Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 107 comments are related to the topic:
i don't think they really went to the moon.
i don't think they really went to the moon.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 107
|
By:
The point being?
|
|
By:
Think of your butter planes Charlie
|
|
By:
Most of us, I think, understood Newton's Laws of Physics at school.
|
|
By:
This is exactly why i cannot trust you to be honest
|
|
By:
Pleas quote me where I said butter planes. You're waffling again.
|
|
By:
It's pointless talking to you because you just make things up and never answer any questions.
|
|
By:
Nope. You say it all of time on your 911 posts. You are all conspiracy theorists you say. Well sadly Charlie herein is where you lie again because you accept that narrative yet you say you understand physics ???
|
|
By:
No Charlie it is pointless talking to you becoz you lie
|
|
By:
Quote me or shut up.
|
|
By:
I have never mentioned butter planes on any thread. Prove me wrong.
|
|
By:
Dont get aggressive Charlie. It doesnt suit you. Looks like you are getting nervous again
 |
|
By:
Lets not get hung up on butter...lets go for margarine instead
|
|
By:
When a compulsive liar is found out he tries to hide behind a sofa
|
|
By:
Come on Charlie out you come
|
|
By:
Ok, if that's what you believe.
|
|
By:
When you grow a pair and start to answer questions I'll come back. Until then you're not worthy of discourse. Just carry on in your fantasy world and you'll be ok.
|
|
By:
Lets just get to the nitty gritty of this one to since i have shown you up for what you are on the london bombing thread... You beleive the narrative for 911 so you accept that the planes that crashed into the towers defied the laws of physics ? Correct ?
|
|
By:
it is not me we are worried about Charlie .. It is the world of contradiction you reside in which is the problem
|
|
By:
John, according to Newton's law what should have happened if a plane collides with a steel structure like the twin towers?
A simple answer please. No waffle. |
|
By:
Not what the narrative says... Thats all i need to know to know its a lie. BOOM BOOM,
|
|
By:
Now you tell me what should have happened if they couldnt aim straight for the window as you indicated earlier ???
 |
|
By:
So you don't know what should have happened?
|
|
By:
Buffoon
 |
|
By:
I dont corresspond with liars DT .. SORRY.
 |
|
By:
ok no problem.
|
|
By:
Somebody seems to have misunderstood Newton's laws.
If only 2 objects in play 1) a plane , 2) steel beam then the equal and opposite applies- although the opinion that a steel berm being fired at 400mph at a commercial jet will not be damaged is only an opinion as no evidence has been presented. Where the laws of physics example falls apart is that a steel beam in a building is no longer just a steel beam. It is anchored in place by the rest of the building. It is no longer a 1000kg beam of steel. It is part of a 10, 000,000 kg building. The steel bar is not going anywhere fast, the energy of the plane collision is going through an anchored steel bar. Then just a case of working out strength of steel bar & what happens to all the energy- sound, heat etc. Why would anyone compare this to hitting a steel bar with a human hand. Just stick to mass & velocity of plane, bar & then some engineering about strength of the materials. Not sure what has got to do with a trip to moon, seems way off topic. |
|
By:
Mex.. Some1 hasnt got a scooby do ..
Here is a clue .. Name begins with an M and ends in an O And heres another ... There aint a whole lot in between those letters. |
|
By:
So you hijack a thread with your 9/11 conspiracy, quote a law of physics, and when someone talks about physics you conveniently go back to how they don't have a scooby? You have now refused to respond to two legitimate questions on your off topic claim.
Please don't do this. Don't hijack a thread. At least save others from your usual nonsense. |
|
By:
Y.A.W.N.
|
|
By:
John
You bought Physics into this thread even though you have been previously told (by somebody else) to gain an education. You claim it makes no difference if a 400,000kg plane crashes into a 100kg steel beam at 100m/s or if it is the 100kg steel beam also travelling at 100m/s crashing into a stationary 400,000kg plane. Really? Would you care to calculate the Kinetic energy in your two examples just to show you are correct & that you do understand basic Physics. Maybe once you have posted your two calculations you could clarify which user of the forum "doesn't have a Scooby do"? |
|
By:
i didnt notice anything from jwh when the orgy of moon commemoration was going on worldwide. every paper and all news channels went on about it. yet jw, usually prolific, was silent. how odd. embarrassment? unable to get up, such was his devastation at being proved an idiot? or silenced by the illuminati, who didnt want their party spoiled by a great seeker-after-truth? the huge number of seriously clever scientists from dozens of countries rolled out to talk about the event must have troubled even an intellectual colossus like jw. how frustrating it must be that you know something did not happen, but 100% of experts in the field say you are a loon. incredibly frustrating. a bit like adolf in the bunker ranting against the world. they are all wrong!
luckily, hes now come to life and will crank it up again. |
|
By:
LOL Search for where JWH (who constantly insults others for being scientifically clueless but fails to consider that on a forum this large he will be dealing with some very educated people, and they won't be conspiracy nuts, and he will be laughed at) gets his quote from. He's getting his "awesome physics knowledege" from a copy and paste of a 9/11 conspiracy book written for and read by the tin foil coiffured and then repeated on scientifically illiterate conspiracy nut sites.
|
|
By:
The 6:05 one I mean.
|
|
By:
Armstrong forgot to pack his camera when they were packing up to leave the moon,some day someone will go back and get it,but somehow i think it may be a candid camera
|
|
By:
Was it covered under his travel insurance?
|
|
By:
JWH claims he has an A level A grade in common sense. Yet when you ask him what should have happened when the planes collided, he doesn't know. But he claims what happened shouldn't have happened, because of Newton's third law.
I have a 96% in Alevel physics. Plus an engineering degree. I would say I am eligible to at least have a decent discussion if he is willing to elaborate on how he thinks the planes did not conform to Newton's third law. But he doesn't want to discuss. All he knows is how to make fun of people who question his funny claims. Remember he's the same guy who said in 2001, you couldn't make a phone call from a plane. When I pointed out you could do that in 1984, he got so p1ssed that he nicknamed me the airfone troll. |
|
By:
Y.A.W.N.
|
|
By:
dt: I would say I am eligible to at least have a decent discussion if he is willing to elaborate on how he thinks the planes did not conform to Newton's third law. But he doesn't want to discuss.
JHW: YAWN The Waffler can't explain anything. A pity because I was looking for him to explain Newton's Second Law in the context of the Twin Towers. |
|
By:
Y.A.W.N.
|
|
By:
Armstrong forgot to pack his camera
Cameras then weren't like they are now. They had to adjusted for changes to light and distance. Imagine trying to take snapshots with a camera strapped to your chest and no viewfinder to look through. Or trying to adjust the camera wearing thick inflated gloves when you couldn't see what you were doing. Yet all the pictures came out perfectly focused and centralised. Still think the pictures weren't shot in a studio? |