Curtains?
OK.
I knew you would come up with some lame excuse. You did not disappoint.
If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II
- Thread starter Seymour Butz
- Start date
Curtains?
OK.
I knew you would come up with some lame excuse. You did not disappoint.
Too many people have cut these kids way too much slack for way too long.
That is exactly their problem.
Nobody has demanded that they sit down and really think about things like a serious adult.
These kids, like FF & MicahJava, think that I'm a big old meanie.
They don't realize that, if they were to put in the tiniest amount of real effort, I'm giving the best intellectual gift that anyone could give them: Not accepting their sloppy, lazy thinking. Demanding that they do better, that they do their best.
If they'd bother to try, they might succeed as figuring some things out for themselves, instead of being spoon-fed crap from smooth talking shysters. If they succeeded at that, every once in awhile, they might come to really like the feeling. If they came to like that feeling, there's a chance that they might eventually become good at thinking for themselves.
Who knows what might follow from that...!!
The single greatest gift that my old VP Engineering did for me, when I was a baby engineer, was to NOT accept anything less than my best design. He'd come back to me, toss a design on my desk & say, "this ain't good enough. You can do better." It royally pissed me off. But then it became a challenge. And his being demanding was the best thing that ever happened to my career.
Later on, I became that demanding figure, on my own designs. I'd be the one telling myself, "This ain't good enough."
worked for me...
Your statement make zero sense, the concrete was not pulverized the instant the collapse began, that is BS, a lie, a fantasy... why do you make up idiotic claims?
You are talking BS, like no plane idiots do. The dust is wallboard and insulation. Caused by the collapse.
What is making your concrete in midair fall apart? Magic? You make no sense, there is no thermite, no explosives, thus saying saying the concrete was broken up in the air is BS; it was broken by the collapse which was equal in energy in each tower to over 100 2,000 pounds bombs, but worse because the energy was confined to impacts, not blast effects. You lost this argument because you don't make sense.
If you can't grasp the Kinetic energy involved, then you can't let go of the BS you can't explain in the first place.
You know there were planes, but then you can't figure out it was Flight 77 at the Pentagon when FDR, Radar, and DNA prove it was.
Thus you make up BS out of thin air, repeating failed lies from 9/11 truth without evidence.
Last edited:
On your education? Did it fail?
I think you meant blue tang fish instead of goldfish.
Nope. I see right through your nonsense.
Axxman300
Philosopher
Funny you post a video which shows WTC getting raked by WTC1, with dust blowing out the opposite side windows from the impact.
You see but you do not observe, the distinction is clear...( wish I'd thought of that line).
There are large chunks of concrete visible falling to the street below.
So reality disagrees with you.
It took over 12 seconds to pulverize the concrete that was pulverized
Wow, a youtube video. Wow. You have proved 9/11 truth followers have no clue and are gullible.
Wow, you showed smoke. You debunk yourself, like 9/11 truth.
Big fail, you showed smoke, and dust. the dust at the WTC was insulation, wallboard, and concrete, the light weight concrete from floors in the WTC; you failed to study the dust;
You come to discuss stuff you never researched, instead you show smoke from the WTC collapse in a youtube video. You think you can see smoke vs pulverized concrete; and fail. you lost this discussion, maybe when you finish your engineering degree, you will understand 9/11.
https://www2.usgs.gov/blogs/feature...he-dust-from-the-world-trade-center-collapse/
Wow, a youtube video. Wow. You have proved 9/11 truth followers have no clue and are gullible.
Wow, you showed smoke. You debunk yourself, like 9/11 truth.
Big fail, you showed smoke, and dust. the dust at the WTC was insulation, wallboard, and concrete, the light weight concrete from floors in the WTC; you failed to study the dust;
You come to discuss stuff you never researched, instead you show smoke from the WTC collapse in a youtube video. You think you can see smoke vs pulverized concrete; and fail. you lost this discussion, maybe when you finish your engineering degree, you will understand 9/11.
https://www2.usgs.gov/blogs/feature...he-dust-from-the-world-trade-center-collapse/
Last edited:
The video speaks for itself. That must eat you up. No amount of skeptic nonsense can change what can clearly be seen. Pulverized concrete is seen immediately after the collapse begins. It's there. Anyone with eyes can see it.
I see what is there. I see pulverized concrete as the collapse begins. Why? Simple. It's because that is what the video shows.
You show smoke and lie. Like no plane liars, but you lie about concrete which can't be crushed instantly but after time. Thus you are a liar base on your fantasy version of 9/11 which never existed. Better luck with the planes, where were all proved with Radar Data.
Why lie about smoke being crushed concrete? Wallboard crushes easy, as does the under-floor insulation. You are missing reality, and playing the BS card.
What is your point? there are no explosives, adn thermite does not pulverize concrete; , no explosions are seen.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0050-02/fs-050-02_508.pdf
You lie about 9/11, and you have no clue what the dust was made up of, and ignore the smoke. Why do you lie like no planers lie?
Last edited:
What was the "unit of failure" of the towers?
Hint: the unit of failure was exactly the same as the unit of construction.
But you do have a point. Not much concrete at all got comminuted (the correct term) at first. There were N floors (the unit, above) that were torn apart. Several concrete floor fractured promptly. That fracturing produced not much concrete dust.
During the entire collapse, there was not a lot of concrete dust (the percentage of all the concrete) was turned to dust. You cannot do that, unless you constrain the concrete on BOTH sides, not just whack it from the top side.
But a relatively small percent of comminuted concrete can produce a LOT of dust.
The real comminution not of the concrete didn't happen until the collapse reached the street, and the concrete was trapped both below & above.
Next, you arrive at my second statement: nobody (that I've heard) has any idea whatsoever how much of that cloud is concrete, versus other crushed friable material.
I don't know. Certainly you don't know.
One thing that was promptly pushed out of the windows with expelled air as soon as the building began to collapse: smoke & Fire.
It took about ((2*10)/(.7 * 32))0.5 = 0.9 seconds for the building to fall 10 feet. All kinds of dust & debris (but little concrete dust) would have been "liberated" from all kinds of hiding spots (in ceilings, in floors, behind walls, etc.), wafted into the air & then carried outside of the building by very strong winds as that air was ejected.
I'll jump to the assumption that I DON'T have to show you the 50,000 tons of descending mass, after one story's collapse...
__
Now that I've answered your question, are you going to answer my question & show us exactly where the explosions happened in WTC7 that you claimed??
Or are you going to run away from your own assertion??
Sounds lie you made that up, it is smoke, expelled by the collapse. Why do yo lie and make up BS?
We we see smoke and dust first as 400,000 cubic feet of air/smoke are expelled per floor... You can't do the math?
You are like the no plane 9/11 truth followers, no evidence, you make it up. ''
How was concrete pulverized before the top section crushed the first floor below? How long does that take? Did you do the math yet? NO
When will you use evidence instead of stuff you make up or plagiarized from a failed movement of woo.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0050-02/fs-050-02_508.pdf
Could some be glass? Fiberglass? Wallboard? You know up to 3 inches of wallboard covered steel in the WTC? any clue yet'
the first floor of concrete crushed would be at .87 seconds an the time it takes to be expelled... thus if you are saying there was crushed concrete after .86 seconds of the collapse, then there is, with wallboard, insulation, glass, and office stuff, partitions, dust, etc.
The real dust study was done... did you miss it
Last edited:
Axxman300
Philosopher
Hardly.
I laugh at your doltishness. You just posted a video that shows the North Tower collapse. The cloud you think is dust is actually smoke from the raging fires which ultimately cause the collapse. The shattered concrete is heavier than smoke (you can test this out yourself) and cascades out the sides of the building as it tears itself apart. Most of the dust is from the drywall being pulverized.
Again, the best part of you posting this video is that you undermine A&ETruth as this video clearly shows impact damage to WTC7, the most telling of which being the dust blasting out the windows of the opposite face. Since you're dense I'll spell it out. Something big and heavy from WTC1 slammed into the face of WTC7 hard enough to shatter plate-glass windows.
The other thing absent from this video is the sound of explosions...except the intellectual bang from shooting yourself in the foot.
LMAO.
I've watched it AT LEAST as much as you have.
I can show you hundreds of burned out cars AFTER the WTC2 tower collapsed, and after WTC1 collapsed.
Please show me 100s of burned out cars before WTC2 collapsed.
Regardless of this idiocy, are you REALLY claiming that none of the debris thrown out of the tower was burning.
And you seem to have skipped over the part where I said that the ejected components were also trailing the very same dust that made up the cloud.
Just out of curiosity, what do you think happens to air, if you were to compress 400,000 cubic feet of it down to about 100,000 cubic feet in about 0.05 seconds...
Give it a shot, kid...