• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Common Sense

just because its made by or shown on the "history channel" doesn't mean its factual. Its just another channel on TV.
Click to expand...

Although the best account I ever saw of the Citicorp Building structural problems was on BBC's Horizon.
 
Architect said:
You've seen the "brick on the head" analogy, I take it?

NonBeliever didn't understand it.
Click to expand...

It boggles the mind that ANYONE could not understand the difference between static and dynamic loads.

The brick analogy works almost every time I present it. You gotta be pretty messed up to not get it.

We can balance a brick on our head and it doesn't hurt. Drop that brick on our head and we're bleeding all over the place. Why? It's the same brick!

What's 28th theory?
 
Was it you I pinched it from? Posted it about a week ago? It was an absolute corker, so it was.


NB's response was something about your body not compacting to 6% it's original size under the dynamic load......like, duh!
 
ConspiRaider said:
I see. "Simple". Simple explosions, simple illusion. Then you are required to now tell us EXACTLY what explosives were used to perpetrate the event. Remember - it's simple, Doctor 28IQ.

Did humans initiate the sequential collapse of each floor by explosives, or a computer? Who operated the computer? From where? And I will strip you of the remaining 28 points in your IQ if you say Building 7...
Click to expand...

Why do you want to talk about speculative details? Why... I wonder... gee, I wonder I wonder I wonder and then I wonder...

I could speculate...one of the 100 different ways they might of executed the demolition... but, of course, I don't know the exact details... so then you could try to debunk what I say with more speculation... instead of addressing the big picture and the fact that we (both Truthers and Deniers) know that explosives could have accounted for lots of things, including the full collapse to the ground... outward projection of the walls... pulverized concrete... the speed at which the towers fell...among other things.

There are so many things that your miracle collapse can't and doesn't account for... you are relying on things that are unproven... as according to Deniers... this is the first time in the history of the world, that something like this happened. Um, sort of, but not really... tall high-rise buildings have fallen to the ground in seconds before... and we have video footage of said events. They are called Controlled Demolition. The WTC were NOT CD... I have explained that people compare these "collapses" to CD, because that's the only other visual (tall buildings falling down in seconds) we have to compare it to. These towers, were probably rigged in a completely different way than CD. As you might be aware... CD never have exploding walls, eh.

We Truthers... actually adhere to scientific laws, probability, common logic and reason... to piece everything together in a very clear and detailed image of what actually happened on 9/11. We certainly don't throw our hands up in the air and go... 8474 happens man. Planes hit buildings... and now we have three magical collapses... and new laws of physics to document...
 
Last edited:
CHF said:
It boggles the mind that ANYONE could not understand the difference between static and dynamic loads.

The brick analogy works almost every time I present it. You gotta be pretty messed up to not get it.

We can balance a brick on our head and it doesn't hurt. Drop that brick on our head and we're bleeding all over the place. Why? It's the same brick!

What's 28th theory?
Click to expand...
youve seen his asteroid quote right?
 
28th Kingdom said:
We Truthers... actually adhere to scientific laws, probability and common logic and reason... to piece everything together in a very clear and detailed image of what actually happened on 9/11. We certainly don't throw our hands up in the air and go... 8474 happens man. Planes hit buildings... and now we have three magical collapses... and new laws of physics to document...
Click to expand...


Sorry, but being Scottish I feel the need to add:


Ye cannae change the laws o' physics, Cap,n!
 
Last edited:
28th Kingdom said:
We Truthers... actually adhere to scientific laws, probability and common logic and reason... to piece everything together in a very clear and detailed image of what actually happened on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Oh so you've got a narrative then as to what you think happened?

Let's hear it.
 
28th Kingdom said:
Okay... first, let's clarify... if the impact floors were removed, the remaining lower floors could have supported the weight of the upper floors, right? It was the energy released from the fall of the upper mass hitting the lower floors that caused all of the lower floors to fail, right? It wasn't the weight of the upper floors, right?
Click to expand...

Yes, in a very lego like way.

I find it very fascinating to observe the inner workings of your logic sequences.
 
28th Kingdom said:
Why do you want to talk about speculative details? Why... I wonder... gee, I wonder I wonder I wonder and then I wonder...

I could speculate...one of the 100 different ways they might of executed the demolition... but, of course, I don't know the exact details... so then you could try to debunk what I say with more speculation... instead of addressing the big picture and the fact that we (both Truthers and Deniers) know that explosives could have accounted for lots of things, including the full collapse to the ground... outward projection of the walls... pulverized concrete... the speed at which the towers fell...among other things.

There are so many things that your miracle collapse can't and doesn't account for... you are relying on things that are unproven... as according to Deniers... this is the first time in the history of the world, that something like this happened. Um, sort of, but not really... tall high-rise buildings have fallen to the ground in seconds before... and we have video footage of said events. They are called Controlled Demolition. The WTC were NOT CD... I have explained that people compare these "collapses" to CD, because that's the only other visual (tall buildings falling down in seconds) we have to compare it to. These towers, were probably rigged in a completely different way than CD. As you probably know... CD never have exploding walls, eh.

We Truthers... actually adhere to scientific laws, probability and common logic and reason... to piece everything together in a very clear and detailed image of what actually happened on 9/11. We certainly don't throw our hands up in the air and go... 8474 happens man. Planes hit buildings... and now we have three magical collapses... and new laws of physics to document...
Click to expand...

I think you don't really understand what CD is all about. Especially when you start going on about explosives on every floor and material being ejected outwards and pulverization of concrete, just to name a few.
 
28th Kingdom said:
We Truthers... actually adhere to scientific laws, probability and common logic and reason... to piece everything together in a very clear and detailed image of what actually happened on 9/11. We certainly don't throw our hands up in the air and go... 8474 happens man. Planes hit buildings... and now we have three magical collapses... and new laws of physics to document...
Click to expand...

Do you think R.Mackey's explainations fall in this category?
 
Remember that 28th declared that it was impossible for steel to fail due to fire loadings and then ran away from the technical postings which proved the exact opposite.

Not that I'll let anyone forget, since I holler it at every opportunity. Sorry guys.
 
CHF said:
Good Lord.

That guy should be strapped down to a bed and studied by men in white coats.
Click to expand...


It's great, isn't it? You just couldnae make it up.



I do have a theory that some of these guys are actually doing some sort of Performance Art type thing.
 
28th Kingdom said:
We Truthers... actually adhere to scientific laws, probability and common logic and reason... to piece everything together in a very clear and detailed image of what actually happened on 9/11. We certainly don't throw our hands up in the air and go... 8474 happens man. Planes hit buildings... and now we have three magical collapses... and new laws of physics to document...
Click to expand...

What new laws? What. New. Laws?
 
I'm using the height of 415m for the WTC. At freefall, x = (1/2)gt^2.

415 = (1/2)(9.8)t^2

830 = 9.8t^2

84.7 = t^2

t = 9.2

Show me a video that has the full collapse happening in 9.2 seconds, and we can talk about freefall speeds. As for the near freefall argument (near freefall not being a scientific term), I am assuming a generous 15 seconds (when the collapse is still 750 feet high in real life):

415 = (1/2)g(15)^2

830 = 225g

g = 3.7 m/(s^2)

which is a little more than a third of the actual value. This is with the generous time estimate (in YOUR favor). With real times I'm sure you aren't even in the same order of magnitude. This is not near freefall. This is the value of g for mars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom