• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
*Takes off time from a project deadlined wednesday*
In that case:
Take one paper or plastic bag.
Fill halfway up with flour.
Now have someone hold it open in the top edge (use both hands, one on each side of the bag).
now clap your hands together at high velocity, catching the bag in the middle.
You now have a kitchen/living room with a cloud of flour in it.
And a working example of airpressure Vs. Debris.
:D
 
Trifikas said:
Can someone define what a "Squib" is in this case? I hear "Squibs" and I always think of the small-explosives packets they use in Special effects shots in movies, Wich barely do any damage at all. Some of them are even put on a actor (over some light-weight armor for some protection) for when they get "Shot". But Unless they're a lot bigger than what I've seen, I can't imagine them taking down a building without millions of them.
Click to expand...
I've never heard the term applied as they're doing either.

Here's the dictionary definition...

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/squib

It grates on me when someone latches onto a word and then beats it into the ground like this.
Another example would be "insurgency".
 
Gravy said:
(lots of excellent questions)
Click to expand...
Great post, Gravy. I think I may have to create a link to that post in my sig. Thanks for attempting to keep them honest over there. (Personally, I find it too depressing to hang out on their forum for too long. I hate losing faith in my fellow human beings.)

Sultanist said:
I've never heard the term applied as they're doing either.

Here's the dictionary definition...

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/squib
Click to expand...
Yep, exactly. The term refers to the actual explosive device (I'm not even sure if that's the term actual demolitionists use.) The sad part is how the CTers see the puffs of smoke and debris ejecting from the building, and automatically connect that as "evidence" of a CD, when no proof of actual explosive devices has even been found.
 
manny said:
Ha! That maroon Roxdog just made an animated .gif of 7 WTC falling. Slowing down one of the tapes, it shows the building falling slightly to the south, just like they say it "should have!"
Click to expand...
He also posted pics of the Madrid Tower burning, and crowed about how it didn't collapse even though the steel was bent and warped. What he doesn't say is that the Madrid Tower was supported by concrete columns, not steel!! If that building had been supported by steel, it would have come down. Does he think that warped steel could have supported a concrete floor? Freakin' retards.
 
In my free time I've been searching some academic databases for legimate articles on the WTC collpase. I was hoping to put together a bibliography of legitimate research for those who may be interested in such reading. Plus, it would be nice to have a list to refer the woos too (not that it would do any good).

Also worth noting, I'm guessing most of these won't be available for free over the internet. If you're interested in checking them out, you'll probably have to head down to your local library to find them.

Disclaimer: In no way do I want to suggest that this list is exhaustive. Also, I have not read all these articles (I've read a few and skimmed most) so I cannot comment on their individual value. The aim is just to put together a bibliography of legitimate research.


So here goes (in no particular order):


(with working link) Towers Lost and Beyond. MIT Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory, TWI Press, September 2002. http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/

A suggested cause of the fire-induced collapse of the World Trade Towers. By: Quintiere, J.G.; di Marzo, M.; Becker, R.. Fire Safety Journal, Oct2002, Vol. 37 Issue 7, p707, 10p.

Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center. By: Karim, Mohammed R.; Fatt, Michelle S. Hoo. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Oct2005, Vol. 131 Issue 10, p1066-1072.

Why did the World Trade Center collapse? Simple analysis; Bazant, Z. P.; Zhou, Y. Journal Engineering Mechanics-ASCE; 2002 Vol. 128, p2-6, 5p.

Could the world trade center have been modified to prevent its collapse?; Newland, D. E.; Cebon, D. Journal of Engineering Mechanics; 2002 Vol. 128 Issue 7, p795-800, 6p.

How did the WTC towers collapse? A new theory; Usmani, A. S.; Chung, Y. C.; Torero, J. L. Fire Safety Journal; 2003 Vol. 38, p501-533, 33p.

How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center; Wierzbicki, T.; Teng, X. International Journal of Impact Engineering; 2003 Vol. 28, p601-625, 25p

Stability of the World Trade Center Twin Towers Structural Frame in Multiple Floor Fires. By: Usmani, A. S.. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Jun2005, Vol. 131 Issue 6, p654-657.

Effect of insulation on the fire behaviour of steel floor trusses. Fire and Materials, 29:4, July/August 2005. pp. 181 - 194. Chang, Jeremy; Buchanan, Andrew H.; Moss, Peter J.

A simple model of the World Trade Center fireball dynamics. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30:2, January, 2005. pp. 2247-2254. Baum, Howard R.; Rehm, Ronald G.

Reconnaissance and preliminary assessment of a damaged high-rise building near Ground Zero. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings. 12 :5, 15 December 2003. pp. 371 - 391. Warn, Gordon; Berman, Jeffrey; Whittaker, Andrew; Bruneau, Michel

Structural Responses of World Trade Center under Aircraft Attacks. Omika, Yukihiro.; Fukuzawa, Eiji.; Koshika, Norihide. Journal of Structural Engineering v. 131 no1 (January 2005) p. 6-15

The Structural Steel of the World Trade Center Towers. Gayle, Frank W.; Banovic, Stephen W.; Foecke, Tim. Advanced Materials & Processes v. 162 no10 (October 2004) p. 37-9

WTC Findings Uphold Structural Design. Post, Nadine M. ENR v. 253 no17 (November 1 2004) p. 10-11

Numerical simulation of blast in the World Trade Center
Baum, Joseph D; Luo, Hong; Loehner, Rainald
AIAA, Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 33rd, Reno, NV; UNITED STATES; 9-12 Jan. 1995. 1995

Issues and strategies in the DNA identification of World Trade Center victims
Theoretical Population Biology, Volume 63, Issue 3, May 2003, Pages 173-178
C. H. Brenner and B. S. Wei

http://www.cmj.hr/2003/44/3/12808716.pdf
http://imagecatinc.com/reportspubs/wtc_mceer.pdf
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC_total__rept.pdf

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/Media_Public_Briefing_040505_final.pdf

Images of the World Trade Center site show thermal hotspots on on September 16th and 23rd, 2001. U. S. Geological Survey, Open File Report OF-01-405. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0405/ofr-01-0405.html
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
What sad paranoia.... I want to laugh about this but I find it terribly, terribly depressing that people can be so delusional.
Click to expand...

I cannot agree more, I get a sense of dred. The same media they blame for the coverup is the same media where they garner their evidence.
When the media stops reporting on something that they believe boosts their claim and posts an updated more plausable explanation, its a conspiracy.
uhhh

But I must say this thread has been a fantastic resource. Im going to be making up a document detailing a lot of the questions asked and a lot of the answers from the many plausable explanations. I cant believe people cant just use critical thought and common sense but the world is an amazing place.
 
great posts gravy
its freakish to see people basically assume the coverup then try to uncover the facts and twist them to their distorted view. Its absolute paranoia. These people are complete nervous wrecks.
 
WildCat said:
He also posted pics of the Madrid Tower burning, and crowed about how it didn't collapse even though the steel was bent and warped. What he doesn't say is that the Madrid Tower was supported by concrete columns, not steel!! If that building had been supported by steel, it would have come down. Does he think that warped steel could have supported a concrete floor? Freakin' retards.
Click to expand...

AND, he was reading my LC thread when I covered the Madrid fire in depth. And I'm the one who got banned for "dishonesty."

Also, the Madrid fire is a fine refutation of the CT claim that steel can't get hot enough to bend and buckle in these fires. MOST of the exterior steel columns failed entirely there.
 
Gravy said:
Also, the Madrid fire is a fine refutation of the CT claim that steel can't get hot enough to bend and buckle in these fires. MOST of the exterior steel columns failed entirely there.
Click to expand...
Gee, that's odd. Without the support from those outer columns one almost wonders what would have happened even to those concrete columns if there had been a 20-story building, two city blocks in wide in each direction, on top of them.
 
senorpogo said:
In my free time I've been searching some academic databases for legimate articles on the WTC collpase. I was hoping to put together a bibliography of legitimate research for those who may be interested in such reading. Plus, it would be nice to have a list to refer the woos too (not that it would do any good).
Click to expand...
Did you see this post? I link to a couple in there. I'm not sure if they're in your list or not.
 
Great list of questions, Gravy!

CurtC - I use Firefox and the Popular Mechanics pages don't look like that for me, though I have a vague recollection that they may have done a while ago - have you downloaded the latest version/updates for Firefox? If I recall correctly there was one around a month or so ago.
 
Check out the photos in figure 3 on page 85 of this document.

It is clear as day that the tower didn't fall straight down like the Loosers contend.
How can they not give it up?
 
Michael Bednarik Named as WTC Demo Suspect

...By me, that is.
On the political forum there's a thread about Libertarian loonie Michael Bednarik running for Congress.

Someone linked to a page about Bednarik's presidential campaign here.
Where I found this quote:
Badnarik wrote:
The United Nations HAS no authority over our national sovereignty, and I would demonstrate that to the world in a dramatic and unmistakable way. The day I enter the Oval Office, I will give notice to the United Nations. Member nations would have one week to evacuate their offices in the UN building in New York. They would have seven days to box up their computers, their paper work, and family photos. At noon on the eighth day, after ensuring that the building was empty, I would personally detonate the explosive charges that would reduce the building to rubble. The same type of rubble we had to clean up after September 11th. I want to send a message around the world that United States foreign policy had changed dramatically, and unmistakably.
Click to expand...
 
Nice list, senorpogo.

Has anyone involved in these discussions thought about updating the SkepticWiki?

A lot of the resources on senorpogo's list are not referenced, and there's at least one glaring omission in the Informational sites: http://www.911myths.com.

Also, there are a ton more pro-conspiracy sites that should be listed--the Alex Jones ones and Loose Change, for instance.
 
I had a live, face-to-face encounter with an Inside Jobber tonight, my first in some time. A month or so ago, I would have been struck dumb by the points he was raising, but tonight I had a clear rebuttal for everything he brought up. We were on a break in class, and I was able to link to a number of websites to back up what I was saying.

He's not a hardcore CTer--he's seen Loose Change and poked around some CT websites and--he just was won over by all the specious presentations. We had to cut the discussion short when class got underway again, but I could see him wavering.

Thank you all for all your fantastic information and reasoning.
 
brodski said:
Um NobbyNobs is "one of us" his question on forum rules &c. was reposted from the LC forum, where he has just started posting.
Or did you get that and have I missed the subtly of your post? :confused:
Click to expand...
Going back and looking at his post I'm not so sure. He says "this site". If by "this site" he means LC then you are correct. So, no, I didn't get that. But it wouldn't be the first time I didn't get something. :D
 
RandFan said:
Going back and looking at his post I'm not so sure. He says "this site". If by "this site" he means LC then you are correct. So, no, I didn't get that. But it wouldn't be the first time I didn't get something. :D
Click to expand...
But when he said "this site," he was simply re-stating what he had posted at the LC forum.
 
CurtC said:
But when he said "this site," he was simply re-stating what he had posted at the LC forum.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. I didn't read the post carefully. Which would perhaps be forgivable if I had taken the time to check the post after the last correction.

I stand corrected and embarrassed. I was wrong.

As Miss Emily Litella said so eloquently those many years ago, "Never Mind" --Gilda Radner (1946 - 1989)

We miss you Gilda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom