Why a one-way Crush down is not possible

[SteveAustin]

You are, as usual, quite correct. My assertion that ALL demolition experts reject the conspiracy rubbish was intended--obviously--to be provocative.

BULL

I indicated as much by acknowledging that lunatics could be produced who would gleefully deny that the North won the Civil War. Predictably, desperate "truthers" are clinging to the deliberate exaggeration, trying to make some sort of point. Let's see what survives their typically disingenuous effort.

No, that was a smear by association.

IT REMAINS A FACT THAT NO DEMOLITION EXPERTS HAVE CHALLENGED THE POSITION ESTABLISHED BY PROMINENT REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DEMOLITION INDUSTRY. NO--ZERO--DEMOLITION EXPERTS HAVE LENT ANY CREDENCE TO THE MYTH THAT EXPLOSIVES BROUGHT DOWN THE TWIN TOWERS.

That's what is left. "Truthers" make baseless, implausible claims about a subject that demolition professionals know more about than anyone else. Not a single demolition professional has sided with the "truthers."

How many demolition experts have come forward to support the Official Conspiracy Theory? AND YES I WILL SAY IT AGAIN, IF THEY HAVE NOT COME RIGHT OUT AND SAID THEY SUPPORT IT, IT DOES NOT COUNT NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO OR WHERE THEY WORK.

If they have not come right out and said it you have no idea what they support, whether it's the Official Conspiracy Theory or alternative theories.

 

[Heiwa]

How do the perimeter columns "PUNCH" through the concrete floor with other columns that closely spaced? Not going to happen. The perimeter wall will act as a "WHOLE" and push down upon the edge of the concrete floor as a "WHOLE", bending or shearing the "L"shaped truss support downward. See my picture above.

Yes, the perimeter walls will act as a whole, like a knife or ax, and slice the thin floor into two bits.

Look at the strong perimeter wall of part A. It is fixed on ground. It will of course try to push up the lowest C floor, when in contact, but the C floor is too weak, so the A wall slices the C floor into two bits.

The strong perimeter wall of part C - it is dropping - and it contacts the top floor of part A. If the A floor was really strong (as Bazant assumes is the case for the lowest C floor), the C wall would just bounce! But it will not - it will slice the A floor into two parts, because the A floor is weak.

The C wall can therefore not push down anything, it will just punch/slice through the top A floor = local failure, soon arrested.

Thanks for asking! What's your age? Any religious beliefs in miracles?

 

[bill smith]

Bill,

You really are amazing.

I don't think that I've ever run across anyone who was more consistently wrong. At every step.


.
What are you talking about...?

There were COPIOUS amounts of insults in my posts.

I stated that the Chihuahua knows more about engineering than you. While this is completely accurate, it is STILL an insult.


.
There was an abbreviated, but comprehensive, technical rebuttal in that post.

I pointed out where you got just about every statement wrong.

Just like here.


.
Not weak. Concise & to the point.


.
Batting 1,000, bill.

"We all..." ?? You speak for nobody but yourself. Your adolescent attempts to recruit the opinions of your imaginary friends may well have worked in the 9th grade. But your utter clumsiness in the attempt convinces me that even angst-ridden teenagers saw thru you, even back then.

"... you are a great believer in the power of perceptiion ..." I'm an engineer, bill. I could not possibly give a rat's butt about anybody's "perception". Least of all, yours.

"... propagandist ...". Sure, bill. That's why I invoke conservation of energy & momentum. Work & energy principles. Impulse / change of momentum equivalence. Stress, strain, calculus, etc. Nothing but "propaganda" here...


.
I am perfectly comfortable with the public perception of BOTH of us, bill.

Tom

I am not satisfied with your 'comprehensive answer'. I find several conecutive 'no's' to be less than convincing. The post nr. was 2433 if anybody wants to check though I will repost it here to see if you can rebutt what I say.

Part C fell directly down on part A. The only force on the upstanding giant core columns was therefore compressive. After a small amount of elastic absorence of the downward force these columns would have punctured any floor and stripped off any floor to column connection that they encountered in part C. This would have ocurred before any plastic deformation of the upstanding columns was spossible seeing that the PE of the seperately descending components could never have overcome the general and constant SE of the individual upstanding giant columns.

Furthermore as the upstanding columns buried themselves deeper in the descending body of part C that body would have provided lateral support for the upstanding columns.

 

[SteveAustin]

.
A major part of my response was telling you
a) what I would do if I found an egregious engineering error in the NIST report, and
b) what I would do if I heard that some other engineer (or anyone) found a significant flaw in NIST's arguments.

This is NOT "belief". It is not "speculation".

Now if you honestly believed that I was labeling what YOU would do as your belief then you lack serious comprehension skills.

However as we both know, I was labeling as YOUR belief your saying what OTHERS would do. But this is part of the "debunking" process, you need as much of these thrown in as possible.

.nce again, you are wrong. I am not speculating about what others would do under those circumstances. I am TELLING you what I would do.

And my extrapolation (what you disparagingly call "belief") is NOT "baseless speculation".

See here you admit it, which means you knowingly lied about that first part

It is based on my 35 years interactions with other engineers.

In that time, I found out that engineers are curious, as patriotic as any other profession, diverse in their political persuasions, and, above all, LOVE finding mistakes in other engineers' work.

And especially because engineers are ornery contrarians, and NOBODY is gonna censor our commentary, especially not some pencil-neck bureaucrat, politician or lawyer.

Finally, MY job is easy. I've got to point out just a few engineers who will point out any existent flaws.
Your job is indefensible. You are suggesting that engineers who love justice & this country would remain silent.

Finally, as proof that the scientist & engineers will NOT stay silent, and that the gov't can NOT silence them:

The Global Warming debate.
The evolution debates (100s of them).
The evolution vs. creations debate.
The sociobiology debate.
Genetics debates.
Nuclear winter debates.
etc. etc. etc.

Sorry. Your proposition simply fails.

NOT from speculation. From experiment & experience.

Sorry but you have posted nothing to back up your claim except more of your belief of what others will do. No matter how much experience you have it is still just your belief.

You obviously do not understand even the basics of human nature and human society and how easy it is for most people IN ANY PROFESSION to sit down and shut up to keep their jobs so they can keep feeding their families. Because speaking out is a sure way to lose your job!!!

I believe that an absence of voiced dissent means an absence of unvoiced dissent.
I believe that the existence of real, unvoiced dissent lead INEXORABLY to the existence of voiced dissent.

You might want to review this part, re-read it a few times because it is gibberish. Oh it looks poetic and all but it is gibberish.

There is NO informed, voiced dissent.
There is amateur, incompetent, voiced dissent. This is NOT the same thing.

So now you backtrack from saying there is no voiced dissent to change it to there is no competent voiced dissent.

So you have in effect moved the goalposts, and labeled any expert in relevant fields that have voiced dissent as "amateur" and "incompetent" simply because they have dissented. I mean after all they MUST be incompetent if they do not agree with the Official Conspiracy Theory ritght?

By that reasoning every single person on the patriotsquestion911 list is incompetent right? Same goes for all those over at ae911truth.org right?

Have you reviewed what each and everyone of them has said with regards to 9/11? I would guess not, but of course you do not need to, in your mind and the mind of all "debunkers" the simple fact that they dissent is enough for you to dismiss them as "incompetent"

A cornerstone of your contention is that there are thousands of engineers who know that the NIST report contains KNOWN gross errors or outright fraud.

The only "skewed belief" on display in that contention, Steve, is the snot-nosed, wet-behind-the-ears, acne enhanced, Young&Stupid but unshakable conviction that "WE (in this case, "truthers") are the only honest, honorable people on the planet".

Most folks grow out of this delusion long about the time the acne clears up.
.
.
As respectfully as I can muster at the moment,

Tom

And then we get into the most classic disinfo tactic, the old insult. It gets a great laugh out of some but just go to show that you well and truly have nothing and you know it. You would not resort to this if you did.

Tell me Tom, what was I labeling as a skewed belief? That's right, it the belief that if no one has come forward to deny the Official Conspiracy Theory then they all support the Official Conspiracy Theory. Are you again saying that belief is not skewed? Or were you hoping to throw those last couple of paragraphs in in the hopes to smear me again and hope no one recalled what originated that comment and well this argument.

 

[Gamolon]

Good picture! Thus the upper or lower outside wall slices the floor it comes into contact with into two parts. One floor part is very short (the one connected to the wall) and the other is very long - connected to the core.

So what you are saying is that the "L" shaped floor truss conenctions, all 60 of them (30 along one wall and 30 along the other) held the downward force of the upper mass enough for the perimeter column walls to "slice through the reinforced concrete floor?

Really?

60 (30 on a perimeter wall) 13" long by 6" deep "L" shaped truss connections are strong enough to resist all that?

You can in fact calculate the energy required to slice a floor in two bits. It is quite substantial and after cutting say 6 floors (3 in A and 3 in C), WTC 1 further local failures should have been arrested.

Interexting. I'm sure you could. Can you calculate whether the 60 (30 per perimeter wall) truss connections welded to the perimeter columns are capable of holding up the upper mass coming down on them all at once?

Seems to me someone (Tony, who has disappeared) claimed that a floor was capable of holding up 12 times times it's own weight (29,000,000 lbs) and that the upper mass weighed about 68,295,000 lbs. So how could those truss connections withstand 2 1/2 times what they could support at 12 times the weight of a floor?

 

[Gamolon]

because the A floor is weak.

Weaker than the 13" wide by 6" deep "L" shaped truss connections? As I recall the concrete floor was reinforced right?

And if the were THAT strong, why wouldn't the small truss connection just "push" though the edge of the concrete floor?

 

[deep]

b) ANYONE who says "I knew the day I saw those towers collapse that ..." is incompetent. Any competent professional knows enough to wait for a competent, professional analysis. The number of people at ae911t who said "I knew immediately it was a demo" proves that those folks are amateurs.

Wait, so anyone who claimed that WTC7 was definitely brought down by fire alone prior to the release of the NIST report is also incompetent, right? I guess it depends on your definition of 'competent, professional analysis'.

c) The folks at ae911t are PROVABLY incompetent. If they were competent, they would have published AT LEAST 100 peer reviewed papers by now pointing out exactly where NIST made errors. The FACT that they have not done so PROVES WITHOUT QUESTION that they are incompetent. Or perhaps lazy. But productivity is an essential component of "competence".

Well, it proves that you believe they are incompetent, but that's all. Your argument is based on the unproven/unsupported/arbitrary assumption that every competent professional would publish or contribute to X number of peer-reviewed papers about NIST after signing the petition.

 

[Gamolon]

The C wall can therefore not push down anything, it will just punch/slice through the top A floor = local failure, soon arrested.

Nope.

I say the concrete floor, with the perimeter columns being so close to the edge of the concrete floor and just inside the lower perimeter column wall would either shear the actual truss from the "L" shaped truss connection, push the "L" shaped truss connection through the edge of the concrete floor, or bend/shear the actual "L" shaped truss connection from the peimeter column/s

 

[Gamolon]

Heiwa, where are the "L" shaped truss connections on this perimeter column?

Sheared off maybe? Oh! And look...

Look at the bottom laft corner of the picture? Is that a piece of truss I see hanging off the column?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Your argument is based on the unproven/unsupported/arbitrary assumption that every competent professional would publish or contribute to X number of peer-reviewed papers about NIST after signing the petition.

No... most of us just like to see historical precedent studies done correctly rather than amateurishly, and we also like to see professionals make competent arguments that fit within the known principals of their profession. Have you actually made any effort to compare AE911truth's claims with written literature on these professions? I can guarantee that the concerns of myself, tfk, Architect, et al are very well founded

 

[FineWine]

BULL

Although you traffic exclusively in "Bull", you can't distinguish the crapola you peddle from the rhetorical device I used to make a point--a point that remains unrefuted.

No, that was a smear by association.

Whenever I observe your witless, uninformed attempts to use rhetorical terms, I am put in mind of a chimpanzee playing with a watch. It is probably true that lunatics who deny that the North won the Civil War can be found. The population of demolition professionals, people with knowledge of the techniques of demolition, is considerably smaller than the general population. While it is reasonable to assume that an eccentric who swallows your insane movement's rubbish might be out there somewhere, that individual has not surfaced to date. Find him.

How many demolition experts have come forward to support the Official Conspiracy Theory? AND YES I WILL SAY IT AGAIN, IF THEY HAVE NOT COME RIGHT OUT AND SAID THEY SUPPORT IT, IT DOES NOT COUNT NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO OR WHERE THEY WORK.

If they have not come right out and said it you have no idea what they support, whether it's the Official Conspiracy Theory or alternative theories.

Stop lying about nonexistent "official" conspiracy theories. Brent Blanchard's views are not "official"; Mark and Stacey Loizeaux's views are not "official"; Ron Dokell's views are not "official." Tfk nailed your inept deceptions to the wall. The total absence of voiced dissent strongly suggests the absence of unvoiced dissent. Demolition professionals know that spokespersons for their industry reject your insane movement's idiocy. Where are the dissenters?

Find them.

 

[deep]

Have you actually made any effort to compare AE911truth's claims with written literature on these professions? I can guarantee that the concerns of myself, tfk, Architect, et al are very well founded

No, because that's not what we're talking about. tfk said it is proven that AE911T members are all incompetent because they haven't published 100 peer-reviewed papers by now (please see his original post for the exact quote).

That is an unsupported opinion, not a fact.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Heiwa, where are the "L" shaped truss connections on this perimeter column?
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/wtc222.jpg[/qimg]

Sheared off maybe? Oh! And look...

Look at the bottom laft corner of the picture? Is that a piece of truss I see hanging off the column?

You have too much fun pointing this stuff out

Heiwa's model gets a number of things "wrong" unsurprisingly... the truss seats were never ever intended to withstand the so called "hinging" that he contends should have happened. The connections would have [and did] as you see, fail from these and other load applications.

Heiwa's "column punch through" entirely ignores every concept dealing with the slenderness ratio of the column assemblies themselves, that without the floors providing the cross sectional bracing of the building between the core and perimeter they were unstable and would have failed under their own self weight.

And most egregiously of all that his model shows a severe out-of-plane loading of the same unbraced column lengths yet he treats these columns as though they're utterly indestructible despite these loads.

He can try to explain how all of this prevents his so called "one way crush down" all he wants but doing so is akin to slamming a steel cube through a titanium cylinder.

I think the reason why I put Heiwa on ignore before was because despite how obviously deranged those assertions are he was still oblivious to them... Apparently he still is :|

 

[FineWine]

Now if you honestly believed that I was labeling what YOU would do as your belief then you lack serious comprehension skills.

However as we both know, I was labeling as YOUR belief your saying what OTHERS would do. But this is part of the "debunking" process, you need as much of these thrown in as possible.



See here you admit it, which means you knowingly lied about that first part



Sorry but you have posted nothing to back up your claim except more of your belief of what others will do. No matter how much experience you have it is still just your belief.

You obviously do not understand even the basics of human nature and human society and how easy it is for most people IN ANY PROFESSION to sit down and shut up to keep their jobs so they can keep feeding their families. Because speaking out is a sure way to lose your job!!!



You might want to review this part, re-read it a few times because it is gibberish. Oh it looks poetic and all but it is gibberish.



So now you backtrack from saying there is no voiced dissent to change it to there is no competent voiced dissent.

So you have in effect moved the goalposts, and labeled any expert in relevant fields that have voiced dissent as "amateur" and "incompetent" simply because they have dissented. I mean after all they MUST be incompetent if they do not agree with the Official Conspiracy Theory ritght?

By that reasoning every single person on the patriotsquestion911 list is incompetent right? Same goes for all those over at ae911truth.org right?

Have you reviewed what each and everyone of them has said with regards to 9/11? I would guess not, but of course you do not need to, in your mind and the mind of all "debunkers" the simple fact that they dissent is enough for you to dismiss them as "incompetent"



And then we get into the most classic disinfo tactic, the old insult. It gets a great laugh out of some but just go to show that you well and truly have nothing and you know it. You would not resort to this if you did.

Tell me Tom, what was I labeling as a skewed belief? That's right, it the belief that if no one has come forward to deny the Official Conspiracy Theory then they all support the Official Conspiracy Theory. Are you again saying that belief is not skewed? Or were you hoping to throw those last couple of paragraphs in in the hopes to smear me again and hope no one recalled what originated that comment and well this argument.

The grotesquely misnamed "truth" movement consists of three essential components, stupidity, dishonesty, and insanity, in varying degrees. Let's examine one of the favorite ploys of "truthers":

Supposedly, individuals in relevant industries abound who understand that the explanations supplied by real physicists, engineers, demolition professionals, aeronautical engineers, seismologists, metallurgists, avionics techs, fire safety experts, forensic examiners, air traffic controllers, etc., are simply wrong. Many of these individuals live in nations unfriendly to the U.S.
WHAT IS IT, EXACTLY, THAT PREVENTS THESE PEOPLE FROM SPEAKING OUT?

There are hundreds of demolition companies, big and small, in the U.S. NOT ONE demolition expert has come forward to dispute the views of prominent members of the industry. Who stops them? Is the demolition industry uniquely infiltrated by minions of your mad, imaginary conspiracy?
What shackles the hundreds of consultants employed by NIST? Is this agency of the Department of Commerce a hive of maniacs conspiring to conquer the world for Halliburton? What stops air traffic controllers from rebutting Dave Bottiglia and his colleagues? Where are the metallurgists who buy the manure your insane movement shovels? There must an army of conspirators--who never leak anything--to knock into line the thousands of people across a wide spectrum of industries who know the "truth." Who are these evildoers? How can so many hide for so long? If they have to hide, how can they be all-powerful?

A personal anecdote: a friend of mine watched Flight 175 crash into the south tower from her office windows. I told her that no-planers think she is lying. She says she doesn't care what psychos think. I said that they believe she is supporting the "gubmint" story to protect her job. She asked who was threatening to fire her. I said that evil forces that control everything were threatening her job. She replied that she retired in 2005--who was threatening what? I said that she was being paid off by the Gigantic Conspiracy. She wondered why she was being paid NOT to go public with her story.

And on it goes.

 

[alienentity]

Hi Steve,

My question (which is perfectly reasonable, dontcha think?) still awaits your answer:

'Here's a simple question for you then - since you apparently believe that the WTC tower collapses were due to explosive demolition, can you provide at least one leading or significant demolitions expert who backs up this claim?'

Still waiting........

 

[Gamolon]

Oh look Heiwa!!!

More sheared truss connections!!!! Funny how that proves my point.

 

[Gamolon]

Uh oh Heiwa!!!

 

[Gamolon]

You have too much fun pointing this stuff out

 

[Gamolon]

Heiwa, have an answer to this incorrect statement on your site?

1. 1 The major Problem - No Evidence of (1) Buckled Columns, ...

Are you going to correct that since there is this evidence?

 

[FineWine]

Heiwa, have an answer to this incorrect statement on your site?



Are you going to correct that since there is this evidence?
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/ST1-full.jpg[/qimg]

Heiwa's all-purpose response: "La-la, I am raving so loudly I can't hear a word you say. My fingers are in my ears and my eyes are tightly shut. I can't hear or see. La-la."