[911InsideJobbers] Re: Fuel vs. Explosion

Thanks, no problem. One other poitn, which I forgot to put in is that if you
measure the lengths of plane per frame as it goes in, it is fairly even. So, even
if you make the unlikely assumption a pilot accelerated maximally exactly as
he hit (which given the turn he was supposedly making is really difficult I
think), it is not like the plane goes in much quicker and then it slows down,
giving an overall average speed that is the same as before hitting.

I hope that makes sense.

--- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@...>
wrote:
>
> > --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> > Von: "alexldent" <alexldent@...>
> > An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > Betreff: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Fuel vs. Explosion
> > Datum: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:36:58 -0000
> >
>
>
> Alex,
> excellent job :)
>
> I will keep these links in my files.
>
> I'm waiting for this gig since months and wish i had the tools and time
> together to do this kind of stuff again.
> Great development and thanks for putting time and effort into this.
>
> >>>>Show him this, which I just put on my
> blog:
> http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/02/second-hit-plane-did-not-
slow-at-all.html
>
> *The Second Hit Plane Did Not Slow At All Upon Impact*
> If you look at the footage Webfairy has broken down here:
> http://webfairy.org/2hit/ghostplane/index.htm
> you can see how the plane moves frame by frame.
>
> The plane takes ten frames to enter the building.
>
> Webfairy explains here how she formatted the videos, and says the
> videos were taken at 30 frames per second. This is consistent with
> other sources.
>
> Okay, so we know the length of a 767 is 160 feet.
>
> This means it takes 1 second to show 480 feet traveled by the plane
> (160 times 3 = 30 frames per second). So the plane is traveling 480
> feet per second, which works out to 28,800 feet per minute and 5.45
> miles per minute, which works out to 327 mile per hour-- AS IT ENTERS
> THE BUILDING.
>
> So how fast was the plane moving before it entered the building?
>
> The top left clip here shows the plane moving before it hits the
> building. Since the plane is moving against a column of smoke, we can
> use this as reference and see that the camera is not moving significantly.
>
> Before it hits the building, the plane takes 12 frames to cross its
> own length, or 160 feet.
>
> This means it takes 1 second to show 400 feet traveled by the plane
> (30 frames per second divided by 12 frames = 2.5/sec; 160 times
> 2.5/sec = 400 feet/sec). So the plane is traveling 400 feet per
> second, which works out to 24,000 feet per minute and 4.5 miles per
> minute, which works out to 272 miles per hour-- BEFORE IT ENTERS THE
> BUILDING.
>
>
> Right before the impact, the plane takes about 12 frames to cross its
> length, though this is trickier to measure as the camera is moving.
> Nonehteless, it seems extremely unlikely in the few seconds before the
> plane hits that it accelerated significantly -- so we can assume the
> plane did not slow upon impact. If anything the plane accelerated upon
> impact, but this may be due to the limitation in these types of
> measurements. What is clear, however, is that the plane does NOT SLOW
> UPON IMPACT.
>
> HOW CAN THIS BE?
>
> CONCLUSION: Either--
>
> 1) the plane met no resistance upon impacting the steel building
> (which is impossible)
>
> 2) the plane disintegrated sequentially as it entered the wall, and
> this disintegration had no effect on the non-disintegrated part of the
> plane (which seems impossible)
>
> 3) the plane was not real, it was a digital image inserted in the
> footage of the building exploding.
>
> Anyone want to pick a choice?
>
>
> p.s. Oddly, the speed of the second hit varies widely from video clip
> to video clip. The official speed was almost 600 mph, but I don't
> believe this. I think it was probably going a more reasonable 300
> mph-- although if the plane only existed on a computer, it is not
> clear how meaningful this is!
>
> --- In 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com, "Nico Haupt" <nicohaupt@>
> wrote:
> >
> > > --- Urspr�ngliche Nachricht ---
> > > Von: "alexldent" <alexldent@>
> > > An: 911InsideJobbers@yahoogroups.com
> > > Betreff: [911InsideJobbers] Re: Fuel vs. Explosion
> > > Datum: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:25:43 -0000
> > >
> >
> > alex,
> >
> > ralph is aware of holmgren's piece and all our other points.
> > He used to be also a member of '9/11 science and justice alliance',
> > but removed himself after 1, 2 years or so.<<<
>
> --
> Lust, ein paar Euro nebenbei zu verdienen? Ohne Kosten, ohne Risiko!
> Satte Provisionen für GMX Partner: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/partner
>

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911InsideJobbers/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911InsideJobbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/