• 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.
kevin said:
I personally won't accept the word of a mechanical engineer on structural issues, nor do I think mechanical engineers are qualified to make engineering statements about structural causes of the collapse. I do think they are more qualified to handle effects of fire on steel (but how that weaking affects force distribution and building structural integrity should then be shifted to a structural engineer), the fuel distributions (fluid dynamics not high on structural engineers studies) and information about the airplanes.

I do think they have a body of knowledge that allows them to analyze the structural issues and present more useful information than other observers, but their knowledge is not as extensive, nor their experience as appropriate to the requirements of this type of analysis as a structural engineer.

There is a good reason Mechanical Engineers aren't allowed to seal a building's structural drawings. Just as a structural engineer isn't allowed to seal the HVAC drawings for a building, or design engines.
Click to expand...

I agree completely, Kevin. I have worked as a mechanical technologist in a multi-discipline engineering firm for 30 years. We specialize in buildings design and have in-house structural, mechanical, civil and electrical engineers, and also architects. The reason we have specialists in each field is that the detailed knowledge and experience required to properly engineer the specialized systems is not easily transferred from one discipline to another. Some of the more serious problems we have encountered have occurred when an engineer (or architect) in one discipline has assumed, incorrectly, that they could do the work of another discipline on a "small simple job". For the design, or post-failure analysis, of a structure as complicated as the WTC towers I would only trust a really top level structural engineer, and even then, only when the design and calculations have been independently checked and verified.
 
2008

Darth Rotor said:
I get the feeling that Warner, unless he gets caught in a massive gaffe, is far more electable that Hillary among swing voters. Rudi is a cypher to me, but he was a decent mayor for New York, for all the whinging the left side of the fence did about him.

McCain is more dead in the water now than he was in 2000. That was his opportunity. He also had an oppourtuinty in the fall of 2002 to ask the hard questions, as he did vis a vis Clinton in Bosnia and Kosovo, and he failed to take the opportuinty. He bought the thin premise hook line and sinker.

Politically, he's still too hard to "control" by the money men funding the Republican party, IMO, to get an endorsement. They want a more tractable front man. If he ran, though, I'd vote for him, for no better reason than he was a Navy Pilot :D and he's not afraid to break a rice bowl here and there.

Unfortunately, and no disrespect intended to the distinguished Senator from Arizona, he's not an intellectual giant. I worry that he could be fooled or misled by his "handlers," or his advisors, on complex issues.

DR
Click to expand...

As long as we're derailed here...

My .02

I don't the the Dems will go for Hillary. She might run, but they won't like it. She's way too divisive. Lots of people HATE her.

My money is on Gore. He says he's not going to do it, but, hell, we've heard more out of him in the past year than we did when he was VP. He's got a movie out (wouldn't doubt if it gets at least nominated for an Academy Award), he's been putting in appearances, I've seen his old campaign videos popping up on the Interwebs...

Let's not forget Obama, either. He's got the "heat" on him as the new Dem posterboy, too.

As for the Republicans, there's no way they'd nominate Condi. I either see the Governator (if they get that bill passed to allow him to run) or Jeb Bush.

Or maybe they can run Marvin Bush, seeing as he's so powerful and made so much money off the gold they found in the basement of the WTC. :) (that's like one of the first times i've ever used a smiley face).
 
re-rail


http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=10256&st=30

pg two is the capper!

See it before it disappears, gets revised, recut, done over, edited, revamped. amended, changed, or even, loosely changed!


Sundance is his new priority. (unless the chemtrails take him out first. . . )

But I'm not out to make money. . .

Theatrical release next - come pay to see what you've seen for free!
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:
Looks like we got another guy using the scientific method to model the collapses.

I've been burned on this stuff before (see the Hufschmid video the other day for example), so I'm not going to automatically believe this is serious. But if you check his earlier posts, it looks like Spooked 911 may have met his match.
Click to expand...

Paper towers. Brilliant. Abso-friggin'-lutely brilliant.

My own experiment involving graham cracker towers with gummi bear cores will be finished later this month and will conclusively prove holograms hit the towers causing them to evaporate to another dimension where Kennedy can use them as his own private penthouses.
 
So.. you'd throw a paper airplane into this structure with a ladyfinger firecracker on board to CONCLUSIVELY prove that the towers could not have been brought down by the explosion alone or by the action of the paper fire melting the Twizzlers. You need the Pop Rock squibs to set off the Sterno/thermite to cause the structure to fail. Sounds ironclad to me. Get Dylan Avery on the phone. Maybe this can make it into Loose Change, The Painful Circumcision Cut.
 
Heads up...

The Deniers are getting cocky about Killtown's avoidance of confrontation with Gravy over here.

Here's Ally from the British 9/11 Denial Campaign:
"Killtown kickin ass on JREF"--
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=3216

And Killtown seems to believe he's got Gravy dead to rights:
"Bitch Slappin' Gravy!"--
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=10633&view=findpost&p=6714713

Both threads carry an invitation to pay us a visit...*rubs hands together and licks chops greedily*

Is this like when Bush supporters claimed that he won his campaign debates because he didn't end up curled up on the ground sucking his thumb and whimpering?
 
I'd say that Baghdad Bob is a more apt analogy.

Regardless, I'd like to see some honest debate for a change. They're all welcome here.
 
jhunter1163 said:
How do you model 4" rebar on 3-foot centers using graham crackers and gummi bears? I'd think Twizzlers would be the candy of choice for that purpose.
Click to expand...
It's 3" rebar on 4' centers. I think if you change your calculations accordingly you will find that Twizzlers are totally inadequate for these structural purposes. I prefer Pixy sticks myself.
 
R.Mackey said:
I'd say that Baghdad Bob is a more apt analogy.
Click to expand...
Heh. Yeah, that's a much better fit:
baghdad_bob.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom