Moderated Continuation - Why a one-way Crush down is not possible

[bill smith]

Yes. NIST itself is peer reviewed. So are Dr. Bazant's numerous papers on the subject, so is Dr. Seffen's, so are the many other papers including computer simulations from China and South Korea.

There is in fact such an excess of energy available that hardly anyone has bothered to come up with a precise theory of collapse. Even the most conservative models predict the total collapse of the structures. There's little point going any further, unless you're a Truther clutching at straws, but that's not science at all.

Yes I believe the NIST theory goes somehing like 'The top and lightest one-tenth of the building overcame all the strain energy that could be supplied by the 47 massive upstanding core columns and their perfectly intact integration with all the other vertical and horizontal components in the lower nine-tenths of the building that was anchored 70 feet deep in the ground.'

This one-tenth made contact after a short drop with the intact lower nine-tenths of the building creating a layer of rubble at the interface.

Essentially this layer of rubble created more rubble which grew and grew like Pinnocchio's nose, taking only from the lower part and leaving the upper one-tenth 100% intact- a bit like Robin Hood in fact if you stretch the analogy a little.

Down and down went the upper one-tenth causing the rubble layer to grow and grow until the building was aaall gone. Then the upper one-tenth was rushed up
.....and they all lived happily ever after.

If it sounds like a fairy tale that's because it is a fairy tale.

 

[funk de fino]

Yes I believe the NIST theory is somehing like 'The top and lightest one-tenth o the building overcame all the strain energy that could be supplied by the 47 massive upstanding core columns and their perfectly intact integration with all the other vertical and horizontal compponets in the lower nine-tenths of the building that was anchored 70 feet deep in the ground.

This one-tenth made contact after a short drop with the intact lower nine-tenths of the building creating a layer of rubble at the interface.

Essentially this layer of rubble created more rubble which grew and grew like Pinnocchio's nose, taking only from the lower part and leaving the upper one-tenth 100% intact- a bit like Robin Hood in fact if you stretch the analogy a little.

Down and down went the upper one-tenth causing the rubble layer to grow and grow until the building was all gone. Then the upper one-tenth was rushed up
.....and they all lived happily ever after.

If it sounds like fairy tale hat's because it is a fairy tale.

If thats what you think NIST theory is, then you are wrong.

 

[BadBoy]

1. Never before in the recorded histpry of the planet Earth has one-tenth of any structure crushed nine-tenths of the same structure down flat on the ground by gravity alone. Never, ever before.

Such a building did collapse 2356 years ago. Prove me wrong.

 

[bill smith]

Such a building did collapse 2356 years ago. Prove me wrong.

Lordy Lordy Bad Boy....but you don't sound like somebody looking for answers at all these days. Recorded history I said.

 

[BadBoy]

bill: 4. The bottom line is that the burden of proof still lies with the government and it's agents.

wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

You are claiming a government conspiracy. No one else is. Nothing, NOTHING is going to happen now unless your gaggle can provide evidence that a government conspiracy did infact occur, or that there are questions to be answered.

YOU need to prove that your conjecture is correct. The burden of proof thank god, is with you nut jobs. If YOU cannot prove otherwise NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE. and no one will care.

The debunkers could all go home and ignore you guys, and let you rave on and on, and STILL NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN until you can provide some evidence.

byebye

 

[Heiwa]

This thread is about Why a one-way-way Crush down is not possible and not, e.g. government conspiracies. If any government authority is aware of the possibility that one-way crush downs of structures are possible, they should do something about it! The good news are that one-way crush downs of structures are NOT possible. The bad news are that some government authorities support and encourage the opposite. Even worse, they are not alone! Just read most of above posters! It seems there are plenty of lunatics around.

 

[aggle-rithm]

One-tenth of a structure has never. ever in the entire history of this planet crushed down the other nine-tenths of the same structure to the ground by gravity alone and it never ever will.

Explosives have never, ever in the entire history of the planet been used to bring about controlled demolition of a 110-story building, and it never ever will.

(Particularly if that skyscraper is built on top of a major transportation artery...not to mention the requirement that the explosives must be able to survive a plane crash and fire.)

 

[aggle-rithm]

This thread is about Why a one-way-way Crush down is not possible and not, e.g. government conspiracies. If any government authority is aware of the possibility that one-way crush downs of structures are possible, they should do something about it!

Why aren't YOU doing anything about it, if you are so concerned?

There are only a few engineers here. Why don't you take the discussion where it could really make a difference?

 

[Heiwa]

Why aren't YOU doing anything about it, if you are so concerned?

There are only a few engineers here. Why don't you take the discussion where it could really make a difference?

What's wrong with JREF? Good place to discuss scepticism in a friendly way. I was encouraged here to write a peer reviewed paper for ASCE, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, editor Ross Corotis, which I did and, I have been told, it has been peer reviewed and approved for publication. Haven't heard/seen anything since, though. Doesn't surprise me the least. It's not easy to make a difference. The fun is to try. Try yourself! Do not just agree with all dumb people around.

 

[rwguinn]

Why aren't YOU doing anything about it, if you are so concerned?

There are only a few engineers here. Why don't you take the discussion where it could really make a difference?

Um...
er...
IS your quote accurate? Is Heiwa actually calling for legislation to revoke the laws of physics?
That'll work. Why didn't we think of it before? !!!!!

 

[FineWine]

Yes I believe the NIST theory goes somehing like 'The top and lightest one-tenth of the building overcame all the strain energy that could be supplied by the 47 massive upstanding core columns and their perfectly intact integration with all the other vertical and horizontal components in the lower nine-tenths of the building that was anchored 70 feet deep in the ground.'

This one-tenth made contact after a short drop with the intact lower nine-tenths of the building creating a layer of rubble at the interface.

Essentially this layer of rubble created more rubble which grew and grew like Pinnocchio's nose, taking only from the lower part and leaving the upper one-tenth 100% intact- a bit like Robin Hood in fact if you stretch the analogy a little.

Down and down went the upper one-tenth causing the rubble layer to grow and grow until the building was aaall gone. Then the upper one-tenth was rushed up
.....and they all lived happily ever after.

If it sounds like a fairy tale that's because it is a fairy tale.

Yes, Bill, your incredibly stupid gibberish is a fairy tale. In reality, the thirteen collapsing floors hit ONE floor, the floor immediately below, and crushed it, adding its mass. Then, fourteen collapsing floors hit the floor immediately below, crushed it and added its mass. This process continued until the building was gone.

You see, your cowardly and buffoonish tactic of fleeing from the devastating refutation of your idiocy makes you look ridiculous, but it doesn't save your discredited fantasy. You can keep ignoring me, but that just underlines the fact that you and your muddle-headed guru are done--finished--kaput.

 

[FineWine]

What's wrong with JREF? Good place to discuss scepticism in a friendly way. I was encouraged here to write a peer reviewed paper for ASCE, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, editor Ross Corotis, which I did and, I have been told, it has been peer reviewed and approved for publication. Haven't heard/seen anything since, though. Doesn't surprise me the least. It's not easy to make a difference. The fun is to try. Try yourself! Do not just agree with all dumb people around.

You have ALWAYS run away when asked what your reaction will be when the real engineers at the ASCE journal tell you that you are hopelessly wrong.

I've been saying, and I will say it again, that the real engineers will completely reject your absurd garble of basic physics. They will do so because you promote nonsense to satisfy your bizarre political agenda.

What will your response be? Will you instantly brand them "religious fundamentalists," or "NWO physicists," or some other foolishness? Is there any possibility at all that you could learn from them what the engineers here have tried so hard to teach you?

 

[Justin39640]

You have ALWAYS run away when asked what your reaction will be when the real engineers at the ASCE journal tell you that you are hopelessly wrong.

I've been saying, and I will say it again, that the real engineers will completely reject your absurd garble of basic physics. They will do so because you promote nonsense to satisfy your bizarre political agenda.

What will your response be? Will you instantly brand them "religious fundamentalists," or "NWO physicists," or some other foolishness? Is there any possibility at all that you could learn from them what the engineers here have tried so hard to teach you?

when did his claim of his paper being accepted for review turn into its peer reviewed and waiting to be published?
i thought he submitted it around February? doesnt the peer review process take a lot longer than that?

will they still publish it if it fails review?

 

[BigAl]

when did his claim of his paper being accepted for review turn into its peer reviewed and waiting to be published?
i thought he submitted it around February? doesnt the peer review process take a lot longer than that?

will they still publish it if it fails review?

They are waiting for the April First edition.

 

[Heiwa]

You have ALWAYS run away when asked what your reaction will be when the real engineers at the ASCE journal tell you that you are hopelessly wrong.

Have I? My ASCE journal, JEM, paper has not been published yet so I have no clue what any reaction will be and what will be said. Editor Prof. Ross Corotis is very friendly, though.

And hopelessly wrong?? Me? I have never heard of or seen a one-way structural crush down and the possibility/risk of such event was not taught at my Alma Mater Chalmers University of Technology, 1995-1969. And in 40 years professional life I have never encountered the remains of a one-way structural crush down. And I have seen plenty of damaged structures and local failures in the meantime and analyzed how it came about.

 

[Justin39640]

They are waiting for the April First edition.

lmao thats what i thought lol

 

[Justin39640]

Have I? My ASCE journal, JEM, paper has not been published yet so I have no clue what any reaction will be and what will be said. Editor Prof. Ross Corotis is very friendly, though.

And hopelessly wrong?? Me? I have never heard of or seen a one-way structural crush down and the possibility/risk of such event was not taught at my Alma Mater Chalmers University of Technology, 1995-1969. And in 40 years professional life I have never encountered the remains of a one-way structural crush down. And I have seen plenty of damaged structures and local failures in the meantime and analyzed how it came about.

so, how many 110 story ships have you analyzed?
youre on the same page as bill then
"it never happened before SO IT CANT EVER!!1!1!1"

 

[FineWine]

Have I? My ASCE journal, JEM, paper has not been published yet so I have no clue what any reaction will be and what will be said. Editor Prof. Ross Corotis is very friendly, though.

And hopelessly wrong?? Me? I have never heard of or seen a one-way structural crush down and the possibility/risk of such event was not taught at my Alma Mater Chalmers University of Technology, 1995-1969. And in 40 years professional life I have never encountered the remains of a one-way structural crush down. And I have seen plenty of damaged structures and local failures in the meantime and analyzed how it came about.

I'm telling you what the reaction will be. I asked you a while back if you wanted to bet on the outcome, but you, of course, ran away. Let me repeat: the real engineers at the ASCE journal will show why you are competely wrong. I am asking if you intend to brand them all as religious fundamentalists. You understand the question, just as we understand your reason for ducking it.

You keep trying to pretend that there were no planes crashes. We are not talking about structures thast mysteriously collapsed for no apparent reason. You still haven't explained how the FDNY could have "easily handled" the fires that eventually brought down the towers.

 

[FineWine]

when did his claim of his paper being accepted for review turn into its peer reviewed and waiting to be published?
i thought he submitted it around February? doesnt the peer review process take a lot longer than that?

will they still publish it if it fails review?

He didn't actually write a paper. He wrote up and submitted his famously stupid comments on Bazant's paper.

 

[Justin39640]

. You still haven't explained how the FDNY could have "easily handled" the fires that eventually brought down the towers.

no FD could handle a fire that big and out of control especially with no pressure in the mains
some realized the possibility that the buildings were doomed on first sight
only to have their worst fears come true

thats why the chiefs chose to evacuate rather than fight it (cause firefighters know fire can cause collapses in ANY structure)
firefighting is about saving lives not structures