Regime change, Syria edition.
Regime change, Syria edition.
McClatchy reports, via David Kurtz:
The State Department in recent weeks has issued a series of rhetorical broadsides against Syria, using language harsher than that usually reserved for U.S. adversaries.
“It’s the new Cuba – no language is too tough,” said one of the officials, who like others insisted on anonymity to discuss internal government planning. …
Some officials who are aware of the campaign say they fear its real aim is to weaken or even overthrow Assad and to ensure that he can’t thwart the creation of an international tribunal to investigate the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. A U.N. report has implicated Syrian and Lebanese officials in the murder.
The officials say the campaign bears the imprint of Elliott Abrams, a conservative White House aide in charge of pushing Bush’s global democracy agenda.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The 10 year old boy administration. Do the exact opposite of what the adults tell you to do.
Maybe the US can take on Syria and Iran too. Hell, let’s throw in Pakistan and make it 5 wars at once!
-GSD
March 31st, 2007 at 1:21 pmLet’s have another Iraq real soon!
March 31st, 2007 at 1:22 pmmmm…a tough talking guy that asks for anonymity.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:22 pmAxis of Evil, baby.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pmMarch 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Now that Bush has taken care of Iraq and North Korea, as promised, there are a couple of open slots ; )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil#Definition
March 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pmIt’s wack-a-troll time!
March 31st, 2007 at 1:29 pmThat whole regime change thing worked so well in Iraq, after all. Nothing like replacing a strong (if autocratic) leader with chaos; it’s a great option in the Middle East.
Maybe the theory is that Al Qaeda will move out of Iraq into Syria, The Decider can declare victory, and the US troops can all go home. Pure frickin’ genius.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:30 pmHell, just nuke them all, and let God sort them out.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:32 pmWas there not a link up top for Iranian topics? Did they take it down recently?
March 31st, 2007 at 1:34 pmSince Bush has taken care of Iraq and North Korea, as promised, there are some open spots:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil#Definition
March 31st, 2007 at 1:39 pmOff topic,but what the hey,Jake is here.
Instead of everyone being critical of Rosie O’ Donell,especially liberal pundits,why can’t we convene some engineers and discuss exactly why Building # 7 collapsed,yet wasn’t hit by an airplane.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:42 pmThat whole regime change thing worked so well in Iraq, after all. Nothing like replacing a strong (if autocratic) leader with chaos; it’s a great option in the Middle East.
Comment by gummitch — March 31, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Our government has an entire ‘recent past’ (last 50 years) of doing that very thing:
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa02.html
Howard Zinn explained that it’s because we saw European nations divide up Asian countries for their own interests apres WWII that we decided to beat them at their own game… Which I think explains our pre-emptive attack mentality with the Middle East… Easier to lay claim to a land you’ve conquered if you fabricate reasons for attacking them in the first place, and therefore beat out the competition by the sheer surprise of attacking countries for lies…
March 31st, 2007 at 1:50 pmBuilding collapse after earthquakes, without being hit by airplanes, right? What kind of ground movement and impact to the structural integrity of Building # 7 do you think was probable with the collapse of two 100-story concrete and steel buildings next door? Didn’t Tower 2 fall into Building # 7 as well?
March 31st, 2007 at 1:50 pmtorque sez:
Also of interest is the molten steel found at the bottom of the elevator shafts of all three of the fallen WTC buildings, weeks after 9/11.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:51 pmwhy can’t we convene some engineers and discuss exactly why Building # 7 collapsed,yet wasn’t hit by an airplane.
Comment by torque — March 31, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
It’s been done. Seismic forces and fire are the reasons.
Aren’t there whole websites dedicated to this hoax stuff where these conversations are welcomed? You know TP doesn’t want them here, right?
March 31st, 2007 at 1:53 pmThere’s an excellent website called 911myths dot com which debunks everything the 9/11 Truthers ever said.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:57 pmJake sez:
Building 6 was of far less robust construction than Building 7, was much closer to the Twin Towers, sustained horrific damage from falling debree when the towers collapsed, and had fires raging throughout it far in excess of the fires that burned in buildings 1, 2, or 7. Yet at the end of the day, Building 6 remained standing.
March 31st, 2007 at 1:58 pmBuilding 7 was brought down by a Syrian Stealth Aircraft that cannot be seen in the visable light range. They borrowed technology developed by Wonder Woman in the 1940’s. Dick Cheney has details which he will provide on Fox News on Sunday morning.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:00 pmIndeed, let’s go for the full economies of scale! Anyone else we don’t like in the region?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:03 pmYeh Jake Iraq is all “fixed” right? So why didn’t Democracy take hold? Why has Bechtel bailed out? So why are we still there? Oil production is still down. It did not pay for itself. It was never about terror or evil it was about oil. It’s more like the Axis of Oil.
N Korea? Fixed? Don’t make me laugh Jake, He gave them just what they wanted oil and money.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:03 pmDidn’t Tower 2 fall into Building # 7 as well?
Comment by Jake
Not that I know of.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:03 pmBuilding # 7 fell a full six (6) hours after the other towers.
There was also a reporter saying that # 7 had collapsed,but the building was plainly visible in the background-it fell about 20 minutes later.
It’s just so odd that that building fell just like the towers,yet wasn’t hit by a plane.
Yesterday’s announcement that a Congressional delegation led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will meet with Syrian President Bashir Al-Assad during a four nation Middle East swing was sure to raise the ire of the White House. But because the bipartisan group includes the Muslim Minnesota Democrat Keith Ellison, the predictable conservative catcalls of treason are also almost sure to follow.
For the details, see:
March 31st, 2007 at 2:05 pm“Keith Ellison, Syria and the Coming Conservative Smear.”
Building 6 was of far less robust construction than Building 7,
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — March 31, 2007 @ 1:58 pm
That has to be proven. And that is hard to do, because the ‘quality’ of construction is a product of the construction process, methods, and possibility for human error. Even with as-builts, it’s possible that something unintentional and unnoticed could have compromised the integrity of the structure.
There are also other things that have to be considered that may have had an impact. Unfortunately, the urgency of the developers to clear the site makes most of that now impossible…
March 31st, 2007 at 2:06 pmIt’s just so odd that that building fell just like the towers,yet wasn’t hit by a plane.
Comment by torque — March 31, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Not really. NYC isn’t designed to handle California strength Earthquakes, yet the collapse of those two towers produced one.
http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2001/december5/wtc-125.html
March 31st, 2007 at 2:09 pmThere was also a reporter saying that # 7 had collapsed,but the building was plainly visible in the background-it fell about 20 minutes later.
Comment by torque
That is perhaps the most embarrasing moment for BBC in its history.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:11 pmUnfortunately, the urgency of the developers to clear the site makes most of that now impossible…
Comment by unbelievable
Exactly.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:12 pm#
Building collapse after earthquakes, without being hit by airplanes, right? What kind of ground movement and impact to the structural integrity of Building # 7 do you think was probable with the collapse of two 100-story concrete and steel buildings next door? Didn’t Tower 2 fall into Building # 7 as well?
Comment by Jake — March 31, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
David Ray Griffin puts it best:
The Twin Towers came straight down, which means that each building’s 287 steel columns all had to fail simultaneously; to believe this could happen without explosives is to believe in magic.
At the onset of each tower’s collapse, steel beams were ejected out as far as 600 feet; to believe that these horizontal ejections could be explained by gravitational energy, which is vertical, is to believe in magic.
Virtually all of the concrete in the towers was pulverized into extremely fine dust particles; to believe that fire plus gravity could have done this is to believe in magic.
WTC 7 and the towers came down at virtually free-fall speed, meaning that the lower floors, with all their steel and concrete, provided no resistance to the upper floors; to believe this could happen without explosives is to believe in magic.
Pools of molten metal were found under each building. Because steel does not begin to melt until it reaches about 1,540°C and yet the fires could not have gotten over 1000°C, to accept the fire theory is to believe in magic.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:12 pm…the urgency of the developers…
Comment by unbelievable
What was the urgency?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:13 pmLast time I looked there is still a big hole there.
And you guys are talking about the collapse of the Twin Towers affecting Building 7, which stood tall for 7+ hours after the collapse but then suddenly collapsed into it’s own footprint.
Why didn’t surrounding buildings collapse, too?
Why would it collapse 7 hours after the initial collapses of the WTC 1&2?
Think before you speak and base your arguments in science and physics :)
March 31st, 2007 at 2:14 pmtorque:
Did you know, if it hadn’t been for the legal ban on asbestos that went into effect during construction of the WTC, a good engineering argument can be made BOTH towers would still be standing today? There are endless variables but, in the best engineering judgment out there, all the damage is attributable to the terrorists — I think I’ll trust Gene Corley on this one ; )
http://www.asce.org/pdf/3-6-02wtc_testimony.pdf
March 31st, 2007 at 2:15 pmDeniz:
Let me know if you have any questions after you read Corley’s testimony.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:16 pmSince Bush has taken care of Iraq and North Korea, as promised, there are some open spots: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil#Definition Comment by Jake — March 31, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
North Korea is taken care of? The country that *has* WMDs? BAHAHAA, yet you argue Iraq wasn’t taken care of?
You’re a st*pid child – JakeOff.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:17 pmWow! I finally found something to agree with unbelievable about . . .
March 31st, 2007 at 2:17 pmThat is perhaps the most embarrasing moment for BBC in its history.
Comment by Juan C
Yep,that’s the one.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:18 pmThe Twin Towers came straight down, which means that each building’s 287 steel columns all had to fail simultaneously; to believe this could happen without explosives is to believe in magicComment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
That’s not what HAD to happen. Here is what actually happened (it’s from liberal NOVA and PBS):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
The rest of your post didn’t offer proof to your opinions. By insulting people, you don’t automatically get to be right.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:24 pmWhat was the urgency?
Last time I looked there is still a big hole there.
Comment by torque — March 31, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
Different issue… After Daneil Liebskind won the design competition, he and the Developer wound up in court over the bill and the Developer’s alterations to his design… Since then, the firm of SOM took over the project, had to redo everything to fit the changes the Developer made to Liebskind’s design (which is nothing like what won the competition), and that, for anyone who has ever worked on a tower project knows, takes years. There were also some financial issues as a result, by my friend at SOM didn’t elaborate on those…
There are other adjacent towers in the mix as well.
There are some other legal quibbles in there… but as an architect, I know more about the design issues… well, and the way buildings work…
March 31st, 2007 at 2:29 pmIs it possible that the plane that crashed in PA was actually slated to hit Bldg. # 7 ?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:33 pmThere are some other legal quibbles in there… but as an architect, I know more about the design issues… well, and the way buildings work…
Comment by unbelievable
UnB, wouldnt you agree there is something fishy? Too many uncertainties. Even if you dont take WTC as an example.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:34 pmThink before you speak and base your arguments in science and physics :)
Comment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
How many courses of Physics and Statics did you take at an Engineering university? And how many years of practice do you have in Architecture and/or Structural Engineering?
Hardly gives you the platform to insult those who have.
You people are like a religion – no a cult with this stuff, when all of your ‘experts’ are theorists and opportunists.
I practiced for 14 years before teaching architecture – I don’t know a single person in my field who thinks this hypothesis is credible, because it relies on a very complicated subject that requires years of study and practice to understand.
I’ve posted links to explanations, as I get tired of typing them over and over. The towers fell because they were hit by planes, and the adjacent building fell in their aftermath due to a combination of seismic forces and fire. You can not like it, but it is the truth.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:34 pmWow! I finally found something to agree with unbelievable about . . .
Comment by Jake — March 31, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
We don’t agree.
I’m an architect speaking from experience and you’re just being contentious.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:36 pmThere are endless variables but, in the best engineering judgment out there, all the damage is attributable to the terrorists — I think I’ll trust Gene Corley on this one ; ) Comment by Jake — March 31, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
You forgot another more important variable. An inept government that failed to heed warnings, and refused to act. They are responsible for *allowing* this to happen, without trying to stop it. But Jake, your whole life is built around blaming others, for problems you *help* create – so why should this be any different SON?
As for attacks on the US being 100% the fault of terrorists, yeah, sure, the US has *never* done anything to provoke other people. We may decide that we’re content to share what part we contributed in creating radical islamic terrorism (Afghanistan under Ronuhld RayGun anyone?), but we do *share* in the path.
Wack jobs like you and Valiant P*en*s think that *sharing* any responsibility says we are 100% guilty, yet is *you* who wish to say we’re 100% innocent. The truth is rarely that simple, which is why simpletons like you so regularly struggle with it.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:36 pmIt is, as President Carter noted in his book, difficult to discuss issues like this without being able to consider that Elliot Abrams and the rest of the Neo-Cons, many of whom worked for Netanyahu, care as much or more about Israel than they do about the United States, but this must be considered.
For example, with regard to the Saddam’s purported attempt to get nuclear material from Niger, nobody has ever asked who would have a motive to fake the documents. Here are the possible suspects:
1. An Iraqi group or individual that would benefit from Saddam’s overthrow
2. An Iranian group interested in creating a sympathetic Shiite nation out of Iraq
3. Kurds, who saw the overthrow as a means to gaining statehood
4. The Israeli’s who wanted the U.S. to overthrow Saddam so they wouldn’t have to make the attemp themselves.
5. American conservatives who saw the opportunity to create a “war President” and consolidate political power.
Now the same thing happens with Syria, not to mention Iran–It may be in U.S. interests to overthrow the regimes in Iran, Iraq and Syria, but it certainly is in the interests of Israel and when White House neo-cons (not to mention Liebermann) have strong religious and political connections to Israel’s right wing, we ought to, at least, be able to discuss the matter without being labeled “anti-semetic”, eh?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:36 pm“The officials say the campaign bears the imprint of Elliott Abrams, a conservative White House aide in charge of pushing Bush’s global democracy agenda.”
No one wants to mention Israel?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:40 pmunbelievable, would you repost those links – there are many more open minded people here than you give credit, because you’re mad that you have to keep ’splainin this. Please, be patient with your fellow liberals, we’re bright people who respond well to facts and scientific data. Assume that ;)
March 31st, 2007 at 2:41 pmThat’s what had to happen for the Twin Towers to come down, and did happen since the towers collapsed suddenly
The towers should have been red hot if they were at or past their halfway point for strength and would have sagged, instead of collapsing completely into dust at free fall speed
And in the real world, a pancake collapse doesn’t pick up speed but slows down with each floor because of the resistance
Most physicists, more than other scientists, rely on government money to fund their studies or research so of course most are going to agree with the official theory just like many people will agree that all the science on Global Warming is in, even though there are many discrepancies like how the Carbon levels don’t match up when the temperature was supposed to rise during after the 1940’s
Steven E Jones has done some of the best work on 9/11, and has even tested samples of WTC and found thermate, a mixture of Thermite and sulfur that speeds up the chemical reaction to practically liquidate steel within seconds
What are you going to say next, the Magic Bullet theory is true?
If it defies physics, it defies physics plain and simple
March 31st, 2007 at 2:41 pmUnB, wouldnt you agree there is something fishy? Too many uncertainties. Even if you dont take WTC as an example.
Comment by Juan C — March 31, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
What was fishy was not the impact, the collapse or the adjacent damage, as those are rationally explained within teh knowledge of the building industry.
What is fishy is that the planes made it that far. I see one of two truly possible explanations:
1. Bush knew and allowed it to happen so he’d have cause to attack Iraq. Maybe even provoked it… But planned it? No way. He neither had the time nor the capacity to pull off such a grand feat. And even if he did, the way the towers FELL has no corroboration to that. The corroboration would be in the impacts – not the aftermath of the impacts, as the conspiracy theorists claim…
2. Arrogance by our military that we wouldn’t be attacked. There are Canadian newstories that said that our air traffic controllers believed that 9/11 was an emergency drill and therefore, did nothing….
All other options I’ve seen are not reasonable…
March 31st, 2007 at 2:43 pmComment by James Corbett — March 31, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
Good points James;I’ve always asked why we “can’t” figure out who forged those documents.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:47 pmMy guess would be they were conceived in Dick Cheney’s office.
I was talking to Jake and not you, unbelievable
I’m not part of any cult, you’re thinking of Alex Jones and the NWO crowd
I haven’t taken any engineering courses, but Building 7 collapsed faster than free fall speed
Steven E Jones has plenty of experience under his belt, and that’s whom I’ve read papers from
Also David Ray Griffin and Kevin Ryan who worked at Underwriters Laboratory and NIST when he saw first hand that their attempts to cause a floor collapse using fire with a building model failed
March 31st, 2007 at 2:47 pm“Global democracy” as long as the US administration approves of the results. The Palestinians democratically elect Hamas and the US adminstration and Israel cut off financing to the new government and try and isolate it.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:48 pmComment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 31, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
I fully agree with your post, and this is where Jake will see that we don’t actually agree… What happened on 9/11 was proportionally a result of our actions in the world – from funding and training these people to getting involved in situations that are none of our business.
No one attacked Switzerland that day – yet they have a much higher standard of living than we do (why neocons cry that we were attacked). Switzerland didn’t get attacked, and won’t get attacked, because they mind their own business. We, however, are a raging Empire…
March 31st, 2007 at 2:48 pmWell, what about Syria?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:50 pmSwitzerland didn’t get attacked, and won’t get attacked, because they mind their own business. Comment by unbelievable
And because their banks hold all warlords, terrorists, drug dealers and corrupted governments money. ;)
March 31st, 2007 at 2:51 pmDenis – you’re regurgitating some theories, and not offering actual reality-based examples. One problem you will have is with the fact that the Trade Towers were of a unique design… Due to the fact that they were the tallest buildings in the world at the time of their design.
You can’t site reality-based explanations, because the Towers were one of a kind…
March 31st, 2007 at 2:51 pm1. Bush knew and allowed it to happen…
Comment by unbelievable
It’s good to see that you are atleast open to that.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:53 pmBuilding collapse after earthquakes
Comment by Jake — March 31, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
What are you pretending to be now Jake, architect, structural engineer, forensic investigator, CIA, FBI, NYPD, White House Special Investigator. Which one.
Or are you just and all around expert on every effing thing. Oh yeah, how was it teaching the Wright Brothers how to fly?
March 31st, 2007 at 2:58 pmunbelievable, would you repost those links –
They should be above in this thread…
there are many more open minded people here than you give credit, because you’re mad that you have to keep ’splainin this.
I’m not mad. I’m frustatred that for the last year +, a portion of my fellow ‘liberals’, who’ve latched on to this thing like a cult, have insulted me for not suspending what I know as an experienced architect to just jumping on the bandwagon, for discounting my experience on the subject area in favor of people who’ve never done more than study general physics or who work in the profession on two-story buildings, and for refusing to question this because they like that it is anti-Bush. It makes our side look irrational. And that is frustrating.
Please, be patient with your fellow liberals, we’re bright people who respond well to facts and scientific data. Assume that ;)
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 31, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
I wouldn’t be still arguing/explaining the issue if I felt that way :) Though it does feel like I’m beating my head against the wall with many people who’ve made up their minds and don’t want to hear anything else (hence the insults about us believing in magic, being neocons, and the sort that we chastize the trolls for).
I hate to say that it seems to be the difference between non-religious liberals and religiousliberal – because the Conspiracy Theory relies on faith… But, it seems to be the case.
I’m sure you could also google ‘unbelievable’ and ‘conspiracy theory’ limited to this site and find full explanations I’ve typed, if you really wanted to do that much digging :)
March 31st, 2007 at 3:03 pmThat’s what had to happen for the Twin Towers to come down, and did happen since the towers collapsed suddenly
Not, it’s not… Again, I’ve studied and practiced architecture and engineering. I now teach it. I understand it, and i can tell you that this is not the case.
The towers should have been red hot if they were at or past their halfway point for strength and would have sagged, instead of collapsing completely into dust at free fall speed
Not at all. The steel does not have to be red hot – it only has to be compromised to fail. It’s why we fire proof steel – so it will stay ‘cooler’ longer and people can escape the buildings.
And in the real world, a pancake collapse doesn’t pick up speed but slows down with each floor because of the resistance
Nope… Buildings are 956 air (look at the room you are in). There was also a pile-driver affect as the tops of the building became separate and gravity, giving larger masses graeter strength, was able to collapse the buildings at the accelerating speed of gravity. Basic statics.
Most physicists, more than other scientists, rely on government money to fund their studies or research so of course most are going to agree with the official theory just like many people will agree that all the science on Global Warming is in, even though there are many discrepancies like how the Carbon levels don’t match up when the temperature was supposed to rise during after the 1940’s
There are Independent studies that disagree with the Conspiracy.
Steven E Jones has done some of the best work on 9/11, and has even tested samples of WTC and found thermate, a mixture of Thermite and sulfur that speeds up the chemical reaction to practically liquidate steel within seconds
There are other explanations for those chemicals… And that’s my issue. Only the ones that are the least likely and the most dramatic are being offered… That’s NOT Science, and it’s not what Scientistic do. It’s what religion does.
What are you going to say next, the Magic Bullet theory is true?
If it defies physics, it defies physics plain and simple
Comment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
But, in this case, it doesn’t. Plain and simple.
March 31st, 2007 at 3:12 pmI was talking to Jake and not you, unbelievable
You didn’t specify… And you’re posting in a comments section where it is free for all.
I’m not part of any cult, you’re thinking of Alex Jones and the NWO crowd
Different cult. This one is just as devout and unwilling to consider any other plasuible (and more likely) explanations.
I haven’t taken any engineering courses, but Building 7 collapsed faster than free fall speed
Prove it.
Steven E Jones has plenty of experience under his belt, and that’s whom I’ve read papers from
One person… You do know that Sceinec requires perr-review, right? And, I am his peer, and I’ve reviewed his explanations, and I don’t agree with them. I know many others in the profession who are embarrassed by him. Hardly peer-support…
Also David Ray Griffin and Kevin Ryan who worked at Underwriters Laboratory and NIST when he saw first hand that their attempts to cause a floor collapse using fire with a building model failed
Comment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
You can’t equate the two – the scale alone makes the results uncomparable. You couldn’t generate the same heat, heat gain, stresses or weight…
March 31st, 2007 at 3:16 pmAnd because their banks hold all warlords, terrorists, drug dealers and corrupted governments money. ;)
Comment by Juan C — March 31, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
That’s not Switzerland’s doing – that the financial industry – which finds itself doing that all over the place – including here in the US… :)
March 31st, 2007 at 3:18 pmThank you, Progressives!! I see what you mean! Trip through the poppy fiels…. employ the Golden Rule, pretend extremists Muslims are not a threat, roll over and go back to sleep, knock on the door at Oz…..Makes perfect sense!
March 31st, 2007 at 3:21 pmIt’s good to see that you are atleast open to that.
Comment by torque — March 31, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
Unlike most people, I’m open to just about everything… But I follow logic, not party lines, alliances, or what I wish to be true. Doesn’t make me popular, but I don’t need to be. My self-esteem isn’t tied to the external…
Although I am liberal, I remain Independent for that very reason.
I think Bush is a criminal. I also know he, from 6 years of experience, that he is utterly innept. Logically, it means he probably allowed 9/11 for his own gain – but was utterly incapable of orchestrating any aspect of it.
March 31st, 2007 at 3:22 pmYou couldn’t generate the same heat, heat gain, stresses or weight…
Comment by unbelievable
As a matter of fact, it can be done to a certain degree. Dimensional and scale analysis was created for those purposes, exactly.
Now, if all forces of universe are taken into account, no building could have ever been built.
March 31st, 2007 at 3:23 pmImprint of Elliot Abrams?
Do you think the rest of these names are involed?
Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage
March 31st, 2007 at 3:27 pmWilliam J. Bennett Jeffrey Bergner
John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad William Kristol
Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider Jr
Vin Weber Paul Wolfowitz
R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick
As a matter of fact, it can be done to a certain degree. Dimensional and scale analysis was created for those purposes, exactly.
Not with building, it cannot. Because the area of the floor on fire would generate graeter heat and heat gain that couldn’t be generated in a scaled version. And in a scaled version, steel still has the same point of failure that it does in a real building – make the variables incompatable.
Now, if all forces of universe are taken into account, no building could have ever been built.
Comment by Juan C — March 31, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
Well, fortunately, we only have to deal with the ones on Earth :)
I apologize for my horrible typing. I never learned how and cannot seem to get the part where you watch the screen instead of the keyboard, even though I know exactly where the keys are… Odd…
March 31st, 2007 at 3:30 pmSeems stuff is getting deleted…. That means move on… Okay…
Just want to say that I think the inherent danger in the Conspiracy Theory is that the general public will buy into a false sense of security in these super skyscrapers – and it couls be disasterous for them when emergencies do occur…
March 31st, 2007 at 3:32 pmI see where even Bush 04 advisor, Mr. Dowd, has written an op-ed piece entitled “Kerry Was Right”….amazing how many blinded by this wolf in sheep’s clothing (Bush) are beginning to finally see the light! Utterly amazing! How can anyone “not” see the light when it’s blaring right in your face – every hour – every day – every week….more and more of the ugly truth that this democracy has been damanged, perhaps irreparably, by a group of delusional, twisted, misanthropes….I guess ascending spiritually is clearly an individual thing and everyone has their own “time” to get it….clearly, some walking this path never do…
March 31st, 2007 at 3:34 pmThat’s not Switzerland’s doing – that the financial industry – which finds itself doing that all over the place – including here in the US… :)
Comment by unbelievable
Yeah, I know. My point was that Swiss government make profits out of all that laundry money, of course. A lot of what Nazis took from eastern europe countries was sent to Switzerland…oh, but they were neutral. Yeah, right.
Anyway, I drifted away.
March 31st, 2007 at 3:37 pmRosie O and her traveling road show of freaks and cultists can be entertaining – until the morally numb and intellectually handicapped start to believe their own nonsense…
The most amusing comment Rotund Rosie has made to date is repeating the guess of WTC 7 “Made In America” demise. If the physicists would quit pretending they are architects for a minute, #7 might be explained relatively simply. Note how deep the underground cavern of 1 and 2 were after finally being excavated. First consider 1 and 2 – If you have a building whose foundation is shaken, bearing walls and beams are compromised , not enough flame retardant on girders, and the thing pancakes in on itself – I think the possibilty TWO such collapses could take a toll on the
March 31st, 2007 at 3:40 pmfoundation of a neighbouring building.
What else is Thermate, a chemical PRIMARILY USED FOR MILITARY APPLICATIONS (DING!) like hand grenades or pyrotechnics such as destroying a building doing in a building that magically vaporized to dust at free fall speed?
Three buildings that shattered historical precedent by collapsing from fire for the first time before or after 9/11
March 31st, 2007 at 3:40 pmSyria would be wise to respond in kind. Send its agents to America and de-stabilize the Bush regime and its Zionist controllers like Abrams. Of course thats terrorism, right ? America = a terror nation, always has, always will be.
March 31st, 2007 at 3:40 pm#61 A good read since you seem to be onto something here….written by Professor of Philosophy of Religion (Professor and Theologian) David Ray Griffin entitled THE NEW PEARL HARBOR.
I believe that you will find what you’re looking for in this book and it appears that Kucinich is reopening the investigation soon about this now-rebutted, obviously inaccurate “official story”.
The american people will demand to know the truth of this event which was the premise for everything that’s damaged this country – nationally and internationally – from the bogus war in Iraq to the disintegration of our constitutional rights all inthe name of safety from terrorism….The Patriot Act. It’s beginning to appear that this act was written well in advance of 911 by the members of PNAC and has been recently abused by the mysterious appearance of a clause which was used to fire the attorneys. No doubt there is much about this Patriot Act which needs to be amended. The illegal spying on american citizems by NSA and their abuse of it becomes another situation in need of investigating.
Mounting numbers of americans do not believe the official story. Yesterday, even Rosie O’Donnell brought some facts which do not compute to light…like the collapse of Building 7 (controlled demolition) and this is just one of the daily amassing incongruities and inconsistencies in the official story spoon-fed to each of us as a pretext for this war.
If they lied about WMD, is it not conceivable that they lied about the pretext for it as well….I suspect so.
March 31st, 2007 at 3:40 pmDon’t believe unbelievable. He’s no more a structutural engineer than the president is a physics major. Probably got his degree the same place he got his other 562 degrees, from his printer. Notice how he wants to move on so quickly>
March 31st, 2007 at 3:55 pmCan we get off the 9/11-Denying thread here? We already know that the CT’s have no real evidence or testimony to back them up on their claims.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:04 pm“It’s the new Cuba…”
Yes, right, of course, because Cuba is such a threat to the United States.
I can’t say enough how ashamed I am of my country that is filled with fat, terrified elephants stomping around screaming this and that, afraid of mouse sized countrys.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:05 pmThese are the weirdest comments so far. What on earth does the collapse of the various WTC buildings on 9/11 have to do with Syria? Not only does there seem to be an Ignore List, there seems to be a Living In My Own World List.
Again, it’s difficult to play “gotcha” politics with the Middle East when the nations involved were created in the last 100 years by France, Britain, or the USA. Lebanon used to be part of Syria, just as Kuwait used to be part of Iraq. Israel was carved out of Palestine and occupies what was left of Palestine and has done so for 40 years without any desire to annex or surrender. It’s all very sad. And made more complicated by America’s meddling in the area to keep Russia and China from gaining access to oil –even though Russia and China are geographically closer to these countries.
If Syria is so evil, why does America give it prisoners to be tortured and accept the information gained from these ‘aggressive’ interrogations. There’s some real doublethink going on in the State Department.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:07 pmDon’t believe unbelievable. He’s no more a structutural engineer than the president is a physics major. Probably got his degree the same place he got his other 562 degrees, from his printer. Notice how he wants to move on so quickly>
Comment by neolibcon — March 31, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
First of all, I’m a SHE.
Secondly, I am an architect, who started out in engineering, but switched after three years. I just teach now instead of practice, which got me the job because of my experience and education.
I posted the most comments on the subject, complete with explanations and links, have been discussing it for over a year (here), and only changed threads because a comment of Juan’s as well as my response were deleted and I logically took it to mean that TP was done…
You post under a pseudonym, attack me rather than my argument, and offer nothing logical. If you can’t refute my comments with facts, then clearly, it is you who are questionable, and not me.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:09 pmRegime change now!
Start with the US.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:10 pmBaby Georgie has to play with all the toys in the ME. If he would just stop breaking them.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:12 pmWhat else is Thermate, a chemical PRIMARILY USED FOR MILITARY APPLICATIONS (DING!)
Like the fact that the Towers had been attacked with them prior to 9/11 and probably were still in the building?
Why aren’t you considering anything but the most dramatic and unlikely?
And even if the terrorists had added some explosives – so what? They did it before and could have done it again.
like hand grenades or pyrotechnics such as destroying a building doing in a building that magically vaporized to dust at free fall speed?
It didn’t vaporize. You’re exaggerating. I watched it – many times. It was no different than what all buildings do when they collapse – fall straight down on their own footprint (they are too large tofall over).
Three buildings that shattered historical precedent by collapsing from fire for the first time before or after 9/11
Comment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
You didn’t read my links did you? Why not? I only posted two…
You don’t believe there’s a first time for everything? How elee do things ever happen if there aren’t firsts? Besides, you keep ignoring the seismic loads and unique design of the towers, as well as the type of impact. This was a first for them occuring together. Why then do all subsequent firsts, as a result, of that first, surprise you? They shouldn’t. It’s basic logic…
March 31st, 2007 at 4:16 pmThe Syrian President watches all the scandals and corruption of the Bush Administration. He has no problem with anything that Bush does because Bush is a proven liar and is a lam President. The US has lost friends and support from around the world. The Saudi King even let Bush go. Now what Bush is afraid of is that Speaker Pelosi is visiting the Syrian President. Yes Republican are there now and some will go with Pelosi on her visit. Here’s the problem for Bush and his Administration. Pelosi is third in line to the White House which makes her a high ranking official. No Connie bimbo Rice to deal with. Speaker Pelosi is in charge of the money as Bush is in charge of illegally invading countries. The Syria President knows the power Speaker Pelosi has and that’s why Bush doesn’t want her to go. As usual the idiot President who speaks out of his butt can’t tell the Speaker of the House what to do. Bush would do better trying to get some educated qualified people working for him and let go of the current on the job training dummies. Kyle Sampson and Karl Rove are true examples of how stupid and corrupt this Administration is. Notice Dick Cheney is packing up his stolen money real fast as Waxman closes in on the crimes he committed.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:17 pmI think the possibilty TWO such collapses could take a toll on the foundation of a neighbouring building.
Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
Stop supporting me with your cut-and paste comments. It impacts my credibility that fruitcakes like you claim to support the truth, when you really don’t – you just are being contentious. Shoo.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:18 pm#72 – david,
March 31st, 2007 at 4:21 pmSyria took down building 7. Cheney is going to use that tomorrow on Fox to justify an air attack on Friday. Iran was dropped from the plan when W was told by the generals and admirals that Iran would be able to stand up to an attack (and more importantly, stem the flow of oil to the petroleum industry). See my post #18 for details on Syria’s involvement in 911 as it will be presented by Darth.
Can we get off the 9/11-Denying thread here? We already know that the CT’s have no real evidence or testimony to back them up on their claims.
Comment by Nostromo — March 31, 2007 @ 4:04 pm
I’ll make you a promise – I won’t bring it up first :)
But I won’t let them make their false claims and risk the safety of the general public. It’s part of my duty as an architect.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:22 pmComment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
That’s right VV all your architectural expertise is no doubt wasted living in that double wide.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:28 pmIt impacts my credibility that fruitcakes like you claim to support the truth, when you really don’t – you just are being contentious. Shoo.
Comment by unbelievable
That was hilarious.
Can we get off the 9/11-Denying thread here? We already know that the CT’s have no real evidence or testimony to back them up on their claims.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:30 pmComment by Nostromo
Instead we stick to the idea that bodies evaporated after a plane crash and cell calls easily were made from a moving plane. Yep.
The worse thing than not knowing the truth is knowing the truth.
That’s right VV all your architectural expertise is no doubt wasted living in that double wide.
Comment by shane
Ouch!
Heh.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:32 pmHey Juan, how’s it going?
March 31st, 2007 at 4:33 pmWhy aren’t you considering anything but the most dramatic and unlikely?
And even if the terrorists had added some explosives – so what? They did it before and could have done it again.
Comment by unbelievable — March 31, 2007 @ 4:16 pm
The 93 WTC bombing was a 1,500 lbs nitrate bomb, not Thermate
Also, what other steel high rise buildings have collapsed due to fire?
And they did vaporize, what do you call those gigantic dust clouds and rubble only about a story tall?
March 31st, 2007 at 4:34 pmAccording to the Port Authority floor plans, 275-gallon diesel tanks sat on the fifth, seventh and eighth floors and were fed through pipes from the larger tanks near ground level.
While the diesel fuel remains the most likely candidate for feeding the fires, it was still unknown whether there could have been other sources of fuel in the building, kept there by tenants like the Secret Service that have disclosed little of what their spaces contained.
Huge steel transfer trusses ran mostly through the fifth, sixth and seventh floors where the fires burned. The purpose of the trusses, which included zigzagging and horizontal members and were concentrated around the building’s core, was to allow 7 World Trade to be built over two Consolidated Edison substations that already existed on that spot when the building went up in the late 1980’s. Together the stations held 10 transformers, each about 35 feet high and 40 feet wide.
Before this collapse, no modern, steel-reinforced high-rise in the US had ever collapsed in a fire.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:39 pm“Yesterday, even Rosie O’Donnell brought some facts which do not compute to light…like the collapse of Building 7″
Oh, well, if Rosie O’Donnell said it, it HAS to be true!! Color me convinced!
March 31st, 2007 at 4:43 pmComment by Zooey — March 31, 2007 @ 4:32 pm
Intersting how both Jake and ValiantVenus are both experts on every issue.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:46 pmI fired my doctor and attorney, next time I need advice I’ll ask one of the two geniuses.
“Stop supporting me with your cut-and paste comments. It impacts my credibility that fruitcakes like you claim to support the truth, when you really don’t – you just are being contentious. Shoo.”
Comment by unbelievable
Dear unbelievable – “Contentious”? You are such a miserable paranoid. Are you bi-polar?
I am not an architect nor do I pretend to be one on TV. My supposition is based on cause and effect, velocity and momentum – nothing more – nothing less.
You have no clue what anyone else thinks on any range of topics (just a bit presumptuous of you!),so don’t leave your day job and seek employment at the fortune-telling booth at the carnival.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:47 pmRoyston – No other high rise in history had the same design elements as the WTC. Your supposition is just that.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:48 pmHey Juan, how’s it going?
Comment by Zooey
I have stomach ache, Zoo. :{
But, Im ok. Thanks. And you? How are classes going?
March 31st, 2007 at 4:49 pmvelocity and momentum, cause and effect………
March 31st, 2007 at 4:51 pmoh, valium orb, you steaming chunk of overgrown greenhouse effect, you make my orbit swing……………….
That’s right VV all your architectural expertise is no doubt wasted living in that double wide.” Comment by shane
Thanks Shane – but no double wide for me – I wouldn’t want to displace you…..
As I said, I am not an architect, but I’m not like some here who profess to be an expert on every topic. My conclusion was based on listening and reading interviews of architects and engineers involved in WTC building, maintenance and repair after the First WTC attack.
Shana, unbe appreciates your support – she has a way of reinforcing her enemies opinion and alienating “friends”. You’re a dear!!
March 31st, 2007 at 4:56 pmI don’t understand why Elliot Abrahms is allows to work in government after he pled guilty to two midemeanors for withholding info from Congress in the Iran Contra affair. I don’t really believe in conspiracy theory, but maybe I need to start.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:59 pmThe 93 WTC bombing was a 1,500 lbs nitrate bomb, not Thermate
The hijackers luggage could have had some.
You’re eluding my point that you’re only considering the most dramatic and nothing else…. Unlike Scientific Methods… Why is that?
And, you’re taking stuff out of context while expecting it to stand on it’s own without the mitigating circumstances. This weakens your argument further.
Also, what other steel high rise buildings have collapsed due to fire?
First of all, it didn’t collapse JUST because of fire. fire was one of the factors.
Secondly, you’re dodging my point about the Trade Towers being of unique design that is unlike typical skyscrapers which are build on bay systems and the facade isn’t load bearing.
And they did vaporize, what do you call those gigantic dust clouds and rubble only about a story tall?
Comment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Pulverization from impact… not vaporization. There’s a big difference. And, as I said, buildings are only about 5% materials… The rest is empty space… So you can occupy it.
March 31st, 2007 at 4:59 pmRe: Unbelivable
I went to a prestigious engineering school in Flint Michican and studied Mechanical Engineering, and if the official 9-11 story is true, then me and every other person with a mechanical engineering degree need a full refund of our money, because everything we were taught in school was wrong!
The official explanations ignores all these laws:
1. Conversation of Energy
2. Conversation of Momentum
3. Instantaneous Force = Mass times Instantaneous Accelleration
4. Collisions cannot be inelastic (concrete floor dropping intact into a lower floor to break joists) and inelastic (concrete floor breaking apart into dust to float upward) at the same time.
5. The sum of the Forces and the sum of the Moments on a static structure are zero.
6. Gravity can only bring a weakened build structure down via Moment failure (i.e. cutting into a tree trunk to weaken it enough to make it lean and topple down) and the WTC debris does not show moment failure because it did not have vertical columns still sticking in the ground and broken in two, which is what is needed to have the force multiplication of the levers needed to generate the force at distance called a moment large enough to defeat steel’s 60,000 psi tensile strength.
7. Kinetic energy cannot be stored, so once the planes stopped moving and the buildings did not fall over then, the buildings were out of danger and returned to their normal static state although with fewer vertical columns, but that is what stell framed buildings are designed to be able to do, and law #5 was back in play.
8. And on and on
The official explanations ignores all these facts:
1. The WTC buildings fell at extremely fast speeds of less than 15 seconds, (10 seconds is freefall in a vaccum!) which require an huge impulse of energy, and the potential gravity of a static structure cannot be converted into an impulse because of law #5.
2. The WTC buildings did not collapse they disintegrated into dust and rained an inch thick layer of 50 micron concrete all around lower Manhatten tens of blocks away from the WTC.
3. Before the invention of explosions and today without explosives, nobody can turn concrete into 50 micron dust in less than 15 seconds. The compresion strength of concrete is thousands of pounds per square inch and if you dropped it from an plane crusinf at 30,000 feet, it still would not hit the ground with enough force to turn it sand sized dust, yet alone 50 micron white dust powder that looks like snow. To turn concrete into a 50 micron dust without explosives, requires a long time slowly grinding between two hard abrasive covered surfaces. If anybody can make 50 micron concrete dust like on 9-11 by simply dropping a concrete block 1400 feet and dropping debris on it, you better patent that idea and get the billions of dollars for making abrasives obsolete!
4. Steel does not weaken in hydrocarbon fires. This is why your car engine can burn gasoline which burns hotter than jet fuel (kerosine) for many hours without weakening, and why kerosine lamps and furnaces do not “collapse” on themselves after burning for an hour. Hey, do not believe me, take your barbecue grill fill it up with lighter fluid, kersoine, or gasoline and light, when the fire goes out, repeat, and tell us how long it takes before the steel in your grill bends and collapses!
5. Steel has a high thermal conductivity. Any heat applied to the middle of a vertical column would not stay in the one place, but would conduct through the entire mass of the vertical column from roof to ground. Take a steel rod and heat one end and hold the other end in your bare hand, and tell us how the heat stayed at the lit end and did not burn your hand.
6. In order for a building to fall into its own basement instead of toppling over, starting from the top of the building all the vertical columns on a given floor must be cut with a large horizontal forces (but gravity only acts vertically down!) upward and on an angle at exactly the same time, then the process must be repeated at a lower floor but not low enough that the upper part of the building is tall enough to generate a moment large enough for it to topple before the lower part of the building starts moving out of the way. (If you think this can happen by chance, try to make your coffe table fall in place without toppling over by trying to cut all four legs at exactly the same time, and tell us how you made out!)
7. And on and on
March 31st, 2007 at 5:01 pmI fired my doctor and attorney, next time I need advice I’ll ask one of the two geniuses.
Comment by shane
Oy. I predict that soon you will be a very sick person, with legal problems. :D
I read on another thread what you said about your daughter. She sounds fantastic. Good work!
March 31st, 2007 at 5:02 pm“Contentious� You are such a miserable paranoid. Are you bi-polar?
You are saying you aren’t contentious? ROTFL!!!
Bipolar is your diagnosis. I’m just good at pointing out the obvious…
I am not an architect nor do I pretend to be one on TV. My supposition is based on cause and effect, velocity and momentum – nothing more – nothing less.
Liar. You copied and pasted that. It was apparent in the way the lines broke in your post, isolating a couple of words on a line in a way that typing something into teh comments box doesn’t do….
You have no clue what anyone else thinks on any range of topics (just a bit presumptuous of you!),so don’t leave your day job and seek employment at the fortune-telling booth at the carnival.
Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Oh calm down, you’re irrational and inconherent when you rant like this. Not that you ever make sense.
Go back to joking about your dead child…. Freak.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:02 pmHahaha. Syria downed one of the buildings on 9/11? What kind of nutty conspiracy theory is that??? That’s not provable. It’s a bit late to be pinning these things on whomever one pleases.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:03 pmI have stomach ache, Zoo. :{
But, Im ok. Thanks. And you? How are classes going?
Comment by Juan C
I’m sorry you’re sick, Juan. I hope you’ll be better soon.
Tea & toast. :)
I’m doing fabulously well, and classes are totally cool. :-)
March 31st, 2007 at 5:04 pmYou need to stop being a conspiracy theorist, unbelievable
I’m actually referring to facts while you spin out “well it could be this…” you’re just speculating now
Not to mention, the government claims the planes were vaporized upon impact, and so were their black boxes even though firefighters and others have contradicted these claims and said they found them in the rubble
Not to mention the FBI claims to have found the passport of one of the terrorists in the planes perfectly intact, passports made out of paper, while a metal airplane and humans were vaporized to dust
Not to mention 1,000 other people
So fires + gravity can vaporize steel, people, and blackboxes meant to withstand this type of destruction?
Back to David Ray Griffin’s argument, one would have to believe in magic to accept these anomalies
March 31st, 2007 at 5:05 pm#90 I was talking specifically about WTC7, a 47-storey skyscraper built in 1985 with a trapezoidal footprint, which occupied an entire city block and rose over 600 feet above street level.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:06 pmAs I said, I am not an architect, but I’m not like some here who profess to be an expert on every topic. My conclusion was based on listening and reading interviews of architects and engineers involved in WTC building, maintenance and repair after the First WTC attack.
You’re not a human either… But it doesn’t stop you from pretending to be one.
Your jealousy is so obvious again…
It wasn’t your conslusion you copied and pasted it. No wonder you try to insult me by claiming I’m lying – you just have a guilty conscience. LOL
Shana, unbe appreciates your support – she has a way of reinforcing her enemies opinion and alienating “friendsâ€. You’re a dear!!
Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
More incoherent babble… You’re just projecting because everyone here hates you.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:06 pmlate to the discussion, scrolled past a lot, but here’s my 2 cents:
why can’t we convene some engineers and discuss exactly why Building # 7 collapsed,yet wasn’t hit by an airplane.
Comment by torque — March 31, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
It collapsed because of gravity. If there were no gravity, the building would still be standing, or would have been flung into outer space due to centrifugal force.
The earthquakes registered from the twin towers were below 3.0 (2.1 and 2.3, if memory serves me correctly) on the Richter Scale. They would have felt like standing next to train tracks as a freight train passed by.
And the greatest shock waves occured several seconds before each tower collapsed.
Sorry, Unbelievable, but TP filters my posts with links on this topic.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:07 pmThis is what mechanical engineers learn at school:
h t t p : / / j a n e d o e 0 9 1 1 . t r i p o d . c o m / B i l l i a r d B a l l s . h t m l
Sorry about the spaces, but it is the only way to pass the filter
March 31st, 2007 at 5:13 pm25 – thanks for the link.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:16 pmwent to a prestigious engineering school in Flint Michican and studied Mechanical Engineering, and if the official 9-11 story is true, then me and every other person with a mechanical engineering degree need a full refund of our money, because everything we were taught in school was wrong!
Mechanical Engineering is not Structural Engineering. It’s why there are two different degrees and not just one generic one that applies to all aspects of engineering.
Kinda how a Doctor of Medicine has a different degree that a Doctor of Psychology. They both studied medicine, but they don’t practice the same way….
The official explanations ignores all these laws:
I don’t support the Official Theory either. It’s not an either or situtation….
1. The WTC buildings fell at extremely fast speeds of less than 15 seconds, (10 seconds is freefall in a vaccum!) which require an huge impulse of energy, and the potential gravity of a static structure cannot be converted into an impulse because of law #5.
Which occured from three forces – plane impact, entire floors on fire and the severed tops of the building acting like a pile driver.
2. The WTC buildings did not collapse they disintegrated into dust and rained an inch thick layer of 50 micron concrete all around lower Manhatten tens of blocks away from the WTC.
Pulverization from collapse will do that… It was mostly concrete that covered the city.
3. Before the invention of explosions and today without explosives, nobody can turn concrete into 50 micron dust in less than 15 seconds.
It wasn’t a ‘body’ who did it – it was the three factors I listed above.
4. Steel does not weaken in hydrocarbon fires.
Let’s keep it to structiral steel situations – and not mechanical, where the steel is also under the weight of itself and the loads it carries. Or does your car engine support your car, and your barbeque support your house?
Steel under pressure that is weakened is a different ball game.
5. Steel has a high thermal conductivity.
A steel rod has less mass than a series of wide-flanges and tube steel… takes longer to conduct as a result – which I don’t deny happened… Just not as fast as an isolated little rod.
6. In order for a building to fall into its own basement instead of toppling over,
Buildings NEVER fall over – there simply isn’t enough of a physical force in existence that can get them to do so.
7. And on and on
Comment by criticalthinker — March 31, 2007 @ 5:01 pm
Stick with engines and mechanics… You know them well, but their scale and function are factors you aren’t considering, and cannot apply as apples to apples logic…
March 31st, 2007 at 5:18 pmThat’s not a highly persuasive argument, given the fact that you do as well. Unless, of course, your given name is…Unbelievable!
:-D
March 31st, 2007 at 5:27 pmYou need to stop being a conspiracy theorist, unbelievable
Those who’ve lost the ability to argue, attack the person.
What’s teh conspiracy in my post? My own expert opinion? LOL
I’m actually referring to facts while you spin out “well it could be this…†you’re just speculating now
You aren’t posting fact – you are posting hypothesis and conjecture. When I ask you why you don’t consider other hypothesis, you insult me rather than answer my question, which is valid.
Sceintific research considers the facts and asks questions… Why aren’t you?
Not to mention, the government claims the planes were vaporized upon impact, and so were their black boxes even though firefighters and others have contradicted these claims and said they found them in the rubble
I don’t speak for the government. I have my own opinions. I think the government is responsible by refusing to stop it, so why would I speak for them? Doesn’t make sense…
Not to mention the FBI claims to have found the passport of one of the terrorists in the planes perfectly intact, passports made out of paper, while a metal airplane and humans were vaporized to dust
I’d have to see the claim and the passort before I could tell who was lying….
Not to mention 1,000 other people
So fires + gravity can vaporize steel, people, and blackboxes meant to withstand this type of destruction?
I’m not an expert on blackboxes. Just buildings. And I don’t deny there are problems. I just don’t agree with Conspiracy explanation on all of them – especially the tower. If MA can’t be an expert on everything, neither can anyone else….
Back to David Ray Griffin’s argument, one would have to believe in magic to accept these anomalies
Comment by Deniz Yeter — March 31, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
Insulting me hurts your credibility, not mine…
Besides, I’m an Atheist. It’s well know I reject all forms of magic… LOL
March 31st, 2007 at 5:29 pmComment by criticalthinker — March 31, 2007 @ 5:01 pm
thanks for the post.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:29 pmThis is what mechanical engineers learn at school:
Comment by criticalthinker — March 31, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
NOT buildings… Which is why you could not build one (excluding things like houses and barns and small shelters) in any US state…
I’m not trying to insult you – really – but when you claim to have an understanding of buildings that excludes structural forces and statics, you’re setting yourself up to be proven wrong…
March 31st, 2007 at 5:32 pmSo, we now have our own battle of the experts. On the one hand, Unbelievable, who believes the official explanation. On the other, criticalthinker, who poses some interesting thoughts which question the official explanation.
Unfortunately for Unbelievable, the Government had the remains carted away without performing any forensic examinations on the surviving steel beams. I wonder why the Government did that, and prevented a thorough investigation as a result?
March 31st, 2007 at 5:33 pmKeep the regime in Syria, we need REGIME CHANGE IN DC.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:36 pmre: Unbelievable
Did you bother to read above link I posted?
Especially Appendix A re: Conversation of Energy and Momentum?
That author is a structural engineer and she is saying the same thing I said!
Structural enginering is a speciality inside the field of mechanical enginering, and me and her had to take exactly the same courses for the first 3 years, and if I want to take the test for structral enginerring I would only have to take one year of architecture classes to qualify!
Both she and I took these classes which contains everything we need to know that the official story is a crock of poo!
Calculus I
March 31st, 2007 at 5:37 pmCalculus II
Calculus III
Calculus IV
Calculus V
Chemistry Inorganic
Chemistry Oganic
Physics I
Physics II
Static Mechanics (study of forces on static structures i.e buildings)
Dynamic Mechanics (study of forces on moving structures i.e planes)
Thermodynamics (study of heat tranbsfer)
Fluid Dynamics
Metals (study of steel properties)
Strength of Materials I (study of concrete in compression & tension)
Strength of Materials II
Design Fundamentals I
Design Fundamentals II
So, we now have our own battle of the experts. On the one hand, Unbelievable, who believes the official explanation.
How many times do I have to tell you that I have never read the official explanation and am only stating my own expert opinion before you accept that I am INDEPENDENT on the matter?
And since I’m the only building expert here, there cannot be a battle of experts. The other architect who posts here agrees with me.
Unfortunately for Unbelievable, the Government had the remains carted away without performing any forensic examinations on the surviving steel beams. I wonder why the Government did that, and prevented a thorough investigation as a result?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 31, 2007 @ 5:33 pm
It’s unfortunate for all of us, and if you’d stop being an instigator on this matter, you might realize it.
By the way, don’t try to joke with me. I see what you write about me when you think I’m not around, and frankly, I’m not interested in conversing with you. I don’t respect the two-faces.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:44 pmElliott Abrams, ANOTHER neo-CON-man and GOOSE-STEPPING NAZI-FASCIST of CHIMPya’s Bushland Uber Allies AND IMPLEMENTER OF CHIMPya’s global DOMINATION agenda—-YES INDEEDY, THESE CREEPS ARE SET ON CONQUERING AND SUBJUGATING THE REST OF THE WORLD TO CREATE ONE WORLD ORDER—-UNDER THE RUSE OF “global democracy”—-MY LEFT NUT!!!!!! THEY MUST BE STOPPED AND SOON!!!! RISE UP, PEOPLE OF AMERICA, DRAG THESE EVIL F*CKS DOWN, DESTROY THEM AND THEIR CRIMINAL AMBITIONS AND VILE MACHINATIONS!!!!! SHOW THEM THAT TRUE “FREEDOM” AND “DEMOCRACY” IS NOT TO BE USED LIGHTLY IN SPEAKING OR TAKEN FOR GRANTED, NOR PERVERTED TO FIT THEIR NEFARIOUS SCHEMES!!!!! SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS, THUS EVER BE TO ALL YA Bush TYRANTS!!!!!
March 31st, 2007 at 5:45 pmKeep the regime in Syria, we need REGIME CHANGE IN DC.
Comment by Uncle Ho
We gave it a try, didn’t we Uncle Ho? :D
March 31st, 2007 at 5:48 pm… if you’d stop being an instigator on this matter, you might realize it.
Comment by unbelievable — March 31, 2007 @ 5:44 pm
hey, I didn’t start this thread going down the nine-one-one road!
Somewhere along the line you got really pi$$ed at me and you’ve never let it go.
March 31st, 2007 at 5:48 pmDid you bother to read above link I posted?
I don’t have to … I went to an Engineer University and I dated a Mechanical Engineer during thattime. I know what the course of study includes.
Especially Appendix A re: Conversation of Energy and Momentum?
What’s that got to do with Structural Statics?
That author is a structural engineer and she is saying the same thing I said!
I never denied that there are people who agree with you. I just deny that they are the majority, or in many cases have worked on towers….
Structural enginering is a speciality inside the field of mechanical enginering,
That’s absolutely not true. Structural Engineers study in the CIVIL ENGINEERING department. I know from personal experience. But you’re a better judge of that than my own lying eyes… and degrees?
And me and her had to take exactly the same courses for the first 3 years, and if I want to take the test for structral enginerring I would only have to take one year of architecture classes to qualify!
But there’s a distinction!
Both she and I took these classes which contains everything we need to know that the official story is a crock of poo!
Not true… Or you’d have a degree that said so and allows you to design buildings… Which you legally cannot do.
Design Fundamentals II
Comment by criticalthinker — March 31, 2007 @ 5:37 pm
We all take the basic stuff – it’s the fact that we do diverge and that we practice (experience) differently that defines us…
Design a building of several stories and come back to discuss. Until you have that experience, which I do, you are still just speculating….
March 31st, 2007 at 5:52 pmRe: Unbelievable
“Buildings NEVER fall over – there simply isn’t enough of a physical force in existence that can get them to do so”
Go to ask.com and enter “Can buildings topple over?” and explain to us why the buildings descibed in those links do not exist!
You are just so wrong because you obviously do not know what a MOMENT is!
A moment is a force generated at a distance because of building structural members acting as levers.
That is why the wind will not sway people walking near the ground, but that same wind will sway tall buildings.
The small horizontal force at the top of your head is not multiplied very much by your small body lever.
The small horizontal force at the top of a tall building is multiplied very much by its long building lever.
If you cut one side of a tree truck just enough to make it tilt, its weight is multipled by the trunk into a force strong enough to break the trunk and make the tree topple over.
If you cut the vertical columns on one side of any building enough to make it tile, its weight is multiplied by the vertical columns into a force strong enough to to break the vertic columns on the opposite sides of the building and make it topple over.
That is how gravity brings a static structure down with weakened columns down, it is because the sum of the MOMENTS on the building are no longer zero!
March 31st, 2007 at 5:54 pmCan I ask whether the interesting debate between criticalthinker and unbelievable aimed solely at WTC1 and WTC2, or does it include WTC7?
March 31st, 2007 at 6:00 pmIMHO WTC7 is the building we should take a closer look at.
hey, I didn’t start this thread going down the nine-one-one road!
Neither did I… But so what? Who made you hall monitor?
Somewhere along the line you got really pi$$ed at me and you’ve never let it go.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 31, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
The reality is that you’ve never stopped giving me a reason to move past it. At intervals you have to make some nasty comment, and then you try to act like I’m victimizing you.
You’ve clearly said that you have a problem with the fact that I won’t convert to your beliefs. That’s not MY problem or issue. I don’t bring you up and make slanderous claims to vilify you. It’s the other way around. Always. And then you try to be all buddy-buddy and get offended when I don’t play along.
Last week you claimed that I was ChildrenofLir when he got into a fight with some regulars well past my bedtime. Totally uncalled for.
After a while, it’s just so old, tired, and immature, that annoyance turns into dislike. And you wonder why?
Just pick a face and stick with it already…
March 31st, 2007 at 6:02 pmCriticalthinker –
ask.com? Are you serious? How about Jeeves? Was that in your curriculum as well?
You’re not a Structural Engineer. you don’t know what you’re talking about and you refuse to consider for one second that there are people who do.
You’re talking pure theory.
The Trade Towers were, I think, 248′ square. You PROVE to me that they could fall over because there are enough forces (actually, it would also require torque – as moments are straight – because of the pivotal point about which it has to be pushed). Prove it. Otherwise, it’s purely speculation…
March 31st, 2007 at 6:07 pmI don’t have to … I went to an Engineer University and I dated a Mechanical Engineer during thattime.
Right ON! I dated a NBA star once so I know everything about basketball! Even how many yards they need for a first down!
March 31st, 2007 at 6:08 pmLike the fact that the Towers had been attacked with them prior to 9/11 and probably were still in the building?
Comment by unbelievable
OK, there’s no proof of this. Your credibility is losing ground here.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:12 pmJFK had to overule his right wing generals and advisors. They wanted to invade Cuba.. ” a godless communist menace”. The Cuban missile crisis was probably as close as the world got to a Nuclear War. Fortunately, JFK had read history…in paticular Barbara Tuchman’s excellent book on world war I..”the guns of August” which came out around that time. He knew the dangers of a conflict that spirals out of control.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:12 pmBush, unfortunately, has been going along with BAD ADVICE’ in spite of the glaring evidence of disaster in IRAQ. Hopefully he can be prevented from another disasterous decision regarding Syria.
Right ON! I dated a NBA star once so I know everything about basketball! Even how many yards they need for a first down!
Comment by joker — March 31, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
If you were a major league baseball player, you’d know the basics of team sports – which was my point. I know what classes my boyfriend took and could understand the gist of it as I was studying a semi-related field, went to the same college, and had the handbook for courses required.
I also had a music major as a roommmate and it’s amazing what I learned from living with her considering I cannot sing to save my life…
Basketball has baskets, by the way, hence the name….
March 31st, 2007 at 6:14 pmOK, there’s no proof of this.
That the chemicals from an explosion can be absorbed into porous surfaces, which would remain there?
That’s just common sense. But the Mythbusters did it with the smell from dead pigs in a Corvette…
Your credibility is losing ground here.
Comment by joker — March 31, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
Not at all… The caliber of your posts is evidence… LOL
March 31st, 2007 at 6:17 pmI went to high shool, and dated a person who ran the mile in track, and I know all about how to run for a long time without stopping…
March 31st, 2007 at 6:18 pmre#121
All three of the buildings were brought down with explosives!
We have pictures of the WTC-1 and WTC-2 being brought doem with explosions:
h t t p : / / 9 1 1 r e s e a r c h . w t c 7 . n e t / w t c / e v i d e n c e / p h o t o s / w t c 2 e x p 2 . h t m l
In these pictures you can OBVIOUSLY see steel beams being blown outward and building materials crumbling, since gravity only pulls things downward, and material can only bounce upward after colliding with lower floors and the ground.
But from this and the other pictures here you can see that steel beams and concrete masses are moving upward and outward before the building even came down.
Only in america can you show people a picture of explosion, and talk them out of what they can see in front of their own eyes!
Because WTC-7 was not hit by an airplane, there was not even a reason for the vertical columns being weaken enough to even start generating a moment to pring it down, so they had to resort to the silly falling debris fire argument.
Of course this just like for the other buildings does not explain the falling in place instead of toppling over and near free fall collapse speeds.
Think about the fact that all those buildings contained thousands of metal filing cabinets, porcelein sinks and tolets, and a bunch of other fire proof material, yet not a single piece of these items was found in the debris.
Think about how 110 stories worth materical could be pulverized into a 50 micron dust so small that it could not even fill the six sub-basements which were already full of building utility equipment.
Should not those piles of debris at least been several stories high, especially given that the much smaller WTC-7 created a debris pile many times higher?
Things falling down from gravity and colliding into other building materials do not turn into 50 micron dust powder!
March 31st, 2007 at 6:22 pmI have read most of this read (Hello Zooey=) and the thing I want to know is how did workers in the basement get burned before the planes even hit.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:23 pmI had Plymouth Voyager van given to me once;
March 31st, 2007 at 6:23 pmthat mice had lived in for a few years as it sat in a field.
The porous materials in it smelled really bad….
Unbe – AHhh….Your famous ASSumptions (and I always regarded you as a critical thikier…) Your mind is as closed as a water-tight vault. It’s interesting to note that you seem to have few friends and effectively manage to pi$$ off the remainder of your comrades. (i.e Zooette, Braid Faire, etc.) Hopefully you’ll be able to get some much needed rest during Easter Break….you poor thing.
Toooodles……..
March 31st, 2007 at 6:23 pmYou’ve clearly said that you have a problem with the fact that I won’t convert to your beliefs.
Only you have made that claim, not I. It is not possible to convert someone to the path of a Shaman. You either can or cannot travel between realms. From what I gathered from our earlier discussions, you believe it is unreasonable to believe that that which cannot be proven exists. Whereas I believe that it is unreasonable to believe that that which cannot be proven does not exist.
Since both Athiesm and Spirituality are rooted in a belief system based on the unprovable, the only “conversion” from one system to the other would, of necessity, be based upon personal experience and not any form of logical debate.
Now, if you still want to cling to the belief that I tried to “convert” you…you are certainly free to do so.
Last week you claimed that I was ChildrenofLir when he got into a fight with some regulars well past my bedtime.
Not true. I said CoL reminded me of you. And, let’s face it, you tend to get highly defensive and lash out when you feel you’ve been insulted.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:24 pmHopefully you’ll be able to get some much needed rest during Easter Break….you poor thing. Toooodles……..
Comment by valiant venus
Hopefully you’ll start eating, your looking quite anorexic MA.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:25 pm#114
“And since I’m the only building expert here, there cannot be a battle of experts. The other architect who posts here agrees with me.”
Yes I do unbelievable and you and I really don’t like each other or agree when it come to just about everything else, but we agree on this. I just got on to this thread and sure have been using alot of energy well explaining structrual engineering and statics to these people. The comment I have for anyone else out there is this: Name one reputable structural engineering firm in the U.S. that subscribes to the WTC towers being taken down by explosives.
“Design a building of several stories and come back to discuss. Until you have that experience, which I do, you are still just speculating….”
How about he/she designs something along the lines of the Azure tower in Dallas.
http://www.azureliving.com/
On another note, its going to be close…I thing $2.80 is the magic number!
http://www.southcarolinagasprices.com/
March 31st, 2007 at 6:27 pmThat the chemicals from an explosion can be absorbed into porous surfaces, which would remain there?
That’s not what was said and you know it. The Thermate was found in much more abundance than any absorbtion rate from any hypothetical past explosion. Are you sure you’re not Jake?
March 31st, 2007 at 6:28 pmOn another note, its going to be close…I thing $2.80 is the magic number!
Comment by Tracy — March 31, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
Regular is $3.13 at the cheapest gas stations in Central California today, up from $3.09 on Thursday.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:31 pmre: unbelievable
If you want to understand what I am saying about how moments topple buildings over, you have to get a college text book on static mechanics and read it.
Only after you learn what is meant by “the sum of the forces and moments on a static structure are zero”, will you even begin to understand how wrong you are.
To prove that you do not know what you are talking about especially about mechanics and strength of materials, here is a simple question:
Assuming a WTC tower is 1400 feet high and you dropped a one cubic inch concrete block from that roof:
How many pounds of of force would it hit the ground with, and is that force more or less than the compression strength of the weakest concrete?
I know you cannot answer this question, because anybody that can knows the official explantion is a crock because it does not explain how 110 floors of concrete got pulverized into a 50 micron dust powder!
March 31st, 2007 at 6:34 pmComment by criticalthinker — March 31, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
Dude – whatever… I’ve made my point and you yours – this thing is like a religion, and you wouldn’t consider anything else no matter what, so I see no point in wasting either of our time. You belive what you want and I’ll know that the majority of my proffesion does not agree with you… And, as a teacher, that my students are being taught the reality so that they will know the inherent complications of skyscrapers.
Good luck.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:34 pmYour famous ASSumptions (and I always regarded you as a critical thikier…) Your mind is as closed as a water-tight vault.
General insults now because you were busted for cut and pasting?
I’ve noticed a correlation between how nasty you are and how busted you are… The nastier, the more busted. LOL
It’s interesting to note that you seem to have few friends and effectively manage to pi$$ off the remainder of your comrades. (i.e Zooette, Braid Faire, etc.)
I’m not here to be “friends”. I have enough of those in my real life (unlike you). I’m here to be a voice against ignorance like you. If people don’t like me, or vice versa – welcome to reality. Unlike you, I accept that not everyone can get along. Which is odd that you can’t considering NO ONE here likes you… Not even the other trolls. Ouchie…
Hopefully you’ll be able to get some much needed rest during Easter Break….you poor thing.
Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
Typical Christianist – only lives for the holidays where you get to be special for the day. I enjoy every day.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:40 pm#136
We it sucks to live in California. Average price here in Texas is $2.56. Must be all those taxes.
http://www.texasgasprices.com/
BTW as far as unbelievable and I are concerned if it isn’t at $2.80 by tomorrow then we know what that means.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:44 pmTwo days, two pissing contests (Tuskegee and WTC collapse). The only problem I have with the situation is that building 2 fell within its own footprint. The plane that went into it took out one corner. I have felled hundreds of trees. As criticalthinker indicates, you notch out one side and cut the coup de grace from the stub on the opposite side. An expert can fell a tree so its top hits within 2 feet of target per hundred feet of tree, usually less. The problem with building 2 is that it failed to drop its damaged top floors across the street.
March 31st, 2007 at 6:57 pmunb may have a degree in architecture, but she has obviously skipped the courses in strength of materials, physics and chaos theory. That has been part of the curriculum since the Tacoma bridge collapse.
Unbe – I cut and paste nothing – (psssst….just because you say “LIAR” doesn’t make it so.) I know you think you are the only one who KNOWS ANYTHING….but allow others to dispel that misguided notion of yours….
Well it’s BBQ time…… what no date on a Saturday night ? Maybe you could paint your nails or something…..
March 31st, 2007 at 7:03 pmOnly you have made that claim, not I. It is not possible to convert someone to the path of a Shaman. You either can or cannot travel between realms.
Stop it. You said that you offered me the way or the path or something along those lines and that something was wrong with me for rejecting it. You said it. Not me.
From what I gathered from our earlier discussions, you believe it is unreasonable to believe that that which cannot be proven exists. Whereas I believe that it is unreasonable to believe that that which cannot be proven does not exist.
I don’t do believe… I either accept or do not accept based on evidence, logic (including things like strings, blackholes and evolution which I cannot personally prove exist, but make logical sense), and reason. Believe is not a part of my equation.
Obviously – you know yourself, so I’ll accept what you say you believe.
Since both Athiesm and Spirituality are rooted in a belief system based on the unprovable, the only “conversion†from one system to the other would, of necessity, be based upon personal experience and not any form of logical debate.
Atheism is not a belief system. It’s the opposite. It’s the lack of belief. Atheism is a thinking system.
I don’t agree. Convering from one system to thr other would require going from a thinking or believing (depending on where you are starting) system to the other. Not easy, I can attest, as I went from Catholicism (belief sytem) to Atheism (thinking system) via Buddhism (a philosophy in between), and not many people do this.
You’ve gone from one belief system to another belief system.
Now, if you still want to cling to the belief that I tried to “convert†you…you are certainly free to do so.
Again, I don’t believe. I accept that you did based on what you typed in that regard and I now recall. I even commented on that you and didn’t get this objection then…
Not true. I said CoL reminded me of you. And, let’s face it, you tend to get highly defensive and lash out when you feel you’ve been insulted.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 31, 2007 @ 6:24 pm
Ya know who else CoL reminds me of? Unbelievable. She hasn’t been around much, has she….
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 25, 2007 @ 9:18 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/25/feinstein-calls-on-gonzales-to-resign
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know what you were infering… And in context of people discussing someone pretending to be COL, your comment is even more obvious
#425 – BnF, why in the world would you think it was unbelievable?
Comment by Quadrajet — March 25, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
Let’s face it – you assume I get highly defensive and lash out when insulted. The fact that I maintain my critical thinking functions during heated debates invalidates that assumption you make. It’s a fact that when people are angry, they excrete adrenalin and it shuts down all but the the survival aspects of the brain.
Funny how you tried to dodge responsibility of what you said… Rather than just accept it. That’s not integrity.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:05 pmvv,
March 31st, 2007 at 7:06 pmAre you refering to finish nails or common nails?
criticalthinker – I studied structural engineering and architecture in college, therefore I don’t need a mechanical engineering textbook to know about structural statics… LOL
I’m not wrong. And the fact that the most practicing Structural Engineers and Architects agree with me is enough for me.
Later.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:08 pmYes I do unbelievable and you and I really don’t like each other or agree when it come to just about everything else, but we agree on this.
I don’t dislike you… You just push my buttons. I think it’s funny, actually. The only conservatives here I actually dislike are MA, and… well, that’s it… just MA.
I just got on to this thread and sure have been using alot of energy well explaining structrual engineering and statics to these people. The comment I have for anyone else out there is this: Name one reputable structural engineering firm in the U.S. that subscribes to the WTC towers being taken down by explosives.
This should be interesting… Because you’re right – the CREDIBLE folks explain it the same way you and I do…
How about he/she designs something along the lines of the Azure tower in Dallas.
http://www.azureliving.com/
Are you bragging? LOL
On another note, its going to be close…I thing $2.80 is the magic number!
http://www.southcarolinagasprices.com/
Comment by Tracy — March 31, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
Okay – so what does that mean to you? And how long are you willing to argue about it, because I need to go soon…
March 31st, 2007 at 7:12 pmunb,
March 31st, 2007 at 7:13 pmI do not want practicing architects to design anything that I would have to live in. I would rather have a professional.
That’s not what was said and you know it.
Yes it is… What else could I have meant?
The Thermate was found in much more abundance than any absorbtion rate from any hypothetical past explosion.
How do you know?
Are you sure you’re not Jake?
Comment by joker — March 31, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
Considering you are… I can’t be. :)
March 31st, 2007 at 7:14 pmWalt – a 248′ building falling is NOT the same as a 24″ or even 56″ diameter tree. Do the math… It couldn’t fall over.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:16 pmUnbe – I cut and paste nothing – (psssst….just because you say “LIAR†doesn’t make it so.) I know you think you are the only one who KNOWS ANYTHING….but allow others to dispel that misguided notion of yours….
You totally copied it. The text was off to prove it… Busted…
Well it’s BBQ time…… what no date on a Saturday night ? Maybe you could paint your nails or something…..
Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
It’s only 7:00… And only you value yourself in terms of other people liking your cootchie or not.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:19 pmre: unbelivable
A majority of the people believe that a virgin can have a baby and man came back from the dead.
The scientific method does not require a “majority” of experts to prove or disprove something!
It is a known FACT that concrete cannot be turned into a 50 micron powder without explosives, and that is the IRREFUTEABLE proof that the WTC buildings were brought down with explosives.
Unless one of your so called “experts” can come on TV and show how they can turn one floor of concrete yet alone 110 floors of concrete into a 50 micron dust without explosives in less than 15 seconds, the are WRONG accordording to the scientific method.
I feel sorry for students if they have a teacher who does not know enough of Newtonian Mechanics to calculate how hard a piece of concrete falling from the top of the WTC hit the grounds, yet thinks they can teach them about skyscraper failures as to whether they were a result of a non-zero force or a non-zero moment.
Should they go to college and take engineering classes, and use that teachers knowledge as their basis, they will be shocked at the failing grades they will receive!
But for the record this is how the calculation goes:
Mass of one cubic foot of concrete = 150 pounds = 4.6875 slugs
Acceleration due to gravity = 32 feet/sec/sec
Distance = 1/2 times Acceleration times Time * Time
1350 feet = 1/2 times 32 * Time * Time
Time = 9.18 = round down to 9 to make math easier
Speed of block right before impact = 9 * 32 = 288 feet/sec
Speed of block right after impact = 0 feet/sec
Instantaneous acceleration = 0 – 288 feet/sec = -288 feet/sec
Instantaneous Force = Mass times Instananeous Acceleration
Instantaneous Force = 4.6875 times -288 feet/sec = 1350 pounds
Is that enough force to compression fail a cubic foot of concrete into dust?
The compression strength of the weakest concrete is 5000 pounds/in/in, while the weakest is 25,000 pounds/in/in.
Since that 1350 pounds was spread across a square foot instead of a square inch lets change the weakest 5000 pounds/in/in to
720,000 pounds/feet/feet.
As you can see that force is enough to break the concrete block into pebbles, but far less than the force needed to compression fail it into dust!
Now do you think that the debris on each of the 110 WTC concrete floors including the upper ones was pushing down 720,000 pounds across every square foot?
Hey maybe for the very bottom ones, but no way for the roof or any of the top floors!
Hey even if they were, how would the dust get out from under that weight to move upward even before the building fell all the way to the ground!
The government can get away with these silly unscientific lies, because their paid shills or so called experts know that very few people have engineering degrees and understand how strong concrete is in compression is in comparison to weak gravity!
March 31st, 2007 at 7:20 pmunb,
March 31st, 2007 at 7:22 pmI am not talking about the building, just the top 23 or so floors.
I do not want practicing architects to design anything that I would have to live in. I would rather have a professional.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 31, 2007 @ 7:13 pm
They are the same Walt…
March 31st, 2007 at 7:22 pmA majority of the people believe that a virgin can have a baby and man came back from the dead.
Then a majority of people are willingto accept things that cannot exist… Just like people who believe the way the Trade Towers fell could prove that Bush was responsible for them being hit. Just are ridiculous…
The scientific method does not require a “majority†of experts to prove or disprove something!
Comment by criticalthinker — March 31, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
You just lost me… If you don’t respect peer-review and collaboration, you don’t anyting about science… And there’s no basis for agreement.
Tell that to Jesus… Conjecture is more his speed. LOL
March 31st, 2007 at 7:27 pmI am not talking about the building, just the top 23 or so floors.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 31, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
Which were still 248′ by 248′… Same math.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:28 pmI agree wth Tracy’s request:
Quote one VALID Licensed Structural Engineer with actual experience designing towers who supports your Conspiracy Theory… Not a professor, not a mechanical or electrical engineer, not a student, not a phD who has never worked for a firm, and not your Uncle Charlie who is the head Engineer for Wal-Marts….
March 31st, 2007 at 7:31 pmTracy – find me next week. We have a heated debate about gas prices to attend to…
Later everyone else!
March 31st, 2007 at 7:33 pm#137
You breakout that submittal for that concrete when that poured those composite slabs for those floors and then we will have ourselves a real discussion. BTW what are the other components of concrete besides the aggragate? One could be flyash which is around 10-30 microns used in structural concrete. Lime is another which is around 40 micons. In fact all components of Portland cement are less 70 microns.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:36 pmunb,
March 31st, 2007 at 7:38 pmNot really, my second architect was a student of Frank Lloyd Wright. Fifty page spec book and plans down to the detail of laying, soldering and testing of the shower stall liner. Cost me a mint, but when I transferred the property, I made a few bucks.
There’s an excellent website called 911myths dot com which debunks everything the 9/11 Truthers ever said.
Comment by Perry Logan — March 31, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
I’ve spent the last two hours going over this site. First, I do not believe most of the conspiracy theories out there, so I tried to take this with as open a mind as possible.
This site uses a lot of circular logic to come to it’s conclusions. It also says many times, “No proof exists”, as if testimony doesn’t count. When coverups are done, there will be no evidence. The only proof lies in testimonies. (I worked as an investigator for Naval Intelligence back in 1980-1983). The examples they give are often shoddy and not well researched. And so many times, they give a hypethetical and then act as if the “logic” behind this is enough to debunk a point.
In conclusion, when I want to debunk some myths, I will NOT send people to this web site. It looks like it was done strickly as a propaganda tool and not as a truly scientific study. If I were to use any of this in a scientific review, or a court of law, I would be made a fool of. Be wary if you are using this for your assumptions.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:44 pmThank you, Progressives!! I see what you mean! Trip through the poppy fiels…. employ the Golden Rule, pretend extremists Muslims are not a threat, roll over and go back to sleep, knock on the door at Oz…..Makes perfect sense! Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
That was a great channeling of the wicked witch. Do flying monkeys also shoot out of your *ss? Don’t you have to *eat* something, before anything shoots out of your *ss – anorexia girl?
You’re so *funny*, but NOT because of the reasons you *feel* you are!!! You’re the *joke* – that’s what’s funny!!!! All you need to do is scream “I’ll get you my little pretty” to Unbelievable – and you’ll have a perfect witch!!!!
March 31st, 2007 at 7:46 pm#146
“I don’t dislike you… You just push my buttons.”
Same here.
“Are you bragging? LOL”
Well I thought that even the least qualified architect could design up to seven stories. Here at Perkins + Will we design alot of highrises.
“Okay – so what does that mean to you?”
It means that your prediction about gas being at $3.00 (+/- $0.20) by the end of this month is either going to pass or fail just barely. I going to be a nail biter and very fun.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:48 pmostracks,
Please don’t judge this site by this thread alone.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:50 pmRE: Tracy’s request
Somebody quote me one structural engineer who has explained how concrete can be pulverized into 50 micron powder in less than 15 seconds without explosives.
Somebody quote me one structural engineer who has explained how gravity which pulls mass down could propel the steel beams and concrete mass in this picture upward before it has a chance to hit the ground and bounce upward from a collision?
Why do not these experts ever draw ahould be able to draw a force diagram to illustrate how this movement against gravity could occur?
How do they explain the mushrooming of the material upward and outward if gravity is the only force in play, and not explosives?
Has anybody every see a building falling under the influence gravity explode like that?
h t t p : / / 9 1 1 r e s e a r c h . w t c 7 . n e t / w t c / e v i d e n c e / p h o t o s / w t c 2 e x p 2 . h t m l
Q: Why do they never address those questions in any of their explanations?
A: They refuse to answer these questions because they are IRREFUTABLE proof that explosions brought those buildings down.
I am extremely opened mind and more than ready to change my mind, if anybody can show me a link to a document that answers these questions, without violating the laws of science.
I have yet seen any explanation, and I read the entire 9-11 report that even considered these “Lt Columbo” questions.
March 31st, 2007 at 7:51 pm“And only you value yourself in terms of other people liking your cootchie or not.” Comment by unbelievable
Translation: “No date. The men I meet are sick of my lectures. I’ll stay home and watch TV with my cat on my lap.”
March 31st, 2007 at 7:52 pmre# 158
After you bake a cake out of 50 microm flour power, do you expect to drop it and get 50 micron flour powder back out?
The materials in concrete undergo a chemical reaction, they are not compressed to together like sand or snow!
It does not matter how small the size is of the chemical reagants that go into a reaction, only the compounds that come out.
I repeat if that task is so easy and can be done without explosives, how come NOBODY can pulverize hardened concrete into 50 micron dust in less than 15 seconds.
No matter how high a height you drop a concrete block from, it will not turn into a snow like 50 micron powder!
Before the invention of explosives, the only thing that could turn solid rock into micron sized powder in seconds was a volcano!
March 31st, 2007 at 8:00 pmTranslation: “No date. The men I meet are sick of my lectures. I’ll stay home and watch TV with my cat on my lap.†Comment by valiant venus — March 31, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
Translation: Projection.
March 31st, 2007 at 8:07 pmre #160 ostracks
The laws of conversation of momentum and conversation of energy say the official explanation is scientifically impossible.
See the Appendex A at the bottom of the page for the mathematical details:
h t t p : / / j a n e d o e 0 9 1 1 . t r i p o d . c o m / B i l l i a r d B a l l s . h t m l
March 31st, 2007 at 8:16 pmostracks,
Please don’t judge this site by this thread alone.
Comment by Zooey — March 31, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
oh my! please don’t! …
…lordy lordy… how did the SYRIAN REGIME CHANGE thread get turned into another 9/11 pissing match? … … oh yea…
well, i know that I was sure hoping to learn something about the possible plans for SYRIAN REGIME CHANGE…
maybe later…
March 31st, 2007 at 8:37 pmi see there is a newer thread… i started reading this one this morning… have even napped since then… i never nap…
the city can sure wear you out!
#166
“The materials in concrete undergo a chemical reaction, they are not compressed to together like sand or snow!”
Yeah but they don’t change size either! Have you ever been around a construction site when they are cutting concrete? The particles are in dust form.
“I repeat if that task is so easy and can be done without explosives, how come NOBODY can pulverize hardened concrete into 50 micron dust in less than 15 seconds.”
BS! In fact I went outside while in the middle of typing this response and did just that with my 16 ounce hammer. I have a couple of cores from some slump tests in my garage. I broke of a 2 inch x 2 inch piece and pounded into very fine dust in 10 seconds with my 16 ouce hammer.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:16 pmI see that I did not make myself clear on message #160. I was not talking about this site, but rather the myth911 site. That is the site I was critiqueing.
criticalthinker. I do realize that the official explanation is not correct. It smells like the coverups that we used to do. However, I do not think that all of the alternative theories are correct either. The truth lies somewhere in between.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:25 pmThanks, ostracks.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:39 pmRemember when we said that Bush wanted to take over the middle east when he invaded Iraq?
Now we’re looking at Iran, Syria, and we’re in Afghanistan and Iraq and Israel is our ally.
Even though the neocons said we were crazy, it sounds like we weren’t too far off the mark.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:53 pmBush the Conqueorer.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:56 pmAh, yes! Elliott Abrams, the guy who was convicted for lying under oath to Congress during the Iran-Contra hearings… Later pardoned by Poppy Bush along with another convicted perjurer, Pointdexter…
If anyone remembers the Iran – Contra hearings, Abrams’ testimonies were a perfect example of arrogance, defiance, and perjury. He was a piece of crap then, he is a worse piece of crap now. Abrams is the poster boy for the white collar criminal who cannot possibly be rehabilitated, ever.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:58 pm#170 Tracy thanks for doing the experiement with the hammer.
March 31st, 2007 at 11:22 pmNow I don’t have to!
The truth lies somewhere in between.
Comment by ostracks — March 31, 2007 @ 9:25 pm
Thanks for the voice of reason. It is interesting that people feel so certain in their explanation of something that has never occured before. It seems if the government was trying to find out the facts they would have assembled a panel of the best and brightest experts in many of the related fields from assorted countries and studied what happens.
March 31st, 2007 at 11:43 pmIn hindsight it seems that conclusions were either anecdotal or fabricated. So it seems premature to close the book on the issue.
Any chance Pelosi just stays in Syria?
March 31st, 2007 at 11:44 pmAny chance Pelosi just stays in Syria?
Comment by muckdog
She’s gonna come back just to piss you off.
March 31st, 2007 at 11:51 pm#178 – “Any chance Pelosi just stays in Syria?”
Comment by muckdog
Only if we get verrrry lucky…..
April 1st, 2007 at 12:39 amOnly if we get verrrry lucky….. Comment by valiant venus — April 1, 2007 @ 12:39 am
If we get lucky, you’ll choke on a grain of rice, and spare the world from your constant whining and miserable disposition. Otherwise, we’ll just suffer from your st*pid c*nt hate speech – business as usual.
Tell Venomous P*nis, why must you *thrust* yourself on the world? Is it the gender confusion, the sexual confusion, the religious confusion, or all of the above that makes you so self loathing – you miserable little c*nt?
April 1st, 2007 at 1:36 amAny chance Pelosi just stays in Syria? Comment by muckdog — March 31, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
Any chance you and valiant venus move to Pakistan, with the rest of the Taliban? Just because you’re Christian and Jewish – don’t let that stop you! You both have far more in common with the terrorists, than you do with Americans! That’s why it’s such ashame that Israel keeps you apart! You’re like twins, separated from Osama at birth! I bet you hate the day that they stopped being best buds with the Reagan administration and Israel – fighting the Commie hordes, don’t you wackos?
April 1st, 2007 at 1:38 amOnly if we get verrrry lucky…..
Comment by valiant venus
It’s funny how frightened you are of Pelosi.
April 1st, 2007 at 1:46 amIt’s funny how frightened you are of Pelosi.
Comment by Zooey — April 1, 2007 @ 1:46 am
She can’t handle *actually* powerful women – how ironic huh for someone with her gender/sexual confusion? You’d think she’d like Pelosi, but she spends all of her time calling her “SpeakerETTE” and other “feminizing” terms – as though that’s a bad thing. What a f*cked up little piece of sh*t she is!
April 1st, 2007 at 1:52 amValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
Self-loathing women usually hate other women.
April 1st, 2007 at 1:56 amGreat thread !!
April 1st, 2007 at 3:42 amMore on the Civil War: Another dark weekend.
April 1st, 2007 at 4:53 amHashim al-Shibli, Iraqs Justice minister, has tendered his resignation after at least 14 Iraqis died and 58 were injured in sectarian violence on Saturday.
The Iraqi interior ministry also said that the final death toll from the Tal Afar attack was 152, with further 347 wounded.
[...] post by Nico and software by Elliott Back Bookmark [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 4:32 amLegal Advice Regarding Damage To Car By Street Repair
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
March 15th, 2008 at 4:59 pm