• 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 - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
DavidJames said:
I'm so glad I can continue viewing loose change. I just saw a post in the LC Lounge reprinting a letter from two women in Amman.As a sympathetic gesture I also announce my resignation from Fox News. I would also like to take this opportunity to resign from...

CNN
MSNBC
Al Jazeera
The Republican Party
The Democratic Party
The United States Army
Manchester United
The New World Order
The New York Yankees
The Fortune 500
The Indianapolis 500

More resignations will be forthcoming

I urge all of you to join me in support of those brave women...
Click to expand...

Don't resign from the Indy 500, keep going til you get black flagged. That way you can rake up some more corporate sponsor money for all the extra time you're on TV, and use it to fund your shady activities. You shill. :p
 
Darth Rotor said:
You seem to be presuming a 600 mph spec, with no evidence that it was more than an issue raised. The base spec (for airborne hazards, and thus only one of many specs per your excellent point earlier on) and the applied safety factor, whereas I find it more likely to have been based on the airspeed of an airliner in the Terminal phase of a flight:
Click to expand...


Another thing to consider about this 600 MPH figure...

I have serious doubts about a 707 being capable of achieving 600MPH at such a low altitude.

With air that dense I suspect at that speed the amount of lift generated would rip the wings off.

-Andrew
 
Darth Rotor said:
But again, what do you mean by "higher than needed" here?
Click to expand...

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_wind_loads.htm

As reported today, the clarified original design wind load estimates all exceed those established by the New York City building code prior to 1968 (when the WTC towers were designed) and through 2001 (when the towers were destroyed). The values also are higher than those required by other selected building codes of the era, including the relevant national model building code.
Click to expand...

a minimum cost design would've used the bare minimum wind loading as prescribed by code.
 
gumboot said:
Another thing to consider about this 600 MPH figure...

I have serious doubts about a 707 being capable of achieving 600MPH at such a low altitude.

With air that dense I suspect at that speed the amount of lift generated would rip the wings off.

-Andrew
Click to expand...

Such realities rarely enter into these types of "worst-case" analysis. They would most likely call up the manufacturer, ask for the loaded weight and the maximum speed (at any height) and the cross-sectional area. They would then use the maximums available to them in the analysis.

The NIST report indicates the existance of a document that summarizes the results of analysis done of the impact of a Boeing 707 flying at 600mph and that the building would survive. From the wording they use it indicates to me that they took their existing design and did a "what if" scenario. The building passed that scenario. This doesn't mean the building was designed to take such an impact, it means that what they did design for (live load/dead load, wind load, etc....) allowed it to take such an impact.

There is no indication of what they would've done had it failed this basic analysis. Would they have beefed up the design so it could take that impact? They didn't have to so we'll never know.
 
kevin said:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_wind_loads.htm
a minimum cost design would've used the bare minimum wind loading as prescribed by code.
Click to expand...
The the "bare minimum" isn't a criterion to establish "more than needed." Nor did I anywhere in my discussion imply a design assumption of "meets the minimum, and is therefore "good enough" in any of my remarks. You may have inferred that, and perhaps my prose wasn't lucid enough. To me, overdesign occurs in the region of marginal returns discussed a post or two previous of mine. There is often a bit of ground between "bare minimum" and "we are past the point of diminishig returns" which gets to the art of assessing and agreeing on the correct safety factor, design, etc. Thanks for the link, in any case. If the impact at 520 knots (a "point" dynamic load) comes out, after modeling and load distribution analysis, to be a lesser included case of the load distribution required for an assumed case of wind speed/gust/loading, (* safety factor) then it would not be a critical design criterion. Likewise an impact speed of 200-300 knots.

"More than the bare minimum" and "more than needed" are not equivalent terms. Again, we seem to have gotten into a quibble over semantics, and of course the relative importance of an architect. :cool:

DR
 
Brainster said:
Unfortunately, the show's already over. I wasn't sure if we'd be discussing politics or 9-11 (this is a regular gig for me), but I was on for 10 minutes this morning with Allman and Smash in the Morning on 97.1 FM in St. Louis.

As it worked out they wanted to talk 9-11. They mentioned having seen the 9-11 Deniers Speak video, and specifically noted their anger at Dylan's claim that Bernard Brown sent his son to die. They also said that Dylan or one of the other Loosers was supposed to appear on their show but backed out. Combined with all the other stuff we've seen, it sounds to me like they're opting for the turtle strategy.
Click to expand...

250px-DuckandCover.jpg


EDIT: Anywhere where I can listen to these interviews? I'm glad my video is getting loads of exposure and I get all horny when 9/11 Deniers squirm. Unfortunately, it has destroyed my sex life :(
 
Last edited:
Someone here posted a link to a video that shows the tower taking as long as 30 seconds to collapse. Rather than look through this whole thread, could you please repost it?

Thank you.
 
Andrew Johnson said:
Daughter: "Daddy, what do you at work?"
JayRef: "Well sweetheart, one of this things I do is that I go onto these internet message boards. There are these people called 'Truthseekers'. I argue with them just for the sake of it."
Daughter: "Oh. Why do you do that, Dad?"
JayRef: "Well, it's actually fairly easy work, especially when you've irritated them. Sometimes they say to me that I have no conscience and that I don't care that the organisation I work for is responsible for the slaughter of thousands of people."
Daugther: What's a conscience Dad?
JayRef: I'm not really sure. I think it's got something to do with telling the truth, rather than pretending to tell the truth."
Daughter: "But isn't it naughty to pretend that you are telling the truth?"
JayRef: "Well, it depends. When a group of people look like they are going to expose a global criminal network, the people who run the organisation I work for start to get worried."
Daughter: "I don't really understand what you mean."
JayRef: "Well, I am afraid, that if I didn't lie to these truthseekers, you wouldn't be able to eat or have any toys or anything."
Daughter: "Oh!"
JayRef: "Yes - it's true."
Daughter: "....but Daddy, if you lie in your work, how do I know when you are telling me the truth?"
JayRef: "Because you are my daughter - I will always tell you the truth."
Daughter: "But Dad, if I was to go onto one of thost internet message boards, would you lie to me there?"
JayRef: "Ummm.... Errrr.... Of course not Sweetheart...."
Click to expand...

The above strange and elaborate strawman is brought to you by The British wing of the TROOTHER Party

Making the mediocre feel better about themselves one fallacy at a time.

-z
 
I just put in for my ban over there with this:
9/11 truth is VIRAL.
Click to expand...

And so is everything else on the internet. This is the reason we have Snopes.com, because as this site so readily proves, thousands of people are willing to believe anything they read on the internet.

Now, I know I'll get banned for saying this, because you guys tolerate even less dissent than Scientologists, and that's saying a lot.

Nevertheless, I will now write words that I fully expect you to remember for the rest of your lives.

I assure you that there will never, ever, ever come a time when anyone reading this is, in the words of one hysterical poster in this very thread, "waiting in line for your food ration at the concentration camp". No matter how much you might secretly long for this type of martyrdom, it will NEVER COME TO YOU.

I further assure you that there will never, ever, ever come a time -- contrary to your most cherished fantasies though it may be -- when you (collectively) stand before the world and, just like in the Scooby Doo cartoons, rip the rubber masks off bin Laden and Zawahiri only to discover that it was really just Bush and Cheney the WHOLE TIME, causing them to mutter as they are led away in handcuffs, "... and we'd have gotten away with it too, if not for those MEDDLING KIDS!!"

Finally, I will assure you that years down the road, you will be looked upon by the vast majority of the world as the kooks you are unable to recognize yourselves to be. That's right, you heard right: you will be mentioned in the same chapter as flat-earthers, witch burners, holocaust deniers, UFO abductees, and the Elvis-faked-his-death guys.

But that's OK. Especially in times like these, human sanity thrives on levity and cheap entertainment, and you guys provide it by the bushel, free of charge even. For that, if nothing else, you are to be commended.
Click to expand...

It's not even all that great, but if that doesn't get me banned, nothing will.
 
Daughter: Daddy, why do you never spend anytime with me?
Truther Daddy: Well because I am busy collecting evidence and heresay from laymen inorder to bring down the people who run our country.
Daughter: Why Daddy?
Truther Daddy: Because there is no REAL evidence to bring them down darling, so I have to get what I can, or fabricate it. Like that CNN poll I told you about. You know, the one Daddy and his friend went to over and over again to change the results.
Daughter: But isn't that dishonest Daddy?
Truther Daddy: Are you really my daughter, or are you a CIA plant?

:)
 
its funny how they're so anti-bush yet they follow his policies so well.

closing the skeptics forum, why not just say:
"if you're not with us you're against us"
 
Gravy, Dylan finally figured out who you are. Aren't you relieved? It must have been hell for you, not knowing.

Dylhole said:
"gravy" aka MarkyX aka Mark Iradian aka Mark Roberts aka ... you get the picture ... is now showing up at Ground Zero on a weekly basis and starting fights with NY9-11Truth, provoking the cops to clear the area.

there's alot more to discuss, but the fact is, this man is out to infiltrate and provocateur the movement. he is a 40-something balding man who should have a life and family of his own, and is instead spending his own time, energy and money into harassing key members and gatherings of the 9-11 movement.

concerned "Tour Guide" or professional trouble maker? who knows. i'm sure he's reading this right now thinking of a clever response to it. the best he'll do is bring up my Jack Blood interview again. which I've already explained and apologized for.
Click to expand...
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=9992&view=findpost&p=6577801
 
I am announcing my resignation from:

The Alberta Social Credit Party Board of Directors
The Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance Party (CCRAP, the media up here had a field day with that name)
The Debbie Gibson Fan Club
The Swedish Bikini Team (LC bastards told them I'm not swedish :p )
The 357th Black Helicopter Squadron
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom