Who Disrespects NYPD & NYFD

Gravy said:
What question? Whose description of the full collapse?
Click to expand...

Your description gravy -

"The core" was made of thousands of pieces. Those pieces buckled, sheared, and came apart. Large portions of the core remained standing briefly, then fall over and down. What, exactly are you having trouble understanding?
Click to expand...

My question is, is that your opinion or based on studies?
 
Originally posted by Pardalis
Do *you* know what "straw man" means Jessica?
Click to expand...

Sure, she does.
(CT Mode)
A "strawman" is something attacked by crows because he has no straw. Skeptics here make an argument and take the straw out of the Truther's arguments!

A "tin woodsman" is an argument that has become rusted. From too much rain of information.

A "cowardly lion" is the arguments that 'skeptics' make when they run away from the truth!

Everything I know about debating I learned from The Wizard of Oz! (/CT Mode)
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Experts have also suggested that we can travel to distant stars by going through wormholes. Doesn't mean it will happen any time soon, or even if it's possible.

Meanwhile, ponder this pic, you really think something can withstand an impact like that? eta russell, is that falling "straight down"?
Click to expand...

I would rather believe engineers who predict a global collapse model than ponder a pic you hastily cut and paste from a website.

If you have reached a dead end it is wise to stop.
 
Usual Suspect, why are you here?

Do you want an honest and constructive debate, or do you just want to bully everyone who doesn't agree with you and insult them?
 
WildCat said:
Experts have also suggested that we can travel to distant stars by going through wormholes. Doesn't mean it will happen any time soon, or even if it's possible.

Meanwhile, ponder this pic, you really think something can withstand an impact like that? eta Russell, is that falling "straight down"?
Click to expand...
I should also point out NIST does touch upon Bazant's analysis.

NIST pg 323 Northerwestern University
Roughly NIST agrees with the assessment of the tower's required structural capacity to absorb the released energy of the upper building section as it began to fall as an approximate lower bound. The likelihood of the falling building section aligning vertically with the column below was small, given the observed tilting, so that the required capacity would be greater if interaction with the floors was also considered, as pointed out in the study.

Bazant's 2006 version is located here.
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/pe...t/PDFs/Papers/
ProgressiveCollapseWTC-6-23-2006.pdf
(Bazant 2006)
The subsequent progressive collapse was not simulated at NIST because its inevitability, once triggered by column buckling, had already been proven by Bazant and Zhou's (2002) comparison of kinetic energy to energy absorption capability.
 
Russell Pickering said:
What hits me is that with the fact that the buildings were hit at different heights and angles, had different patterns of explosions and fuel distribution, that they just looked damn identical visually.

Well except for the top of the one leaning so far out and then the rest of it underneath still falling.

It is an amazing fact that they looked identical.
Click to expand...
Okay, Russell states that the collapses looked identical.
Then he states that there was a big difference between the collapses.
Then he states that they looked identical.

Sigh. This is truly unbelievable.

Russell, one very big difference is that a large portion of the north tower debris went northwest, while the south tower debris was much more equally distributed around its core. Another difference is that the north tower collapse initiated on the side opposite the aircraft impact, whereas the south tower collapse began near the area of impact.

Add to that the large tilting of the south tower, as opposed to the small tilt of the south, and you have a few reasons why the tower collapses did not look identical.
 
WildCat said:
Experts have also suggested that we can travel to distant stars by going through wormholes. Doesn't mean it will happen any time soon, or even if it's possible.

Meanwhile, ponder this pic, you really think something can withstand an impact like that? eta Russell, is that falling "straight down"?
Click to expand...

Yes that's the photo. It just looks like it would topple over. The rest of it fell straight down. If that fell off to the side as you imply, where did the weight come from to compress the remaining floors straight down to the ground?
 
Pardalis said:
Usual Suspect, why are you here?

Do you want an honest and constructive debate, or do you just want to bully everyone who doesn't agree with you and insult them?
Click to expand...


I just want to see Gravy debunk Craig and Steele. Honestly I thought he could shoot down Craig no problem but it appears not. I knew Seetle would give him trouble. He didn't even look at the links.
 
Pardalis said:
Usual Suspect, why are you here?

Do you want an honest and constructive debate, or do you just want to bully everyone who doesn't agree with you and insult them?
Click to expand...

You are kidding about the insulting and bullying aren't you?
 
jessicarabbit said:
Your description gravy -



My question is, is that your opinion or based on studies?
Click to expand...
You don't have the slightest idea what "modelling global collapse" means in engineering terms. It literally means knowing how every column failed, fell, what it impacted, etc etc in great detail. There is no way currently to model that. It would take a sensor in damn near every square foot of the building to know that. It ain't gonna happen. What is known for certain is that once it started it was unstoppable, which of the millions of possible scenarios actually happened is a purely academic excercise.
 
Russell Pickering said:
You are kidding about the insulting and bullying aren't you?
Click to expand...

Thank you Russ. Infact I apologize for calling Mark a Straw man. However that's not going to change the fact that he still will not debunk Craig and Steele. And I still have money on that he can debunk Craig but he ain't touching Steele and he knows it.
 
WildCat said:
You don't have the slightest idea what "modelling global collapse" means in engineering terms. It literally means knowing how every column failed, fell, what it impacted, etc etc in great detail. There is no way currently to model that. It would take a sensor in damn near every square foot of the building to know that. It ain't gonna happen. What is known for certain is that once it started it was unstoppable, which of the millions of possible scenarios actually happened is a purely academic excercise.
Click to expand...

So then such descriptions are opinion. Why hasn't gravy answered?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom