Are you comparing a mid air, high altitude explosion / re entry burn up, to a ground impact?


.

Come on, now.
You know the point was that the field of vision of those cameras was extremely limited.

The released videos for public consumption was even more limited. Why is that and where is the debris? I asked where the planes were not what the limits of the cameras were.

Truth is nobody knows the limits of those cameras because the FBI took and buried the videos.

No cameras at the field where flight 93 supposedly crashed.

Where are the planes?


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

for comparison:
This discusses the size of debris pieces, witness & government photos as well,
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/debris.html, References DoD briefing.

also via the same site, crashes into terrain for comparison, only some of which appear to have large intact pieces.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/compare/jetcrashdebris.html

Thanks Jason

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

for comparison:
This discusses the size of debris pieces, witness & government photos as well,
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/debris.html, References DoD briefing.

also via the same site, crashes into terrain for comparison, only some of which appear to have large intact pieces.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/compare/jetcrashdebris.html

Nice stuff. But, even there, we don't know the range of views being shown.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

for comparison:
This discusses the size of debris pieces, witness & government photos as well,
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/conclusions/debris.html, References DoD briefing.

also via the same site, crashes into terrain for comparison, only some of which appear to have large intact pieces.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/compare/jetcrashdebris.html

Thanks Jason

Did you read the links he provided?

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

I put away the argument on the word pull long ago,

So that was what? Oops? You just slipped and happened to make another glaring error?

Now I ask you where two of the four planes are and you refer back to a single word?

Two were destroyed as they flew into the World Trade Center. One was destroyed as it cratered into a field, the other was destroyed as it smashed into a bomb-resistant, reinforced concrete building with blast-resistant windows.

And what of the titanium parts? Did they disintegrate along with the people, chairs, fuselage, and glass?

Yet they did manage to find Flight 77 passenger, Suzanne Calley's, wedding ring and driver's license in perfect condition. ATM card of Flight 11 passenger, Waleed Iskandar, also turns up unscathed, but he wasn't even listed as a passenger on the AA official flight list.

Capt. Jim Ingledue of the Virginia Beach Fire Department and 9/11 first responder recently reported he found the completely unblemished California ID card of a Flight 77 passenger amidst the devastation and rubble at the Pentagon?

Where are the planes? Where are the Pentagon tapes? Why cover up the videos?


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Are you comparing a mid air, high altitude explosion / re entry burn up, to a ground impact?


.

Come on, now.
You know the point was that the field of vision of those cameras was extremely limited.

The released videos for public consumption was even more limited. Why is that and where is the debris? I asked where the planes were not what the limits of the cameras were.

Truth is nobody knows the limits of those cameras because the FBI took and buried the videos.

No cameras at the field where flight 93 supposedly crashed.

Where are the planes?


.

OK, you keep looking for a plane in a 12 foot wide section. Good luck.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

I put away the argument on the word pull long ago,

Now I ask you where two of the four planes are and you refer back to a single word?

bobby, bobby, bobby...


Your the 911 expert. Post some pics in your defense.

Umm, I should have been more explicit.

:) you're too funny MrGray. GIGO when it comes to much of the data you've provided and reprovided. Throw in the likes of John Lear and the other even more ridiculous theories and well, what hope do you have? It's not the amount of data you provide (and reprovide) it's the quality.

Are we to believe that the planes were holograms, military planes remote controlled with missiles, regular passenger aircraft? How does one deal with the questions that follow on from anything other than regular passenger aircraft

If military planes with missiles, what were the missiles for? To bring down the buildings?

If holograms, how was this achieved, acoustically as well as visually (note the planes were seen for miles before reaching their destinations).

How does one integrate this data with the notion of controlled demolition? If controlled demolition where's the supporting physical evidence? Eye-witness testimony is all well and good, and you may choose to discredit mine and those I've talked to, but forensics is better.

Where are the actors involved in this huge conspiracy. Was Silverstein one of them? Where's that evidence of the use of "Pull" as an alternative term for demolition you mentioned back on the 5th that we'd get back to? As this seems to be the only "evidence" the Truthers have when it comes to his involvement.

If the methods used to bring down the towers in a controlled demolition did not use high explosives, where's the evidence of this having been done elsewhere? If it is thermite (or thermate) seen falling from one corner of one of the twin towers, why is this not seen elswhere? Could a controlled demolition of 4 buildings (WTCs 1, 2 & 7 and the Marriot Hotel) really be started by a single thermite/thermate "charge" at one corner of one floor in one of the towers?

&c., &c., &c.

No response to this from You MrGray. Yes "Pull" is in there, but so are many other points, and rather than address them you post some pictures. So I say again, did somebody say side-stepping?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Are you comparing a mid air, high altitude explosion / re entry burn up, to a ground impact?


.

Come on, now.
You know the point was that the field of vision of those cameras was extremely limited.

The released videos for public consumption was even more limited. Why is that and where is the debris? I asked where the planes were not what the limits of the cameras were.

Truth is nobody knows the limits of those cameras because the FBI took and buried the videos.

No cameras at the field where flight 93 supposedly crashed.

Where are the planes?


.

OK, you keep looking for a plane in a 12 foot wide section. Good luck.

How far from impact should we be looking Sarge?


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Are you comparing a mid air, high altitude explosion / re entry burn up, to a ground impact?


.

Come on, now.
You know the point was that the field of vision of those cameras was extremely limited.

The released videos for public consumption was even more limited. Why is that and where is the debris? I asked where the planes were not what the limits of the cameras were.

Truth is nobody knows the limits of those cameras because the FBI took and buried the videos.

No cameras at the field where flight 93 supposedly crashed.

Where are the planes?


.

OK, you keep looking for a plane in a 12 foot wide section. Good luck.

How far from impact should we be looking Sarge?


.

According to this article, 3 to 6 miles, as it is believed that Flight 93 broke up in the air.

---

Calm Chaos Forum...Join Calm Chaos Now

Couldn't get access to the paper I wanted, that describes how alloy powders are made from various metals (including titanium) by high velocity impact into unheated solid material. This technique I've seen used in making powders for cold alloying and making of magnetic alloys as well.

This is produced in a similar fashion described as:
"...solid scrap, billet or machined turnings are processed to remove contaminants, hydrogenated to produce brittle material then ground under argon in a vibratory ball mill, typically at 400 °C for 4 hours at a pressure of 1psi for Ti Grade 5. The resulting particles are angular and measure between 50 and 300 µm"
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium_powder#Pre-Alloyed_Powder_Production

So in a high speed crash, instantaneous fragmenting (rather than powdering) of aged titanium, at cold to possibly several thousand degrees, at much higher pressure than 1psi, doesn't seem that far fetched to me, but I'm no metallurgist either.

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

Are you comparing a mid air, high altitude explosion / re entry burn up, to a ground impact?


.

Come on, now.
You know the point was that the field of vision of those cameras was extremely limited.

The released videos for public consumption was even more limited. Why is that and where is the debris? I asked where the planes were not what the limits of the cameras were.

Truth is nobody knows the limits of those cameras because the FBI took and buried the videos.

No cameras at the field where flight 93 supposedly crashed.

Where are the planes?


.

OK, you keep looking for a plane in a 12 foot wide section. Good luck.

How far from impact should we be looking Sarge?


.

According to this article, 3 to 6 miles, as it is believed that Flight 93 broke up in the air.

Thanks Labbie,

If it broke up in the air I'd expect more things like chairs and bodies to be recovered. Something hit the ground with an apparent wing config, yet nothing found at that touch down area?

Shot down makes more sense, with some bombs dropped to make a crater for a cover story?

Is that weird?

They even made a movie out of this planes story...


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Couldn't get access to the paper I wanted, that describes how alloy powders are made from various metals (including titanium) by high velocity impact into unheated solid material. This technique I've seen used in making powders for cold alloying and making of magnetic alloys as well.

This is produced in a similar fashion described as:
"...solid scrap, billet or machined turnings are processed to remove contaminants, hydrogenated to produce brittle material then ground under argon in a vibratory ball mill, typically at 400 °C for 4 hours at a pressure of 1psi for Ti Grade 5. The resulting particles are angular and measure between 50 and 300 µm"
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium_powder#Pre-Alloyed_Powder_Production

So in a high speed crash, instantaneous fragmenting (rather than powdering) of aged titanium, at cold to possibly several thousand degrees, at much higher pressure, doesn't seem that far fetched to me, but I'm no metallurgist either.

Thanks Jason.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Sure, it's not something you see everyday, materials pulverising into small pieces would take a huge amount of energy for sure. Just how much energy needs to be dissipated with a loaded airliner flying at what? ~300mph? Impacting to a dead stop, along with how resilient the metals are, and how yielding the impact site is must all play their part. I guess I'm not that surprised personally that a plane composed mostly of aluminium [and fuel] would have that kind of reaction [Having been involved with production techniques based on tendency of metal to 'discombobulate' under sudden stress]. Metals are strong in tensile strength but much poorer under compression, but again, I'm not a metallurgist.

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

Couldn't get access to the paper I wanted, that describes how alloy powders are made from various metals (including titanium) by high velocity impact into unheated solid material. This technique I've seen used in making powders for cold alloying and making of magnetic alloys as well.

This is produced in a similar fashion described as:
"...solid scrap, billet or machined turnings are processed to remove contaminants, hydrogenated to produce brittle material then ground under argon in a vibratory ball mill, typically at 400 °C for 4 hours at a pressure of 1psi for Ti Grade 5. The resulting particles are angular and measure between 50 and 300 µm"
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium_powder#Pre-Alloyed_Powder_Production

So in a high speed crash, instantaneous fragmenting (rather than powdering) of aged titanium, at cold to possibly several thousand degrees, at much higher pressure than 1psi, doesn't seem that far fetched to me, but I'm no metallurgist either.

You forgot this most important part. The possible presence of contaminants makes these powders unsuitable for use in critical aircraft applications.

---

You forgot this most important part. The possible presence of contaminants makes these powders unsuitable for use in critical aircraft applications.

Hi Dominique, I'm not referring to the use of powdered metals in the context of being used for airplane parts. I'm using the manufacturing technique as an example of what [solid machined] billet material parts (as are used in planes) may do under extreme conditions. [They may shatter/powder]

In manufacture of metal powders: Solid billet material is also used as raw ingredient, pulverised to fine granules through simple manufacturing process. The conditions to cause the metal to fragment/shatter seem comparatively gentle compared to what I might expect in , for example, the pentagon crash.

Airplane high speed impact: Billet material used for components, sudden impact may impart sufficient stress to fragment the components into small pieces (not necessarily powder, but some parts may react this way if the stress conditions are beyond a threshold).

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

I put away the argument on the word pull long ago,

Now I ask you where two of the four planes are and you refer back to a single word?

bobby, bobby, bobby...


Your the 911 expert. Post some pics in your defense.

Umm, I should have been more explicit.

:) you're too funny MrGray. GIGO when it comes to much of the data you've provided and reprovided. Throw in the likes of John Lear and the other even more ridiculous theories and well, what hope do you have? It's not the amount of data you provide (and reprovide) it's the quality.

Are we to believe that the planes were holograms, military planes remote controlled with missiles, regular passenger aircraft? How does one deal with the questions that follow on from anything other than regular passenger aircraft

If military planes with missiles, what were the missiles for? To bring down the buildings?

If holograms, how was this achieved, acoustically as well as visually (note the planes were seen for miles before reaching their destinations).

How does one integrate this data with the notion of controlled demolition? If controlled demolition where's the supporting physical evidence? Eye-witness testimony is all well and good, and you may choose to discredit mine and those I've talked to, but forensics is better.

Where are the actors involved in this huge conspiracy. Was Silverstein one of them? Where's that evidence of the use of "Pull" as an alternative term for demolition you mentioned back on the 5th that we'd get back to? As this seems to be the only "evidence" the Truthers have when it comes to his involvement.

If the methods used to bring down the towers in a controlled demolition did not use high explosives, where's the evidence of this having been done elsewhere? If it is thermite (or thermate) seen falling from one corner of one of the twin towers, why is this not seen elswhere? Could a controlled demolition of 4 buildings (WTCs 1, 2 & 7 and the Marriot Hotel) really be started by a single thermite/thermate "charge" at one corner of one floor in one of the towers?

&c., &c., &c.

No response to this from You MrGray. Yes "Pull" is in there, but so are many other points, and rather than address them you post some pictures. So I say again, did somebody say side-stepping?

Talk about United 93 all you want on a thread titled Tower Seven, but I'll call it side stepping until the cows come home. I'll get to United 93 and the Pentagon once you've addressed these issues.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I put away the argument on the word pull long ago,

Now I ask you where two of the four planes are and you refer back to a single word?

bobby, bobby, bobby...


Your the 911 expert. Post some pics in your defense.

Umm, I should have been more explicit.

:) you're too funny MrGray. GIGO when it comes to much of the data you've provided and reprovided. Throw in the likes of John Lear and the other even more ridiculous theories and well, what hope do you have? It's not the amount of data you provide (and reprovide) it's the quality.

Are we to believe that the planes were holograms, military planes remote controlled with missiles, regular passenger aircraft? How does one deal with the questions that follow on from anything other than regular passenger aircraft

If military planes with missiles, what were the missiles for? To bring down the buildings?

If holograms, how was this achieved, acoustically as well as visually (note the planes were seen for miles before reaching their destinations).

How does one integrate this data with the notion of controlled demolition? If controlled demolition where's the supporting physical evidence? Eye-witness testimony is all well and good, and you may choose to discredit mine and those I've talked to, but forensics is better.

Where are the actors involved in this huge conspiracy. Was Silverstein one of them? Where's that evidence of the use of "Pull" as an alternative term for demolition you mentioned back on the 5th that we'd get back to? As this seems to be the only "evidence" the Truthers have when it comes to his involvement.

If the methods used to bring down the towers in a controlled demolition did not use high explosives, where's the evidence of this having been done elsewhere? If it is thermite (or thermate) seen falling from one corner of one of the twin towers, why is this not seen elswhere? Could a controlled demolition of 4 buildings (WTCs 1, 2 & 7 and the Marriot Hotel) really be started by a single thermite/thermate "charge" at one corner of one floor in one of the towers?

&c., &c., &c.

No response to this from You MrGray. Yes "Pull" is in there, but so are many other points, and rather than address them you post some pictures. So I say again, did somebody say side-stepping?

Talk about United 93 all you want on a thread titled Tower Seven, but I'll call it side stepping until the cows come home. I'll get to United 93 and the Pentagon once you've addressed these issues.

We're moving forward and onward bobby,

This investigation is not linear and there are no rules to free speech. We are doing well.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

If I believed the official story, I wouldn't be bothered wasting my time debunking the debunkers...

So I "admittedly disbelieve" the "official story" because I challenge the "Truthers"? Does that mean that the "Truthers" in reality believe the "official story"? I'm confused.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

If the official story includes shooting down a plane and hiding the Pentagon crash videos... yes.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

We're moving forward and onward bobby,

This investigation is not linear and there are no rules to free speech. We are doing well.

So it's hit and run then? Hit us with a bizarre theory and run away when it starts to fall apart, but then in two years hope we've forgotten so you can do the same thing over? Forward? Call it what it is, side stepping.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...