Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by JKRAP » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:29:08


what happened to DE !

Everyday cars contact  the wall at various ammounts of speed in the wall
direction, but you dont call them 180 Mph head on collisions . Yes they contact
the wall while going 180 mph down the track but it isnt 180 mph INTO the wall.
ONLY a wall  across the start finish line would qualify as Cars driving head on
into a wall at 180 Mph and there would be nothing  left of the bodies to
identify except the fingerprints.

DE was traveling at 180 down the track and then began  drifting up into the
wall at another lower speed. Contact wth tthe wall was at an angle so the speed
equivilent  of a head on collision would be 40 mph or so  .

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by BANDIT29 » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:40:00

Quote:
>Contact wth tthe wall was at an angle so the speed
>equivilent  of a head on collision would be 40 mph or so  .

Not 40......the car was WAY too demolished for it to have only been a 40 mph
impact.

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Dave St.Ong » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:06:36

How many times are you going to post the same damned message???  40 mph or
so..the fact is we don't know exactly how fast he was going, and you
estimate at 40 mph "or so' is pure speculation without any numerical backing
(in other words, A GUESS).  If it were so, you would post your numbers..

Dave


Quote:
> what happened to DE !

> Everyday cars contact  the wall at various ammounts of speed in the wall
> direction, but you dont call them 180 Mph head on collisions . Yes they
contact
> the wall while going 180 mph down the track but it isnt 180 mph INTO the
wall.
> ONLY a wall  across the start finish line would qualify as Cars driving
head on
> into a wall at 180 Mph and there would be nothing  left of the bodies to
> identify except the fingerprints.

> DE was traveling at 180 down the track and then began  drifting up into
the
> wall at another lower speed. Contact wth tthe wall was at an angle so the
speed
> equivilent  of a head on collision would be 40 mph or so  .


 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Lee Aanderu » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:42:02

Quote:

> what happened to DE !

> Everyday cars contact  the wall at various ammounts of speed in the wall
> direction, but you dont call them 180 Mph head on collisions . Yes they contact
> the wall while going 180 mph down the track but it isnt 180 mph INTO the wall.
> ONLY a wall  across the start finish line would qualify as Cars driving head on
> into a wall at 180 Mph and there would be nothing  left of the bodies to
> identify except the fingerprints.

I don't believe you... go out and field test your theories and come back
and let us know.

Lee

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by JKRAP » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:02:02

I Could post the math formulas and Physics equations but do you really think
anyone on this board would understand them or be able to know whether they were
correct or not ?
I bet no one would because the ones that would believe it already know Physics
and dont need to be shown how to come up with the answer. The ones that dont
believe the facts are not going to believe them no matter what. Just like
Blacks that insist that OJ Simpson is innocent. No evedince of any kind will
ever change their mind because they cant understand it anyway !
 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by JKRAP » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:08:09

You dont even have a clue do you ? What was the highest grade you ever got in
Math Class or Trig or Calculus or Physics?  I bet you never had any of them or
you would not be arguing. Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society . Your
rational thinking would make it likely that you believe the earth is flat too.
 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Tony Ba » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:11:47

Your open minded view of the world is as impressive as your "science".

Your "answer" is based on a lot of speculation and guesswork, and really
isn't an answer. I get the concepts that apply here, and I too could come up
with an answer if I had data to plug into the formulas. You seem to have
confused your guesswork with fact, but that is an incorrect assumption. The
problem is that none of us have the actual info (as if it mattered) making
such speculation a bit of a turd hunt. You seem quite impressed with your
superior intellect, perhaps you should find an audience that is equally
impressed.


Quote:
> I Could post the math formulas and Physics equations but do you really
think
> anyone on this board would understand them or be able to know whether they
were
> correct or not ?
> I bet no one would because the ones that would believe it already know
Physics
> and dont need to be shown how to come up with the answer. The ones that
dont
> believe the facts are not going to believe them no matter what. Just like
> Blacks that insist that OJ Simpson is innocent. No evedince of any kind
will
> ever change their mind because they cant understand it anyway !

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Lee Aanderu » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:24:34

You want the highest grade?  Well that would be an "A".  I guess you're
not too picky about which courses.  I don't have a college transcript in
front of me... you wouldn't believe me anyway.

Lee

Quote:

> You dont even have a clue do you ? What was the highest grade you ever got in
> Math Class or Trig or Calculus or Physics?  I bet you never had any of them or
> you would not be arguing. Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society . Your
> rational thinking would make it likely that you believe the earth is flat too.

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Lee Aanderu » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:27:39

I bet you can't.  If you're really a scientist or mathematician you've
heard this before, "Prove it".  We want hard numbers, not guesses or
estimates.  You say impact speed was only 40 mph.  I say it's at least
double that if not triple.  I'm too lazy to spend a bunch of time trying
to figure it out since I haven't used any of this in 15 years and don't
want to know how much I've forgot.

Lee

Quote:

> I Could post the math formulas and Physics equations but do you really think
> anyone on this board would understand them or be able to know whether they were
> correct or not ?

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Tony Ba » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:22:28

Okay, that clears up a lot. I think this is the same approach Einstein used
when people attempted to discredit his relativity theories. Personal
attacks, name calling and a comparison of "grades".


Quote:
> You dont even have a clue do you ? What was the highest grade you ever got
in
> Math Class or Trig or Calculus or Physics?  I bet you never had any of
them or
> you would not be arguing. Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society .
Your
> rational thinking would make it likely that you believe the earth is flat

too.
 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by D. Scott Seder » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:27:51

How many times are you planning on posting this bullshit?


Quote:
> what happened to DE !

> Everyday cars contact  the wall at various ammounts of speed in the wall
> direction, but you dont call them 180 Mph head on collisions . Yes they
contact
> the wall while going 180 mph down the track but it isnt 180 mph INTO the
wall.
> ONLY a wall  across the start finish line would qualify as Cars driving
head on
> into a wall at 180 Mph and there would be nothing  left of the bodies to
> identify except the fingerprints.

> DE was traveling at 180 down the track and then began  drifting up into
the
> wall at another lower speed. Contact wth tthe wall was at an angle so the
speed
> equivilent  of a head on collision would be 40 mph or so  .

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Jerry and Be » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:51:34

No offense intended, Lee, but you're a trout on a fly.   Why waste the
energy?


Quote:
> You want the highest grade?  Well that would be an "A".  I guess you're
> not too picky about which courses.  I don't have a college transcript in
> front of me... you wouldn't believe me anyway.

> Lee


> > You dont even have a clue do you ? What was the highest grade you ever
got in
> > Math Class or Trig or Calculus or Physics?  I bet you never had any of
them or
> > you would not be arguing. Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society .
Your
> > rational thinking would make it likely that you believe the earth is

flat too.
 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Lee Aanderu » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:50:48

Cause it's fun.

Lee (I always pictured myself as more of a Walleye)

Quote:

> No offense intended, Lee, but you're a trout on a fly.   Why waste the
> energy?

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Jerry and Be » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:08:21

OK, then have at him.  Not many walleye here in the Sierra Nevada's!


Quote:
> Cause it's fun.

> Lee (I always pictured myself as more of a Walleye)


> > No offense intended, Lee, but you're a trout on a fly.   Why waste the
> > energy?

 
 
 

Head On Crash into a wall at 180 mph IS NOT

Post by Fish Ma » Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:33:11


Quote:
> Okay, that clears up a lot. I think this is the same approach Einstein
used
> when people attempted to discredit his relativity theories. Personal
> attacks, name calling and a comparison of "grades".

he shoots....HE SCORES!!!

Quote:


> > You dont even have a clue do you ? What was the highest grade you ever
got
> in
> > Math Class or Trig or Calculus or Physics?  I bet you never had any of
> them or
> > you would not be arguing. Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society .
> Your
> > rational thinking would make it likely that you believe the earth is
flat
> too.