Rob Balsamo's Physics of Conspiracy

[paul w]

The latest 911myths has another nail for the inside jobbie coffin:

"9/11: Attack on the Pentagon combines meaningless technobabble with hand-waving and curve-fitting to one short segment of a specific flight path that has been carefully selected for its implausibility.

The generalization from that one flight path to all possible flight paths is completely unjustified. It is easy to describe plausible flight paths whose g-loads are well within the capabilities of a Boeing 757, and I have done so in this review.

The video amounts to an argument from authority. The self-assuredness of Balsamo's video monologue, combined with his sneering contempt for critics, is designed to convince viewers that he really does understand the physics and mathematics, while his detractors do not. In reality, Rob Balsamo is a former airline pilot with no discernible skills in mathematics or physics and a history of making outrageous mistakes in his calculations.

If you approach his video with an open mind, however, then it should occur to you to wonder what people who are fluent in calculus and Newtonian mechanics think of its arguments.

Now you know."

http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/will/Mus.../balsamo2.html

[Victor]

How is it physically possible for a 757 to fly at just above ground level for 1/4 mile or so as is the official story?


Its ok if the jet is taking off or landing to be so low and not crash into the ground - but not in level flight.

I really would like to believe the official story but it just sucks and is physically impossible.

[Victor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSeZ1eQzDvI

A 757 with such a large wingspan would be physically unable to fly as low as the official story claims - due to ground effect.

[paul w]

"A 757 with such a large wingspan would be physically unable to fly as low as the official story claims - due to ground effect."

Er, so okay, Victor, tell us how it is they can land the plane....

[Victor]

Landing is not done at full throttle - the official story is the hijacker was skimming 2 or 3 feet above the ground for 1/4 mile then slammed it into the Pentagon.

Now this is not my story - it is the official story kk.


Ground effect would be most severe at full speed so there is no way anybody can fly a 757 at 2 or 3 feet for 1/4 mile at the alleged speed because the wings are creating two massive vortex which would prevent the jet from skimming so close to the ground.


http://www.rinf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12845


On landing the air speed is reduced hence the jet can then land safely because the lift vortex from the wings is reduced kk.

[paul w]

Wrong again, Victor.

Ground affect is at its worse at lower speeds, hence the reason pilots have to be aware of it when landing - it means the plane can 'float' over the expected landing point.

The pilots at the Pentagon would've been helped by it, but it's not as critical as when at landing speeds.

I covered this topic with Ashley, some time back. Go to the relevant post in the archives, or search the internet.

But...we all know that 'aint gonna happen.

After all, why spoil a perfectly good fantasy.

[Beavis & Butthead]

You tell en PW.

Ehhhhhhhh


Yeh,


Coz if the jet was stopped still it would have more lift right and go up and up into the sky.


Ehhhhhhh Ehhhhhhh ehhhhhhhh



You are so good PW, we wish we had your brain. Ehhhhhhh Ehhhhhhhh



Yeh, there is no need for a jet to run down a runway to get the lift it needs to take off COZ it gets more lift at lower speeds.

Ehhhhhhh Ehhhhhhhh ehhhhhhhhh


We could have flown at 2 inches coz we would have gone even faster than them terrorist Muslims.

Ehhhhhhh ehhhhhhh ehhhhhhh