X Greetings! You are not currently logged in, but please don't let that stop you from voting up any videos you like. :)
|
| |||||||||||||||
pentagon,911,september 11,simulation Pentagon Crash, Digital Render from Purdue University
Comments  playlists with this video World Trade Center by choggie
who voted for this video bamdrew
- therealblankman
- Nebosuke
- PrinceOfEgypt
- Gunter
- Doug_E_Fresh
- deathcow
- joemawlma
- Voronwe
- SpicyFruit
- BoneyD
- CrushBug
- siftbot
x2Pentagon Crash, Digital Render From Purdue University Related Videos
| Watch this Video NextFriends O' the Sift Top New Videos by Vote                 Subscribe Top 15 Sifters of All Time Top 15 Sifters of the Past Week 15. enon
(138 votes) Newest Appreciated Comments        | ||||||||||||||
Stumble This
Visit http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/ for more information. (not my site)
That said, I'll do a voice-over for them right now: "This is a complicated rendereing of the plane hitting the Pentagon... it took a lot of work... we published the work in some journals... thanks to the NSF for the funding."
It does interestingly show how crazy the descent of the plane must have been.
Watch with your eyes open and your brain switched on and you will see that the simulation shows debris and flames entering upon impact from wing-tip to wing-tip. The original breach in the Pentagon wall, 20 minutes before the wider collapse, has been widely documented as 18-20 feet. 757 winspan of 124ft and 10 inches.
If you still don't get it, give up on yourself.
I questioned Purdue and C. Hoffman was kind enough to respond to me. His one line was-
'We did not model the exterior wall of the Pentagon in our simulation.'
For a simulation tasked 'to produce a vivid reenactment of the impact of the aircraft on the Pentagon building' this is a huge fault. Our own visual observations are testimony to how grossly misleading this simulation is.
"A newly released Purdue University animation showing how fire caused the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11 claims to be independent but in reality has been federally funded and was conducted by individuals with direct links to the Pentagon and the White House."
Source
http://thetruthproject.us/2007/06/22/new-911-study-has-direct-links-to-government-pentagon-black-ops/
The National Science Foundation funds much of the science in this country. To say receiving NSF funding means you're taking orders from the Pentagon and the White House is hilarious.
I mean... where do you think people get funding for this kind of research? The other major institution for scientific research funding in the US is the National Institute of Health, which funds predominantly medical related research.
And as for the Structural Engineer also being involved in research related to the Oklahoma City Bombing, he's a highly published and widely respected structural engineering researcher specializing in reinforced concrete structure stability. He was approached by the visualization research team to help with modeling accuracy.
We are fighters for the sames cause: Science. I fear no matter what proof we give, no matter how rigorous our science, they will never see the logic in our interpretation of the data. Conspriracy theorist grasp so hard onto a belief that to them it is closer to a religion, to which point they will never question again.
The simulate show ving crashed pentagon without engine??
I supose those engine would do HEAVILY damage than the vings.
This simulate is waste of time and it not a evidence at all because you haven't included two engine.
trying to fool us??