Thursday, November 15, 2007

What would Sir Isaac think?

It's sad that the second oldest university in the English-speaking world has disgraced itself like this. I invoke the spirit of Sir Isaac to haunt Doc Seffens and members of Cambridge's governing Regent House.

I have an idea. Take all the Cambridge and MIT "scholars" that have written nonsense about 9/11, add those that have disgraced Purdue and Northwestern, put them in this Cambridge-MIT Institute, and move the whole sordid mess to BP headquarters.

Maybe I'm being too harsh. Maybe this is the best they can do -- show how absurd the official story really is. Maybe this is what MIT's Wierzbicki was trying to do when he said:

To the casual observer, it would appear that the facade of the Twin Towers did not offer any resistance at all, and that the plane's wings and fuselage slice through the exterior columns as if they were made of cardboard. . . How was it possible that the relatively weak, light, and airy airframe damaged the apparently heavy lattice of high strength steel columns? The devastating result of this encounter came as a surprise to the engineering and scientific community or at least to the present authors.

Wierzbicki and Teng, How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center, Int'l J. of Impact Engineering 28 (2003) 601-625, at 602.

No comments: