, BCT Technology AG, GermanyDAVID BRANDHORST, 3, Los Angelesspecialist at University of MassachusettsGLORIA DE BARRERA, 49, El Salvador, exporterassociate, recent Boston University graduateRONALD GAMBOA, 33, his partner Daniel Brandhorst, 42, and their son Davidmany family trips. "They did a lot of traveling, they were bothLYNN GOODCHILD, 25, Attleboro, Mass., Putnam InvestmentsGERALD HARDACRE, a 62-year-old Carlsbad resident, had been visiting hisdaughter in Boston. "I have lost my best friend and the city has lost a manwho is productive," Hardacre's brother Larry said. "There's a big hole in aan environmental engineer who helped make San Diego a cleaner, better placeto live. Though his life was taken by a despicable act, his family remainsunited. "They have broken our hearts, but they are not going to break ourERIC HARTONO, 20, Portland, OR high school student. He was moving fromRALPH KERSHAW, 52, Manchester-by-the-Sea, Mass., marine surveyorROBERT LEBLANC, 70, Lee, N.H., professor emeritus of geography, UniversityMACLOVIO "JOE" LOPEZ JR., 41, Norwalk, Calif.JULIANA VALENTINE McCOURT, 4, New London, Conn.SHAWN NASSANEY, 25, Pawtucket, R.I., American Power ConversionKATHLEEN SHEARER, Dover, N.H.ROBERT SHEARER, Dover, N.H.football at Boston University.lives in La Mesa, California. Baker told 10News in San Diego that her sonCAPTAIN CHARLES BURLINGAME, 51, pilot, graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy,DAVID CHARLEBOIS, Washington, D.C., first officerMICHELLE HEIDENBERGER, 57, Chevy Chase, Md., flight attendant.JENNIFER LEWIS, 38, Culpepper, Va., flight attendantKENNETH LEWIS, 49, Culpepper, Va., flight attendantservices company IPCWILLIAM CASWELL, 54, Silver Spring, Md., physicist, NavyZANDRA COOPER, Annandale, Va.CHARLES DROZ, 52, Springfield, Va., vice president for software development,BARBARA G. EDWARDS, 58, Las Vegas, school teacher at Palo Verde High Schoolin Las VegasCHARLES S. FALKENBERG, 45, University Park, Md., director of research atECOlogic Corp., in Herndon, Va.DANA FALKENBERG, 3, University Park, Md.ZOE FALKENBERG, 8, University Park, Md.WILLIAM "BUD" FLAGG, Millwood, Va., retired Navy admiral and pilot forDARLENE "DEE" FLAGG, Millwood, Va.RICHARD P. GABRIEL SR., 54, Great Falls, Va., managing partner, StratinSTANLEY HALL, 68, Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif., Raytheon Co.BRYAN JACK, 48, Alexandria, Va., senior executive at Defense DepartmentSTEVEN D. "JAKE" JACOBY, 43, Alexandria, Va., chief operating officer,ANN JUDGE, 49, Great Falls, Va., travel officer manager, National GeographicRichard and Kathy, live in Del Mar.YVONNE KENNEDYNORMA KHAN, 45, Reston, Va., manager of a nonprofit organizationDONG LEE, 48, Leesburg, Va., engineer, Boeing Inc.CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, 38, Arlington, Va., executive, Work Life Benefitsusing knife-like instruments. Barbara Olson was a chief investigator for theHouse Government Reform Committee in the mid-1990s. She later became aout on her own as a TV commentator and private lawyer. She was a frequentPenninger and his wife, Janet, loved to take motorcycle trips together. Theyhave one daughter, Karen. Penninger has worked for BAE Systems in RanchoROBERT R. PLOGER III, 59, Annandale, Va., software architect, LockheedLISA RAINES, 42, senior vice president of biotechnology firmJOHN SAMMARTINO, 37, Annandale, Va., technical manager, XonTech Inc.BOB SPEISMAN, 47, Irvington, N.Y., diamond industry salesmanNORMA LANG STEUERLE, 54, Alexandria, Va.LEONARD TAYLOR, 44, Reston, Va., technical group manager, XonTech Inc.SANDRA TEAGUE, 31, a physical therapist at Georgetown University Hospital inLESLIE A. WHITTINGTON, 45, University Park, Md., Georgetown UniversityVICKI YANCEY, 44, Springfield, Va., employee of defense contractorVredenburgcarrying 37 passengers, two pilots and five flight attendants. It crashedJASON DAHL, 43, Denver, captain, United AirlinesALAN BEAVEN, 48, Oakland, Calif., environmental lawyerTHOMAS E. BURNETT JR. 38, San Ramon, Calif., was senior vice president anddevelopment company. He was aboard United Airlines Flight 93 when the planetrip for a November collectibles show.COLLEEN FRASER, 51, Elizabeth, N.J., chairwoman, New Jersey DevelopmentalANDREW GARCIA, 62, Portola Valley, Calif.LINDA GRONLUND, 46, Warwick, N. Y., environmental compliance, BMWRICHARD GUADAGNO, 38, of Eureka, Calif., a U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceHe worked for the federal government for 17 years at wildlife reserves inNew Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Oregon. Anne Badgley, director of theHe is survived by his parents and a sister.NICOLE MILLER, 21, San Jose, student, West Valley CollegeIndustries Vice President Walter Hoadley.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shawn555

fatdaddycool

Chi-TownHustler
Forum Member
Mar 26, 2001
13,718
275
83
60
Fort Worth TX usa
Sushi,
I said "ya feel me" to scrapman, hence his name at the top of the post followed by a comma. I didn't read your last post because your statement about wing tanks was so absurd. Have you ever been inside the wing tanks of a 767? Every two weeks an aircraft would come in for a heavy C check. There are different terminologies for this check. United refers to them as a "D" check for instance. Each time, all wing tank panels would be removed and QA inspectors, my department for a time, would crawl in the tanks and inspect them for corrosion. Without going into too much detail let me assure you that the fuel tanks most certainly do extend towards the tips. Not all the way but certainly close. Do you know why they always fuel the wings first? Remember the B-52? They had small wheels on the wings end. That was to help support the wings on the ground when full of fuel. You see sushi, the fuel in the wings provide structural support by it's weight to keep the wings from over flexing in lift condition. Some aircraft don't need the tanks to extend as far, MD-80 for instance, because they have a better lift ratio. Again, I am well aware of how these aircraft perform and what their capabilities are. I am not refuting the reprehensible actions of the administration in the aftermath. I am refuting your claims as to what is and isn't possible as it relates to those motors and aircraft. I have no doubt had the terrorists somehow kept the autopilot engaged, the clacker would have given them pause. However, the fact that they are able to turn off the transponder, the cockpit voice recorder, among other things, leads me to believe the autopilot had been disengaged long ago. You see, that's the little gems your storytellers omit from their stories. Sure the aircraft has fail safes designed to warm the pilot when they're operating the aircraft beyond its manual limits. The FACT that you and scrap used a pilot's testimony in attempt to make me look foolish and ignorant as to the limitations of a piece of equipment I spent most of my adult life repairing, testing, measuring, and manufacturing, when the pilots are the ones that need several redundant fail safe systems to prevent them from exceeding the limits we set in the first place is what pissed me off. It was dismissive and rude.
If you want to vomit out a bunch of stuff you heard on a video or read in a website that is singular in point, be my guest. Just don't be dismissive of others that are clearly educated on some aspect of your story.

I am curious about one thing though. May I ask why you're so upset about the delay in the investigation by the administration, yet I hear no complaints from you about the continued wasted resources investigating Benghazi, the birth certificate, emails, etc... and even more disturbing, nothing about the investigation of wmds in Iraq, Halliburton ties to the white house and government contracts they benefited from by the war, Cheney shooting a guy in the face. You didn't bitch when you found out that Darren Wilson was allowed to leave a shooting scene by himself and proceed to a police fraternity where he washed up himself and his weapon and them was allowed to check every single piece of evidence in to evidence in a case he was the subject of? So excuse me if I don't take your anger about the investigation as even viable.

Hope this helps,
FDC
 
Last edited:

JOSHNAUDI

That Guy
Forum Member
Dec 12, 2000
10,273
377
83
49
Seguin, TX
www.schwartz-associates.com
I have a question.

Assuming 9/11 is orchestrated and covered up by some entity other than the people that took credit for it.

What is the smallest number of people needed to pull it off, the act and the cover up?

4 holographic airplanes, 2 real scud/patriot missiles slam in to 3 buildings, 2 of which were laced with explosives, 1 was laced with explosives as well but wasn't hit directly, but still collapsed and no one has let it leak in 14 years. The planes struck at different times allowing the media to record the 2nd holographic crash.

General Petraeus can't fuck one person (outside his wife) without the world knowing.

When people say 19 people with box cutters... Before 9/11, people got on planes, said I have a bomb, this is a hijack and the plane landed. That changed on 9/11.

I think there are a lot of questions to be answered about 9/11 and I don't believe all information has been shared with the public, but there are also questions about jfk, aliens, and the lotto that need answers.

tinfoilhatsmile.gif
tinfoilhatsmile.gif
tinfoilhatsmile.gif
 

REFLOG

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,899
68
0
63
The Dogpound
I have a question.

Assuming 9/11 is orchestrated and covered up by some entity other than the people that took credit for it.

What is the smallest number of people needed to pull it off, the act and the cover up?

4 holographic airplanes, 2 real scud/patriot missiles slam in to 3 buildings, 2 of which were laced with explosives, 1 was laced with explosives as well but wasn't hit directly, but still collapsed and no one has let it leak in 14 years. The planes struck at different times allowing the media to record the 2nd holographic crash.

General Petraeus can't fuck one person (outside his wife) without the world knowing.

When people say 19 people with box cutters... Before 9/11, people got on planes, said I have a bomb, this is a hijack and the plane landed. That changed on 9/11.

I think there are a lot of questions to be answered about 9/11 and I don't believe all information has been shared with the public, but there are also questions about jfk, aliens, and the lotto that need answers.

tinfoilhatsmile.gif
tinfoilhatsmile.gif
tinfoilhatsmile.gif

Apollo 11? Is there really a moon:shrug:e
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Apollo 11? Is there really a moon:shrug:e

You think were the only walks of life in this universe? The moon was toed into orbit by another species. However nasa will never tell you that. Keep in my mind nasa has two programs... A secret program.... and a cover up program which the public has some knowledge of.... you may ask why "they" would spend 15billion a year on a cover up program?... because it's not their money... it's ours... duh.... you think nasa is really going to tell you the truth about what there really capable of? You think there really going to tell you about what they have discovered outside of this planet? Wake up America don't be so shallow and swallow everything the media and television shows you, holy shit...


Fuck me, I knew I shouldn't have opened my mouth :facepalm:
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Sushi,
I said "ya feel me" to scrapman, hence his name at the top of the post followed by a comma. I didn't read your last post because your statement about wing tanks was so absurd. Have you ever been inside the wing tanks of a 767? Every two weeks an aircraft would come in for a heavy C check. There are different terminologies for this check. United refers to them as a "D" check for instance. Each time, all wing tank panels would be removed and QA inspectors, my department for a time, would crawl in the tanks and inspect them for corrosion. Without going into too much detail let me assure you that the fuel tanks most certainly do extend towards the tips. Not all the way but certainly close. Do you know why they always fuel the wings first? Remember the B-52? They had small wheels on the wings end. That was to help support the wings on the ground when full of fuel. You see sushi, the fuel in the wings provide structural support by it's weight to keep the wings from over flexing in lift condition. Some aircraft don't need the tanks to extend as far, MD-80 for instance, because they have a better lift ratio. Again, I am well aware of how these aircraft perform and what their capabilities are. I am not refuting the reprehensible actions of the administration in the aftermath. I am refuting your claims as to what is and isn't possible as it relates to those motors and aircraft. I have no doubt had the terrorists somehow kept the autopilot engaged, the clacker would have given them pause. However, the fact that they are able to turn off the transponder, the cockpit voice recorder, among other things, leads me to believe the autopilot had been disengaged long ago. You see, that's the little gems your storytellers omit from their stories. Sure the aircraft has fail safes designed to warm the pilot when they're operating the aircraft beyond its manual limits. The FACT that you and scrap used a pilot's testimony in attempt to make me look foolish and ignorant as to the limitations of a piece of equipment I spent most of my adult life repairing, testing, measuring, and manufacturing, when the pilots are the ones that need several redundant fail safe systems to prevent them from exceeding the limits we set in the first place is what pissed me off. It was dismissive and rude.
If you want to vomit out a bunch of stuff you heard on a video or read in a website that is singular in point, be my guest. Just don't be dismissive of others that are clearly educated on some aspect of your story.

