IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
William "pinch" Paisley Strawman Arguments, aka Tristan1961, trebor, Rick Montez, streetcar, +15 other socks

rob balsamo
post Feb 21 2012, 12:39 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,688
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



I've been informed duhbunkers are still trying to push their strawman arguments regarding a statement made in the below quote. I've added a few edits for clarity so I am bumping this thread split from our Latest News section.


QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Jun 28 2010, 08:11 AM) *
The govt expects us to believe a 767 with its bulky airframe can pull G loads and maneuver to strike a target with a 25 foot margin for error each side of wing tip -- almost 80 knots faster than the structural failure limit of a slick P-51 airframe?

I dont think so.

That is why you see so many experts speaking out.

http://pilotsfgor911truth.org/core

The list grows.




Again, it's not so much duration rather that when it hits its "design limits" it breaks. Period. (Edit: This statement needs clarification as duhbunkers are trying to spin it... They love to cherrypick and spin... This does NOT mean that 1 knot over Vd and it breaks, there is a difference, we are speaking in terms of a "design limit" of anything... note the quotation marks. If you bend a pencil, when does it break? At it's "design limit". When anything breaks, it is safe to say it hit it's "design limit". This is why I put "design limit" in quotation marks. This was clarified with my original statement below, but duhbunkers apparently weren't able to comprehend the meaning of the language in context. Hopefully this clear it up for them, but I doubt it. The duhbunker most responsible for this type of cherrypicking is trebor/pinch/sweetpea/streetxcar + 15 other socks. His real name is Bill Paisley. He is a Military flight school washout who couldn't make it to the front seat nor obtain an FAA pilot certificate and now works for the Pentagon as a Blogger cyber-stalking our work and me personally. It wasn't until I threatened to report him for cyber-stalking that he stopped sending harassing emails. Now all he can do is attempt character assassination through his daily obsession. Learn more here on Trebor)

Keeping it simple, how long can you hold a pencil at its breaking point? You cant, because it already broke. Its called a breaking point for a reason.

American 587 lost it's tail during a wake turbulence upset, losing control, killing all on board.



I think it's safe to say it hit it's "design limit"?

This happened well below Vd, at departure speeds.

Edit2: As expected, duhbunkers still don't understand my edit above and are in full spin mode piling in as many clowns as they can. Let me see if I can further clarify.

Note in my original post I stated "Notice the "Limit Dive Speed" in the above diagram. The "Limit Dive Speed" (Vd) for the 767 is 420 knots. 425 KEAS is when Egypt Air 990 broke apart in flight."

Now if I thought an aircraft "breaks apart at 1 knot over Vd", my original statement above based on the analysis found in 9/11 World Trade Center Attack contradicts such a premise as EA990 did not suffer structural failure at 1 knot above Vd. It happened at 5 knots above. This was it's "design limit" in the context of this post. Other aircraft suffered structural failure at 20, 30, 50, 70 knots over their Vd (Dive speed), some well before (as is the case with AA587). This was their "design limit", again, in the context of this post. Not one positively identified aircraft in the history of aviation has EVER exceeded Vd (Dive speed, end of flight envelope and beginning of the structural failure zone on every V-G diagram) by more than 150 knots and maintained control, stability and/or structural integrity. We are still waiting for the duhbunkers to provide one.

It is also interesting to note that duhbunkers like to call me a fraud, yet I can be verified in the FAA database. Meanwhile, every single person they source who claims to be a pilot (maybe three total.. .as not many more will endorse their crap), do not know the difference between Vne and Vmo, cannot determine the difference between an A320 and a 757, and are all anonymous.

Now, since the duhbunkers still won't comprehend what was just written...

If Obwon had asked - "Also, when a craft exceeds Vd, how long can it be expected to survive?"

I would have told him - It depends on conditions and aircraft. But if comparing apples to apples, based on EA990, the aircraft reached 425 knots before suffering structural failure. This is 5 knots into the structural failure zone of a 767 V-G diagram. This is 85 knots less than the speeds reported for the South Tower aircraft. As speed increases, flight conditions become exponentially worse. Also keep in mind that the South Tower aircraft pulled more G's than EA990 as well.

Duhbunkers still won't get it, or will try to spin it, but layman and real pilots will be able to understand.

Bottom line, I never claimed an aircraft "instantly breaks apart at 1 knot over Vd" or "as soon as a plane passed the red zone on [the] diagram then it would instantly break apart". Our own analysis proves we never would make such a statement based on EA990 analysis alone. Duhbunkers have nothing but strawman arguments, character assassination, are obsessed with our work yet will never confront us... and will certainly never debate the facts. As usual.

Again, you don't get flak unless you're over the target.



It's mainly only one duhbunker who is still pushing such a strawman as described and indicated above. Again, he is pretty obsessed with our work and me personally, not to mention a cyberstalker. He has been stalking us for the past 6 years, nearly daily... He is so obsessed he even created a screename based on my name, "trebor" is Robert spelled backwards.

