Re: The Undamaged Pentagon Column

From: 1aircraftQAguy (glennab1_at_aol.com)
Date: 09/10/04 

Date: 10 Sep 2004 01:35:52 -0700

Anarch Peak <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message news:<Xns955F7CCD8189Dspamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17>...
> glennab1@aol.com (1aircraftQAguy) wrote in
> news:a83bb3a1.0409090456.1df7e70a@posting.google.com:
>
> > Anarch Peak <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message
> > news:<Xns955E86F1FE7CFspamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17>...
> >> glennab1@aol.com (1aircraftQAguy) wrote in
> >> news:a83bb3a1.0409072224.718f53a5@posting.google.com:
> >>
> >> > "C-Fresh" <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message
> >> > news:<Xns955D712F783D5spamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17>...
> >> >> glennab1@aol.com (1aircraftQAguy) wrote in
> >> >> news:a83bb3a1.0409062311.b5b8e91@posting.google.com:
> >> >>
> >> >> > "C-Fresh" <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:<Xns955CD7B6E9EF0spamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17>...
> >> >> >> glennab1@aol.com (1aircraftQAguy) wrote in
> >> >> >> news:a83bb3a1.0409061709.627ea1c6@posting.google.com:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > "C-Fresh" <master@mason.snuh> wrote in message
> >> >> >> > news:<Xns955C85222BD45spamspamsnuhspam33@207.14.113.17>...
> >> >> >> >> glennab1@aol.com (1aircraftQAguy) wrote in
> >> >> >> >> news:a83bb3a1.0409060002.7d48b53e@posting.google.com:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > "Homeland_Insecurity" <insecurity@homeland.net> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> > message
> >> >> >> >> > news:<n1L_c.24394$lv3.7907539@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >> "1aircraftQAguy" <glennab1@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> news:a83bb3a1.0409051140.3187d8f@posting.google.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> > lensman1955@hotmail.com (lensman1955) wrote in message
> news:<633b063b.0409050253.1253ab23@posting.google.com>...
> >> >> >> >> >> > > "Homeland_Insecurity" <insecurity@homeland.net> wrote
> >> >> >> >> >> > > in message
> news:<Izw_c.11758$lv3.5567285@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > "AbsolutelyCertain" <easily@entertained.net> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > message news:chdeb2$9bm$0@pita.alt.net...
> <stuff snipped for space>
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > According to the ASCE report, 8 columns directly
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > in front of and
> in the
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > pathway of this punchout are structurally sound.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > Some of these
> don't
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > even show any cosmetic damage, yet we wuz able to
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > get dat dare AE
> drive > > > > punch out hole from moving debris.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > Can you review the report and find it?
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha!
> >> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> >> > > > From shrieking to this? Nice.
> >> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> >> > > I never liked the "Booster Gold" response myself! If
> >> >> >> >> >> > > you have the information, post it. If you've already
> >> >> >> >> >> > > posted it, provide a link to the post or post it again.
> >> >> >> >> >> > > And again and again and again if you have to until
> >> >> >> >> >> > > you've made your point.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > "According to the ASCE report, 8 columns directly in
> >> >> >> >> >> > front of and in the
> >> >> >> >> >> > pathway of this punchout are structurally sound. Some of
> >> >> >> >> >> > these don't even show any cosmetic damage"
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > He has provided more evidence of his lying to support his
> >> >> >> >> >> > theory.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Huh, lets take a look.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Yeah, you should..... and even look again!
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Pertaining to the 8 columns directly in front of and in
> >> >> >> >> >> > the pathway of this punchout: Figure 7.9
> >> >> >> >> >> > http://bedoper.com/pentagon/asce/ Which states:
> >> >> >> >> >> > "Cracking and spalling, but no significant impairment
> >> >> >> >> >> > function"
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Figure 7.9 pulled from the ASCE report states "no
> >> >> >> >> >> significant impairment in function".
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> > Since when is "Cracking and spalling, but no significant
> >> >> >> >> >> > impairment function"
> >> >> >> >> >> > equivalent to "structurally sound. Some of these don't
> >> >> >> >> >> > even show any cosmetic damage"
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Since you become a mental midget. Review 2A, moron. See the
> >> >> >> >> >> correlation.
> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=sig
> >> >> >> >> >> nif ica nt& x=2 1&y=17
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Hey dumbass, you wrote "Some of these don't even show any
> >> >> >> >> > cosmetic damage." For your info, cracking and spalling is
> >> >> >> >> > much more than cosmetic.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> Can you find the secret text in the ASCE report?
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Can you convince your *** buddy to tell us?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Aren't you the one with *** buddies? ...... prison bitch.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Harvard Debate Team, I see...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > That must be your team, because we're the MIT team...... Which
> >> >> >> > one has the technical background?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Yes, I'm amazed with your technical skills.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thank you.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> If you look at the legend, the column directly in front of the
> >> >> >> >> "punch-out" shows NO DAMAGE:
>
> >> >> >> > Is that what is taught at Harvard? To mislead, basically to
> >> >> >> > lie? All of the columns "directly" in front of punch out are
> >> >> >> > yellow, which have cracking and spalling damage. You must be
> >> >> >> > refering to the column to the side of the punchout.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Graphic here:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ASCE Report Proves No 757 Hit The Pentagon
> >> >> >> http://www.bedoper.com/pentagon/asce
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > I guess you haven't noticed that the punch out hole is offset
> >> >> > differently in Figure 6.2 than Figure 7.9.
> >> >> > Neither Figure shows an undamaged column directly in front of the
> >> >> > punch out.
> >> >> >
>
> >> >> I do notice you're ignoring the entire issue, at this point.
> >> >
> >> > I've noticed you always say something like that when you've just
> >> > avoided something!
> >>
> >> I suggest you study the diagrams, and tell my why those columns weren't
> >> damaged or destroyed, but the wall was.
> >>
> >> If you can.
> >
> > Well "my" the aircraft was basically shredded and flowing around the
> > columns, however there were some metals that didn't shred.
> >
> > The columns were much stronger and had less surface area than the
> > wall.
> >
> > F = A x P applies. Can you figure that one out?
>
> Flowing around the columns?