I am curious about one thing though. May I ask why you're so upset about the delay in the investigation by the administration, yet I hear no complaints from you about the continued wasted resources investigating Benghazi, the birth certificate, emails, etc... and even more disturbing, nothing about the investigation of wmds in Iraq, Halliburton ties to the white house and government contracts they benefited from by the war, Cheney shooting a guy in the face. You didn't bitch when you found out that Darren Wilson was allowed to leave a shooting scene by himself and proceed to a police fraternity where he washed up himself and his weapon and them was allowed to check every single piece of evidence in to evidence in a case he was the subject of? So excuse me if I don't take your anger about the investigation as even viable.

Hope this helps,
FDC



Do you think those flimsy wings are going to slice right through concrete and steel like butter? And what happened to the tail of the plane?

Not too mention the plane is made out of aluminum for the most part...
 

fatdaddycool

Chi-TownHustler
Forum Member
Mar 26, 2001
13,718
275
83
60
Fort Worth TX usa
Do you think those flimsy wings are going to slice right through concrete and steel like butter? And what happened to the tail of the plane?

Not too mention the plane is made out of aluminum for the most part...
Are you asking me or once again trying to tell me what I'm supposed to think? I have to tell you sushi, I'm really starting to wonder if you might be a bit of a flake.

I'm kidding man. I knew you were at the very least a hula hoop short of a hippie kit rather early on, so no worries there.

Let me ask you this, have you ever seen a chopstick thrown through a metal plate? Well if they throw it sideways, it doesn't work.
It has a lot to do with velocity, mass, surface area at impact etc.... Aluminum in of itself is not the strongest of the metals but when you reinforce it, add stringers and ribs, mass, velocity and a shit ton of good old non-American terrorist know how, they make big holes in lots of things.

Hope this helps,
FDC
 

yyz

Under .500
Forum Member
Mar 16, 2000
43,113
2,164
113
On the course!
FDC, I have a serious question for you. This is one of the biggest things that has bothered me about that day.


Did that jet fuel really cause those fires to destroy those building like that? What I mean is, we have all used fuel to light fires. The fuel is gone pretty fast. Try lighting a grill sometime with starter fluid! We all know how that shit goes! So, if I put jet fuel on my briquettes, would I come out a half hour later, and find my grill in ashes on the ground?

Why wouldn't the jet fuel just burn up in a flash for the most part upon impact?
 

fatdaddycool

Chi-TownHustler
Forum Member
Mar 26, 2001
13,718
275
83
60
Fort Worth TX usa
FDC, I have a serious question for you. This is one of the biggest things that has bothered me about that day.


Did that jet fuel really cause those fires to destroy those building like that? What I mean is, we have all used fuel to light fires. The fuel is gone pretty fast. Try lighting a grill sometime with starter fluid! We all know how that shit goes! So, if I put jet fuel on my briquettes, would I come out a half hour later, and find my grill in ashes on the ground?

Why wouldn't the jet fuel just burn up in a flash for the most part upon impact?
Yyz,
I initially questioned that a bit myself and after some research, I am certain that the fuel was a key element in the collapse but it cannot turn steel to ash or melt steel to a molten state. Here's what I know to be true.
Upon impact the fuel was randomly dispersed in a wide area. Jet A, does not burn at extremely high temperatures, but it does ignite at much higher temperatures them gasoline. I've thrown a lit cigarette into a drip pan full of jet A many times and it goes out like it's water. In jet engines the fuel is ignited using a "jet burner" type flame. Fuel mixed with air in a controlled manner in a confined area. The fire in the towers was a diffuse flame meaning the elements of fire were ambient not controlled. This makes for an even lower burn temperature than when in a jet burner scenario. When the planes hit and the fuel dispersed everywhere not all of it ignited immediately and not all of it burned at the same temperature. That's extremely important. Temperature and heat are not the same thing. The temperature of the fire would have attained or surpassed 500? Celsius in even the most diffuse flame. In some areas it may have reached 650?C. That is more than sufficient to weaken a cementite steel. The trade towers consisted of 95% air. The construction of it was a cantilever structure consisting of compartmentalized steal beams and outer support tubes. Each floor had joists that provided cantilevered support to the structure. These joists were covered in concrete and became the floors. They were held in place by "clips" or brackets might be a better description, I'm not sure of the technical term. Anyway, earlier I stated that heat and temperature are not the same. Temperature is an intensive property while heat is an extensive property. The dispersal of fuel upon impact caused the heat of the fire to weaken the steel structure unevenly. When steel is heated to 450?C it's hardness properties go from cementite, to austentite, which is a weak steel and the outer tubes designed to pick up the slack if one fails all began to bow outwardas a result of the weakened conditioned. Now all those joists that held the upper floors in the highest heat areas began to give way. When the upper floors collapsed straight down upon the one below it all the potential energy stored in that floor is released through heat and sound. So each floor that let go increased the heat of the reaction and it created a domino effect. Thus the inward collapse and relatively little debris. That's what I believe happened because scientifically that's what should have happened. There was no lateral load that would result in tipping or anything like that.

This also allsys scrapman's assertions that one of the buildings had no core. It did, it just all fell down upon its own weight.

Sorry for the lengthy response but I felt it was necessary to explain it. I think your grill will be fine brother.
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Fat Daddy Cool you are a complete fukin moron. Because there's supposed jet fuel burning in the buildings this is going to be the first time in fukin history a rise has come down due to fire? That is impressive. .. how much jet fuel was in building 7? How and the fuck did those fires start? building seven a 47 foot high rise is going to come down due to fire?O and let's not forget this would the be the first time in fukin history 3 high rises came down due to fire... 2 supposedly fell because of jet fuel and fire..????.. and you have no fuckin clue about how any science can come in to play that day. Shut your ignorant fukin mouth. You sound like one them paid actors to go on TV and give there two cents about what the fuck they think happened. Dumb ass.

:facepalm: fuck me.
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
There wasn't one piece of dust that was bigger than 80 microns...
That's called molecular dissolution. .. I bet you don't have a fuckin clue what it is let alone how it works or how its generated/dispersed/made? . ... . Go read what the seismic recordings of wtc1 wtc2 wtc7....
Wtc1 came down at a 2.3... The equivalent of 20 floors not 110
Wtc2 came down at a 2.1... The equivalent of 16 floors not 110
Wtc7 came down at a 0.6....The equivalent of 2.5 floors not 47.

.... :popcorn2

Fukin dummy


And for the record I generally steer towards the Republican side and yes I did vote for Bush twice...I'm not some left wing idiot liberal... However this 911 incident is just to much of a fairy tale when you start diggin and stop listening to what the media and TV feeds you. .. it's amazing how many people with credible knowledge of many different incidents that day were not able to talk and give there stories to the media.... and its amazing how many people disappeared who had credible knowledge of the inside trading that went on just before the towers exploded... however 90% of this population doesn't have a fukin clue... gee I wonder why.

And fdc I don't knock your intelligence about aviation I just think some of your comments about this matter are a bit shallow and dry... just my worthless opinion...
 
Last edited:

fatdaddycool

Chi-TownHustler
Forum Member
Mar 26, 2001
13,718
275
83
60
Fort Worth TX usa
You want to talk about science you fukin dummy. ..


There wasn't one piece of dust that was bigger than 80 microns...
That's called molecular dissolution. .. I bet you don't have a fuckin clue what it is let alone how it works or how its dispersed. ... . Go read what the seismic recordings of wtc1 wtc2 wtc7....
Wtc1 came down at a 2.3... The equivalent of 20 floors not 110
Wtc2 came down at a 2.1... The equivalent of 16 floors not 110
Wtc7 came down at a 0.6....The equivalent of 2.5 floors not 47.

You want to bring up science...explain that with your science fdc... go ahead I got all fukin day.... [emoji14]opcorn2

Fukin dummy


And for the record I generally steer towards the Republican side and yes I did vote for Bush twice.... However this 911 incident is just to much of a fairy tale when you start diggin and stop listening to what the media and TV feeds you. .. it's amazing how many people with credible knowledge of many different incidents that day were not able to talk and give there stories to the media.... and its amazing how many people disappeared who had credible knowledge of the inside trading that went on just before the towers exploded... however 90% of this population doesn't have a fukin clue... gee I wonder why.

And fdc I don't knock your intelligence about aviation I just think some of your comments about this matter are a bit shallow and dry... just my worthless opinion...
Sushi,
Your response is childish and, as you stated, worthless.

You want science, here it is. The construction of all the buildings was designed to be light weight and cantilever requiring about 20% of the cementite materials normally used in other constructions at that time. The outer structure of the building used steel columns that were laterally supported by a series of tubes in a cantilever construction. There was nothing in the middle of the building in the way of support other than the floors which were nothing more than joists designed to provide reflexive rigidity in terms of lateral force, high winds and such. When steel is heated to 400-450?C it begins to soften and will continue to soften as long as it's heated. So why don't we apply actual real time science to this scenario, not the science you're reading on a blog. I'm talking about accepted empirical practices. If you were to build an exact scale replica of all buildings involved and provide enough fuel to burn for hours on end in a diffuse setting which would provide varying degrees of heat to the respective floors, that heat will soften the metal structure unevenly but will most certainly soften the steel. That's not up for debate. That's how it works. To continue, I previously mentioned the joists that made up the interior structure of the entire building(s) acted as the various floors. The metal that held those floors/joists in place became weakened and soft. When the first one fell down on top of the one below, which was also weakened and soft, two things will happen. The potential energy that was built up in the mass and velocity of the floor above crashing down upon the one below will be released. How will that potential energy be released? Two ways, sound and fucking heat. As mass and velocity increase so does the potential energy released. Guess what all that heat energy does, and it's quite significant? It releases more heat and sound, raising the temperature of the steel exponentially, thus you get the "red hot steel" that scrapman spoke of at the point where the most heat energy is released. That would be the 20 meters of steel that was below ground etc... or as scrap put it, the bottom of the pile. All of what I just said is not hypothesis but scientifically proven data. The structure blueprints are readily available. The materials used made up only 5-7% of the entire area of the structure. Heat softens steel at 450?C and the buildings collapsed exactly as they would have if they had little or no lateral force upon them which they did not.
Now I will say that some of the steel and tubes were distorted upon impact which is to be expected. The whole potential energy thing again.
Now if you want to talk about molecular dissolution and all that we can. I promise you I'm quite well versed in all things science especially chemistry and biology so let's talk about it. Oh wait that's right, we already did. You see sushi, when we talk about steel being weakened we are taking about the molecular composition of the steel itself. While the compound remains the same the bonds are weakened. Do you know what type of bonds we're taking about? I'll give you a moment to Google it. ............. no not covalent.......no not ionic either....... it's really easy, it's called a metallic bond. Do you know why? Do you know why metals are conductive and rigid? Metals in the periodic table readily give up electrons from their outer shells and sometimes these electrons are released into a type of electron cloud that constantly swirls and moves around the bonded atoms, thus providing an excellent conductor for heat.

Science bitch.

Now, let's recount your explanation of the collapse. You contend that the airplanes never even existed and that all those people that perished in their seats on those aircraft never existed either. You're pond scum for asserting that in my opinion but we're still discussing who's opinion is to be taken seriously. You say that the government conspired to use holographic images of aircraft crashing into the buildings which had been previously laden with explosive charges. This would involve hundreds if not thousands to hold their silence for life about their involvement in the plot, when the most hardened criminals cannot hold their silence for an hour when presented with a shortened sentence.
My version states that religious fanatics hijacked a plane and flew it into the buildings. I do believe the collapse was far more than the terrorists had hoped for but I digress. I explained the collapse in simple yet proven scientific methodology terms, even accounting for the smoking gun of the "red hot steel" scrap was so concerned with.
Your explanation relies solely on your readers mistrust of government and the idea of "super technology" that you can neither explain nor give an example of.
My explanation relies on the evidence on the ground and the empirical data collected from the disaster.


Here's one thing I do know for sure, you have no idea what you're talking about. You move from topic to topic trying to disprove my points and use terms that you have any no idea of their meaning. For instance when you first abbreviated "maximum operating velocity" you used the acronym mov. Later when writing about the same subject you used the acronym vmo, which is correct. Having been in aviation most my adult life I knew what you meant as V-speed terms are quite prevalent. Most recently and only after my post you use the term molecular dissolution and ask if I know what it means without providing any thoughts or explanation on your part as to what it is or what part it may or may not have played in the collapse. The best part of that little piece of ignorance is that I was talking about just that thing in my previous post, you were just too uninformed and ignorant to connect the two thoughts.

So you go on telling me how stupid I am, it's really helping your argument. I hate to tell you this pal but there is much more tangible evidence proving your ignorance and stupidity in your last post alone than you could possibly dispute, even with a hologram.

Science bitch. ..... Science.


Hope this helps,
FDC
 

sushi

Loopis
Forum Member
Dec 3, 2014
1,509
27
0
Hooters
Sushi,
Your response is childish and, as you stated, worthless.

You want science, here it is. The construction of all the buildings was designed to be light weight and cantilever requiring about 20% of the cementite materials normally used in other constructions at that time. The outer structure of the building used steel columns that were laterally supported by a series of tubes in a cantilever construction. There was nothing in the middle of the building in the way of support other than the floors which were nothing more than joists designed to provide reflexive rigidity in terms of lateral force, high winds and such. When steel is heated to 400-450?C it begins to soften and will continue to soften as long as it's heated. So why don't we apply actual real time science to this scenario, not the science you're reading on a blog. I'm talking about accepted empirical practices. If you were to build an exact scale replica of all buildings involved and provide enough fuel to burn for hours on end in a diffuse setting which would provide varying degrees of heat to the respective floors, that heat will soften the metal structure unevenly but will most certainly soften the steel. That's not up for debate. That's how it works. To continue, I previously mentioned the joists that made up the interior structure of the entire building(s) acted as the various floors. The metal that held those floors/joists in place became weakened and soft. When the first one fell down on top of the one below, which was also weakened and soft, two things will happen. The potential energy that was built up in the mass and velocity of the floor above crashing down upon the one below will be released. How will that potential energy be released? Two ways, sound and fucking heat. As mass and velocity increase so does the potential energy released. Guess what all that heat energy does, and it's quite significant? It releases more heat and sound, raising the temperature of the steel exponentially, thus you get the "red hot steel" that scrapman spoke of at the point where the most heat energy is released. That would be the 20 meters of steel that was below ground etc... or as scrap put it, the bottom of the pile. All of what I just said is not hypothesis but scientifically proven data. The structure blueprints are readily available. The materials used made up only 5-7% of the entire area of the structure. Heat softens steel at 450?C and the buildings collapsed exactly as they would have if they had little or no lateral force upon them which they did not.
Now I will say that some of the steel and tubes were distorted upon impact which is to be expected. The whole potential energy thing again.
Now if you want to talk about molecular dissolution and all that we can. I promise you I'm quite well versed in all things science especially chemistry and biology so let's talk about it. Oh wait that's right, we already did. You see sushi, when we talk about steel being weakened we are taking about the molecular composition of the steel itself. While the compound remains the same the bonds are weakened. Do you know what type of bonds we're taking about? I'll give you a moment to Google it. ............. no not covalent.......no not ionic either....... it's really easy, it's called a metallic bond. Do you know why? Do you know why metals are conductive and rigid? Metals in the periodic table readily give up electrons from their outer shells and sometimes these electrons are released into a type of electron cloud that constantly swirls and moves around the bonded atoms, thus providing an excellent conductor for heat.

