Nuclear Demolition

[dalai pasha]

LOLqaeda

 

[Jhnking]

There is not a strong enough word in the English language that can show how stupid you sound right now.

 

[AWdeV]

I think "Rgodfrey" comes pretty close.

 

[dalai pasha]

you believe that an empty aluminium tube at subsonic speed can penetrate this, and the jet fuel melts it and then this happens and i am the stupid one?

 

[AWdeV]

Subsonic or not, a plane is still an giant battering ram laden with flammable fuels travelling at an appreciable speed.

 

[Instag0]

you believe that an empty aluminium tube at subsonic speed can penetrate this, and the jet fuel melts it and then this happens and i am the stupid one?

Yes, yes, and yes.

 

[dalai pasha]

and you probably think that you are well read and intelligent. lol. bunch of idiots. aahaha. this is quite funny actually.

 

[Catholic]

Must we really have two moronic conspiracy threads?

Just merge this thing with rgodfrey's.

 

[Sparkyninja]

Maybe this guy is the true peodophile.

 

[dalai pasha]

Subsonic or not, a plane is still an giant battering ram laden with flammable fuels travelling at an appreciable speed.

read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_depth

a plane cannot penetrate, or melt into a steel building. the wings and the engines would fall of. there would be huge debris that would fall down, bot of the plane and the building.

it would crash and fall down. dont you have any understanding of physics? an aluminium tube cannot penetrate a steel building. check the links.

even if it did, it would not cause it to vaporize. the building didnt collapse. it was pulverized.

 

[Goker]

and you probably think that you are well read and intelligent. lol. bunch of idiots. aahaha. this is quite funny actually.

"None of you believe what I'm trying to tell you. Surely I'm the only smart person around here. You're all idiots, haha."

Real classy mate. Certainly not how I would imagine a crazy person to behave.

 

[Pharaoh Llandy]

Well, I don't click on links provided by people I don't know, so I'm just gonna assume that this post:

Does nothing but demonstrate your own stupidity I'm afraid. You know why they don't do nuclear demolition? Because you can do exactly the same thing with conventional explosives at about a tenth of the cost

Mostly sums up what this thread is about. Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone else!

 

[Instag0]

dont you have any understanding of physics?

Unless you have done the math yourself, or have a source to the math, a question like that is really unwarranted.

 

[dalai pasha]

and you probably think that you are well read and intelligent. lol. bunch of idiots. aahaha. this is quite funny actually.

"None of you believe what I'm trying to tell you. Surely I'm the only smart person around here. You're all idiots, haha."

Real classy mate. Certainly not how I would imagine a crazy person to behave.

only a crazy person would believe that a plane, or fire caused by the fuel in the plane, or structural failure can turn steel into dust and dont do anything to paper.

 

[AWdeV]

@Llandy: No, it's clearly about how the wings on a plane are held on by rubber bands and double-sided duct tape.

DP; your youtube links are unreliable sources. Bull**** basically.

 

[Magorian Aximand]

Oh, this again.

Subsonic or not, a plane is still an giant battering ram laden with flammable fuels travelling at an appreciable speed.

read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_depth

a plane cannot penetrate, or melt into a steel building. the wings and the engines would fall of. there would be huge debris that would fall down, bot of the plane and the building.

it would crash and fall down. dont you have any understanding of physics? an aluminium tube cannot penetrate a steel building. check the links.

even if it did, it would not cause it to vaporize. the building didnt collapse. it was pulverized.

I already explained to you the problem with citing impact depth. But even then, citing that article does you no good if you don't actually do the math.

And then the last bit is just hilarious. The building didn't collapse, but rather it was pulverized? What the ****? Do you even know what those words mean? It did collapse, no matter what we think caused the collapse to happen. It (or rather, parts of it) was/were also pulverized, no matter how you think that happened. The problem for you is, the collapse (which obviously happened) is what pulverized so much of the material. Plain and simple.

 

[dalai pasha]

The problem for you is, the collapse (which obviously happened) is what pulverized so much of the material. Plain and simple.

plain stupid.

 

[AWdeV]

Plane and simple.

Fixed that for you, olololol.

 

[Magorian Aximand]

The problem for you is, the collapse (which obviously happened) is what pulverized so much of the material. Plain and simple.

plain stupid.

Sure. That actually deals with the content of my argument. Well done. I'm thoroughly defeated.

Plane and simple.

Fixed that for you, olololol.

Good to see you again, Punster McPunstien.

 

[Radalan]

you believe that an empty aluminium tube

Yes, that's what a  jet airliner is, an empty aluminium tube.

what seems reasonable to a person depends on his knowledge. just check the wikipedia link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_767