Learn more about "trebor" here....
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10803766


and here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=13872


other socks used by "trebor" are Pinch, sweatpea, Rick Montez, streetcar, Tristan1961 and about 15 more....

Seems he is pretty upset that he couldn't make it to the front seat... or perhaps he has other issues, who knows. I wouldn't be surprised if he has a "shrine" at home in his closet with a collage of P4T analysis and pictures of me, sort of like a demented serial killer in training. Someone should give that guy a psych eval before he hurts himself or others. I personally would welcome him to knock at my door... but we already know he doesn't have the nads to debate us face to face.

In short, anything that comes out of trebor/Pinch/sweatpea/Rick Montez/streetcar/etc.... you can guarantee is a lie or extremely spun up based on his own cyber-stalking bias.... especially if it is not sourced. Even if sourced, it will be cherry-picked and spun to his own twisted agenda. Demand a source link for full context if it comes from someone like "trebor".

As always, if anyone has any questions, feel free to ask. Then again, not many people pay attention to their BS anymore. I put posts like this up when I get an email or two and for the historical record.

To learn more of the tactics used by duhbunkers, click here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21015

Hope this helps..
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Feb 21 2012, 11:02 PM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



I also see Trebor repeatedly making the claim that the height of the Twin Towers would somehow make them an "easier" target... rolleyes.gif

Doesn't matter if they're 1200 ft or 12,000 ft. They're always going to be 208ft wide!

Twit.

Proudbird claimed that "not ONCE" (bolding his) did "Flight 77" fly over its VMO and that the descent was a "slight hill"!

Even their pseudoskeptic Stutt theory has the aircraft 114ft above the Annex (308ft ASL) and had to descend to strike the lightpoles within 2.5 seconds (notwithstanding the overwhelming evidence of the NOC flightpath and the RADALT exceeding its limitations by almost 2.5 times). 124fps descent at one point! At 540-580mph! By Hani Knievel!

Reality check Proudbird. That "slight hill" is 40ft towards the upper part of that memorial.



"Wee buns" as they say in my country.

He doesn't want to talk about it.

Twit.

Edit: Added another "twit"

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Feb 21 2012, 11:03 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Feb 21 2012, 11:54 PM
Post #3





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 911
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Feb 20 2012, 02:02 AM) *
I also see Trebor repeatedly making the claim that the height of the Twin Towers would somehow make them an "easier" target... rolleyes.gif

Doesn't matter if they're 1200 ft or 12,000 ft. They're always going to be 208ft wide!

Twit.

Proudbird claimed that "not ONCE" (bolding his) did "Flight 77" fly over its VMO and that the descent was a "slight hill"!

Even their pseudoskeptic Stutt theory has the aircraft 114ft above the Annex (308ft ASL) and had to descend to strike the lightpoles within 2.5 seconds (notwithstanding the overwhelming evidence of the NOC flightpath and the RADALT exceeding its limitations by almost 2.5 times). 124fps descent at one point! At 540-580mph! By Hani Knievel!

Reality check Proudbird. That "slight hill" is 40ft towards the upper part of that memorial.



"Wee buns" as they say in my country.

He doesn't want to talk about it.

Twit.

Edit: Added another "twit"



Please, kindly permit me to add "TWERPS" as well, to the above! yes1.gif

Thanks -

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Nov 8 2013, 06:33 AM
Post #4



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,688
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



I've been informed Pinch is now going around FB saying....


"You put big enough engines on anything and it'll go as fast as you want. Space shuttle is the obvious example of this."


Not sure where it is and don't really care.. but it does sound like something a Flight School washout would say... such as Paisley... and it was just too good to pass up without saving it here...


So I guess Bill thinks you can strap one of these to one of these and all will be fine accelerating through Mach 2 at any altitude. laughing1.gif

Psst... Bill.... watch and learn... (since I know you are obsessed with this forum and probably still visit daily)





Is it really any wonder why this guy could never make it to a Pilot seat in the Navy nor get an FAA Pilot Certificate? What an idiot... lol

ETA: And sure enough.. he said it... lol... attached is the screenshot I received. Apparently Paisley doesn't think aircraft structures have aerodynamic limitations. Whoever this "Tiffany" referenced is.. she's pretty smart.. whistle.gif

....but I doubt she used the word "determiner"... sounds like another quote made up by our biggest fan... Paisley.

This post has been edited by rob balsamo: Nov 8 2013, 08:28 AM
Attached File(s)
Attached File  paisley_brain_limit.JPG ( 14.86K ) Number of downloads: 48
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post Nov 8 2013, 01:43 PM
Post #5





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Nov 6 2013, 08:33 AM) *
So I guess Bill thinks you can strap one of these to one of these and all will be fine accelerating through Mach 2 at any altitude. laughing1.gif

ROFL too.

I did something like that when I was a kid, I attached a pair of Jetex to a balsa and tissue flying model Lysander and was left with a load of confetti slowly fluttering to the ground. The plane was much patched from repairs after earlier prangs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 30th September 2014 - 01:53 PM