Science bitch.

Now, let's recount your explanation of the collapse. You contend that the airplanes never even existed and that all those people that perished in their seats on those aircraft never existed either. You're pond scum for asserting that in my opinion but we're still discussing who's opinion is to be taken seriously. You say that the government conspired to use holographic images of aircraft crashing into the buildings which had been previously laden with explosive charges. This would involve hundreds if not thousands to hold their silence for life about their involvement in the plot, when the most hardened criminals cannot hold their silence for an hour when presented with a shortened sentence.
My version states that religious fanatics hijacked a plane and flew it into the buildings. I do believe the collapse was far more than the terrorists had hoped for but I digress. I explained the collapse in simple yet proven scientific methodology terms, even accounting for the smoking gun of the "red hot steel" scrap was so concerned with.
Your explanation relies solely on your readers mistrust of government and the idea of "super technology" that you can neither explain nor give an example of.
My explanation relies on the evidence on the ground and the empirical data collected from the disaster.


Here's one thing I do know for sure, you have no idea what you're talking about. You move from topic to topic trying to disprove my points and use terms that you have any no idea of their meaning. For instance when you first abbreviated "maximum operating velocity" you used the acronym mov. Later when writing about the same subject you used the acronym vmo, which is correct. Having been in aviation most my adult life I knew what you meant as V-speed terms are quite prevalent. Most recently and only after my post you use the term molecular dissolution and ask if I know what it means without providing any thoughts or explanation on your part as to what it is or what part it may or may not have played in the collapse. The best part of that little piece of ignorance is that I was talking about just that thing in my previous post, you were just too uninformed and ignorant to connect the two thoughts.

So you go on telling me how stupid I am, it's really helping your argument. I hate to tell you this pal but there is much more tangible evidence proving your ignorance and stupidity in your last post alone than you could possibly dispute, even with a hologram.

Science bitch. ..... Science.


Hope this helps,
FDC

:violin: you sound smart but most of that is inaccurate


I go from one thing to another quickly because there's so much bs... it's hard to stay with one subject...

can you explain the e4-b please.... and is it capable of projecting holographic images that contain speed, energy, light, heat, movement, ect...? Is it capable of using cgi's technology to manipulate what exactly you see on tv? Was it up in the air that day?

excuse me let me correct that... e-4B

And I'd say just over 1/2 of the comments you stated are inconsistent, and it's obvious your brain is about the size of a pistachio when it comes to discussing technology. .. you have no idea what molecular dissolution is.
Do you know what tritium is? Why was there so much tritium recorded..?

Forget it... don't bother..discussing this with someone of your nature is useless.. I can tell your a narrow minded old school dry Republican that refuses to expand your brain... maybe smaller than a pistachio... I'm now guessing the size of droppings left behind from mice.




Enjoy your day Fat Daddy Cool
 
Last edited:

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,863
670
113
50
TX
:violin: you sound smart but most of that is inaccurate


I go from one thing to another quickly because there's so much bs... it's hard to stay with one subject...

can you explain the e4-b please.... and is it capable of projecting holographic images that contain speed, energy, light, heat, movement, ect...? Is it capable of using cgi's technology to manipulate what exactly you see on tv? Was it up in the air that day?

And I'd say just over 1/2 of the comments you stated are inconsistent, and it's obvious your brain is about the size of a pistachio when it comes to discussing technology. .. you have no idea what molecular dissolution is.
Do you know what tritium is? Why was there so much tritium recorded..?

Forget it... don't bother..discussing this with someone of your nature is useless.. I can tell your a narrow minded old school dry Republican that refuses to expand your brain... maybe smaller than a pistachio... I'm now guessing the size of droppings left behind from mice.




Enjoy your day Fat Daddy Cool

He voted for Obama twice so you know he has no brain...he is left wing moron
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top