You better straighten out those PhD CE's, I believe they used the word
"flow or fluid."
 
> And then joined together again to make a round exit hole in a wall?

The mass of debris was not only acted upon by the columns, it was also
acting upon itself. Any force in one direction was countered be an
equal force in the oposite direction. Mr. Newton again.

> Who do you expect to swallow this?

I didn't think you'd attempt F = A x P

It's a simple formula for figuring force or pressure applied to
something, when either force (F) (In pounds) OR pressure (P) (In
pounds per square inches, psi) and the surface area (A) (In Square
inches) to which the pressure or force is applied is known.
In this case we don't know the exact pressure or force applied to the
columns and wall, however it's safe to figure they were pretty much
equal and constant, so the exact pressure or force isn't crucial for
this example.

The impact surface area of the wall is many times greater than that of
a column. That is the key to the walls failure.

So, let's plug in some numbers for surface area and use the same
random number for pressure applied to both the column and wall to
compute the comparable force applied to each. I'm going to
overestimate the columns dimensions and underestimate the well
dimensions, so we will know that in actuality the difference would be
considerably greater than shown.

If the column is 12' tall and 21" wide it has an impact surface area
of 3,024 sq. in.
If the punch out hole has a diameter of 10' it has an impact surface
area of 11,304 sq. in.

If you apply 10 psi to both the column and the wall, forces equivalent
to 30,240 pounds were applied to the column and 113,040 pounds were
applied to the wall.

The force on the wall was well over 3.5 times greater than that on a
column (up until failure point). Actually, the force on the wall
would continue to build up at a greater rate than that of a column,
since the column allowed the debris to flow around whereas the wall
didn't.

Now do you see why the wall failed and the columns showed cracking and
spalling.

Probably not..........
 
> >> >> Quibble over semantics.
> >> >
> >> > "Semantics" has basically been your sides whole issue. Hasn't it?
> >> > The "meaning" of the ASCE report?
> >>
> >> Erm, no. How about the obvious lack of the 757 and accompanying damage
> >> in the photos, for instance?
> >> But keep dodging.
> >
> > So, you don't want to see it? I know, you have too much time invested
> > in this to back down now.
>
> Please show us a 757. Or, barring that, since you can't, I will settle for
> starboard engine damage and tail damage.

There are pictures of engine parts in front of the Pentagon, inside
the Pentagon and in the AE drive, do you think they're only from one
engine?
The tail, like most of the aircraft is unrecognizable without closer
inspection.
 
> >> >>There is no way anything made the punch-out while at the same time
> >> > avoiding >the columns.
> >> >
> >> > So the punch out was produced by magic right? Maybe aliens? Maybe
> >> > an inside job? Maybe the 757 wheel that was found outside the hole?
> >> > Maybe just the mass flow? One thing you're not taking into
> >> > consideration is; we don't know what the Pentagon interior layout was
> >> > like, (walls, corridors, obstructions, etc.) it all had an affect on
> >> > the mass flow. > 'effect'
> >>
> >> Is that paragraph above the best explanation you can muster?
> >
> > It was quite a bit more than your response. Just add it to everything
> > else I've written......... And yours...... pretty much the same, as
> > usual.
>
> You're essentially just making things up, now. You're comparing a 757 to
> liquid, and saying it flowed around the columns, then rejoined to make a
> hole in a wall.
>
> Sort of like Terminator 2?

No, a fluid, sort of like the towers when they colapsed, churning
debris, yet flowing.
 
> >> > The columns were avoided? where? Oh yeah, that single column
> >> > adjacent to the punch out hole.
> >>
> >> Right. The wall was damaged heavily, the column not at all?
> >
> > And you decided that based upon what?
> > The way I see it, the damage to that one column isn't addressed by
> > that figure.
>
> There was no damage to that column. The other columns showed only
> superficial damage.
>
> Impossible.

Cracking and spalling isn't superficial!

> >> > The one with the odd color code that
> >> > doesn't match any in the table. Hmmmmmm
> >>
> >> The table legend reads 'undamaged'.
> >
> > Maybe for all the gray colored columns around the perimeter of the
> > damaged area, but not that single dark gray one.
>
> They are all gray, which means "undamaged". Keep squirming.

Isn't it odd that all the grey columns match the grey legend and this
one column is a darker grey than all the rest?
 
> >>If the best you can do is accuse me of
> >> editing photos, I don't know why you bother.
> >
> > Is that what I did? Why, do you feel guilty?
>
> You really suck at this.

Because you're getting your ass kicked!

Quantcast