High School Physics solve 9/11

[CurveLight]

you fucking moron. the scribd link is to a DOJ document. if you want the actual paper then do what i have told you about a half dozen times already... file a FOI request.

so where is your fbi document?

If the scribd link is to a DOJ document then link a reliable source. Or are you claiming the author of that scribd link is the only one on the entire net who has that document? You're such a hypocrite because when troofers post links to anything but msm sources you cry foul for them citing unreliable sources then you do the same fucking thing.

i told you in one of the first posts how to verify it. so go ahead and do it. have your mom take away the crayons and give you a big-boy pen and fill out the FOI request form. then borrow the money for the stamp from your mom and send off your little request.

Basically you can't provide a credible source for the DOJ document so you try to hide that by living in divecon candyland. Is your Zipcode there still 00000 to represent Loserville?

 

[Fizz]

If the scribd link is to a DOJ document then link a reliable source. Or are you claiming the author of that scribd link is the only one on the entire net who has that document? You're such a hypocrite because when troofers post links to anything but msm sources you cry foul for them citing unreliable sources then you do the same fucking thing.

i told you in one of the first posts how to verify it. so go ahead and do it. have your mom take away the crayons and give you a big-boy pen and fill out the FOI request form. then borrow the money for the stamp from your mom and send off your little request.

Basically you can't provide a credible source for the DOJ document so you try to hide that by living in divecon candyland. Is your Zipcode there still 00000 to represent Loserville?

you lied and said there was no evidence. i provided three pieces of evidence. you dont like them. i get it. it doesnt mean they dont exist. the fact is that you lied and got caught.

..again.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Lets just end this bullshit once and for all:

WHEN YOU RAM FULLY LOADED, FULLY FUELED JUMBO JETS INTO BUILDINGS, THOSE BUILDINGS WILL FALL.

No physics degree necessary to figure that out!

Now, shut the fuck up already!

This is the kind of rubbish you get from BELIEVERS.

Can't get the facts right and exaggerate to support the idiotic BELIEF.

The planes had a fuel capacity of 25,000 gallons but only contained 10,000 gallons. So how is 40% of full capacity fully fueled? The plane that hit the north tower was 141 tons but the maximum take off weight for that design is 200 tons. So how was it fully loaded?

Skyscrapers must be designed to support their own weight. Therefore lower levels must be strong enough to support the combined weights of all levels higher up. But making them stronger means putting in more steel which makes lowerlevels heavier.

So why haven't people claimimg to know physics been demanding information on the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of the towers? Physics without DATA. ROFL

Let's see someone build a physical model that can support its own weight but collapse if the top 15% is dropped on the rest from not moer than 10% 0f the height.

I can't do links yet.

watch?v=caATBZEKL4c
YouTube - Gravitational Collapse onto Cumulative Supports

watch?v=9YRUso7Nf3s
YouTube - 9/11 Experiments: The Arbitrator of Competing Hypotheses

psik

 

[Fizz]

yawn.....


find any proof of anything other than airplanes crashing into the buildings and the subsequent fires causing the collapses yet?

 

[psikeyhackr]

yawn.....


find any proof of anything other than airplanes crashing into the buildings and the subsequent fires causing the collapses yet?

Why don't you PROVE that airliners could do it?

You want to keep it on the level of people BELIEVING things. BELIEF doesn't require accurate data about the buildings. The NIST report never even specifies the total for the concrete in the towers.

Physics has been reduced to the level of rhetoric, oratory and sophistry on the subject of 9/11. That is nothing but stupid crap. People need to be kept from understanding Newtonian physics to go along with the idiotic official theory.

Not being able to specifythe weight of a floor assembly after arguing about whether or not they pancaked for EIGHT YEARS is pretty stupid.

psik

 

[Fizz]

Why don't you PROVE that airliners could do it?

thats easy. go look at the skyline of NYC and notice that two towers at the south end of the island arent there anymore. its been this way since they were hit by two jetliners.


or are you going to try to claim its a coincidence that the towers collapsed the same day they were hit by jets...

 

[CurveLight]

i told you in one of the first posts how to verify it. so go ahead and do it. have your mom take away the crayons and give you a big-boy pen and fill out the FOI request form. then borrow the money for the stamp from your mom and send off your little request.

Basically you can't provide a credible source for the DOJ document so you try to hide that by living in divecon candyland. Is your Zipcode there still 00000 to represent Loserville?

you lied and said there was no evidence. i provided three pieces of evidence. you dont like them. i get it. it doesnt mean they dont exist. the fact is that you lied and got caught.

..again.

Did fizzbitch fuckwad ever find the doj document or is he still going by unverifiable fantasies?

 

[psikeyhackr]

Why don't you PROVE that airliners could do it?

thats easy. go look at the skyline of NYC and notice that two towers at the south end of the island arent there anymore. its been this way since they were hit by two jetliners.

or are you going to try to claim its a coincidence that the towers collapsed the same day they were hit by jets...

That only proves the buildings were destroyed, not what did it.

You are being somewhat contradictory since WTC7was not hit by a jet.

No, going into that coincidence crap just helps people go off into the sophistry rubbish.

Don't skyscrapers have to hold themselves up? Doesn't that mean every level had to be strong enough to support the weight above? Doesn't that mean the designers had to figure out how much steel to put on every level before the holes for the foundations were even dug?

So why haven't the people claiming to know physics beeen demanding to know the TONS of STEEL and TONSof CONCRETE that were on every level since 9/11? How do you do physics without data? Where does the NCSTAR1 report specify the total for the concrete in the towers? They specify the total for the steel in three places.

So why is David Chandler the only high school physics teacher with the brains and guts to teach science?

David Chandler AE911TRUTH gives presentation in Visalia, 17.12.2009, Teil 1/7
watch?v=dyfkNTocUtY

I am not interested in rhetorical crap. I don't regard it as INTELLIGENT.

Try studying General Semantics.

psik

 

[Fizz]

i dont really give a fuck what you regard as intelligent if you are stupid enough to claim planes hitting buildings and raging fires shouldnt collapse buildings. the facts of the day show that planes hit buildings and they collapsed.

if you are going to try to disprove the obvious you are going to need evidence that something else did it. you have none.

 

[Fizz]

Did fizzbitch fuckwad ever find the doj document or is he still going by unverifiable fantasies?

did mommy give you your crayons yet so you can be a big boy and fill out your FOI request yet?

 

[CurveLight]

i told you in one of the first posts how to verify it. so go ahead and do it. have your mom take away the crayons and give you a big-boy pen and fill out the FOI request form. then borrow the money for the stamp from your mom and send off your little request.

Basically you can't provide a credible source for the DOJ document so you try to hide that by living in divecon candyland. Is your Zipcode there still 00000 to represent Loserville?

you lied and said there was no evidence. i provided three pieces of evidence. you dont like them. i get it. it doesnt mean they dont exist. the fact is that you lied and got caught.

..again.

Did fizzbitch fuckwad ever find the doj document or is he still going by unverifiable fantasies?

did mommy give you your crayons yet so you can be a big boy and fill out your FOI request yet?

Wow....all these months and you still haven't been able to find the evidence you claimed you had. What a useless bitch. See ya!

 

[SFC Ollie]

Oh wow, a new truther that wants us to prove the planes did it instead of proving to us that they didn't.

The planes hit the buildings, the buildings fell, they hit other buildings, all the buildings are gone.

No proof found of pre set charges. No proof of missiles. Only proof found was Jet liners.

Simple enough for anyone to understand.

 

[Fizz]

Basically you can't provide a credible source for the DOJ document so you try to hide that by living in divecon candyland. Is your Zipcode there still 00000 to represent Loserville?

you lied and said there was no evidence. i provided three pieces of evidence. you dont like them. i get it. it doesnt mean they dont exist. the fact is that you lied and got caught.

..again.

Did fizzbitch fuckwad ever find the doj document or is he still going by unverifiable fantasies?

did mommy give you your crayons yet so you can be a big boy and fill out your FOI request yet?

Wow....all these months and you still haven't been able to find the evidence you claimed you had. What a useless bitch. See ya!

what the fuck are you talking about? the evidence is the same. if you want to verify it then you still need to do the same thing. so go ahead and do it if you want.

i was thinking about buying a new phone. can you recommend one that doesnt increase my chances of hitting dead spots as i drive faster?

 

[psikeyhackr]

i dont really give a fuck what you regard as intelligent if you are stupid enough to claim planes hitting buildings and raging fires shouldnt collapse buildings. the facts of the day show that planes hit buildings and they collapsed.

if you are going to try to disprove the obvious you are going to need evidence that something else did it. you have none.

So why don't you explain why that hotel in Peking didn't collapse due to fire?

What's wrong, can't handle the physics?

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7879571.stm

psik

 

[DiveCon]

i dont really give a fuck what you regard as intelligent if you are stupid enough to claim planes hitting buildings and raging fires shouldnt collapse buildings. the facts of the day show that planes hit buildings and they collapsed.

if you are going to try to disprove the obvious you are going to need evidence that something else did it. you have none.

So why don't you explain why that hotel in Peking didn't collapse due to fire?

What's wrong, can't handle the physics?

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7879571.stm

psik

different construction, dipshit

 

[Fizz]

i dont really give a fuck what you regard as intelligent if you are stupid enough to claim planes hitting buildings and raging fires shouldnt collapse buildings. the facts of the day show that planes hit buildings and they collapsed.

if you are going to try to disprove the obvious you are going to need evidence that something else did it. you have none.

So why don't you explain why that hotel in Peking didn't collapse due to fire?

What's wrong, can't handle the physics?

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7879571.stm

psik

concrete core and built after the lessons learned on 9/11.

whats wrong? watch too many youtube videos to be able to think for yourself?

 

[psikeyhackr]

i dont really give a fuck what you regard as intelligent if you are stupid enough to claim planes hitting buildings and raging fires shouldnt collapse buildings. the facts of the day show that planes hit buildings and they collapsed.

if you are going to try to disprove the obvious you are going to need evidence that something else did it. you have none.

So why don't you explain why that hotel in Peking didn't collapse due to fire?

What's wrong, can't handle the physics?

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7879571.stm

psik

concrete core and built after the lessons learned on 9/11.

whats wrong? watch too many youtube videos to be able to think for yourself?

So where is your link providing evidence of a concrete core?

You expect people to take your word?

No comment on a plane not hitting WTC7 I notice.

psik

 

[DiveCon]

So why don't you explain why that hotel in Peking didn't collapse due to fire?

What's wrong, can't handle the physics?

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7879571.stm

psik

concrete core and built after the lessons learned on 9/11.

whats wrong? watch too many youtube videos to be able to think for yourself?

So where is your link providing evidence of a concrete core?

You expect people to take your word?

No comment on a plane not hitting WTC7 I notice.

psik

why dont you actually look it up for yourself
this is something that was debunked YEARS ago
only stupid fucks still try to use it

 

[psikeyhackr]

concrete core and built after the lessons learned on 9/11.

whats wrong? watch too many youtube videos to be able to think for yourself?

So where is your link providing evidence of a concrete core?

You expect people to take your word?

No comment on a plane not hitting WTC7 I notice.

psik

why dont you actually look it up for yourself
this is something that was debunked YEARS ago
only stupid fucks still try to use it

So you need to come up with excuses to not have to supply links to support your own claims?

That means you can CLAIM anything. Great position for the stupid. I am not taking your word and I am not going to research it. If you don't provide the link soon I'll assume you ecpect to be able to lie and be believed without any supporting evidence. That rhetoric, oratory and sophistry crap.

I built and videoed a model and explained how anyone that wants to can duplicate it and conduct the experiment for themselves. All you can do is talk and not provide the links for what you claim.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c]YouTube - Gravitational Collapse onto Cumulative Supports[/ame]

As far as I am concerned anyone that can't figure out why a bottom heavy self supporting structure can't be crushed by its own top 15% is a moron.

psik

 

[DiveCon]

So where is your link providing evidence of a concrete core?

You expect people to take your word?

No comment on a plane not hitting WTC7 I notice.

psik

why dont you actually look it up for yourself
this is something that was debunked YEARS ago
only stupid fucks still try to use it

So you need to come up with excuses to not have to supply links to support your own claims?

That means you can CLAIM anything. Great position for the stupid. I am not taking your word and I am not going to research it. If you don't provide the link soon I'll assume you ecpect to be able to lie and be believed without any supporting evidence. That rhetoric, oratory and sophistry crap.

I built and videoed a model and explained how anyone that wants to can duplicate it and conduct the experiment for themselves. All you can do is talk and not provide the links for what you claim.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c]YouTube - Gravitational Collapse onto Cumulative Supports[/ame]

As far as I am concerned anyone that can't figure out why a bottom heavy self supporting structure can't be crushed by its own top 15% is a moron.

psik

holy shit
how fucking stupid do you have to be to believe the crap you do?