The Heiwa Challenge

Status
Not open for further replies.
Heiwa said:
I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.
Click to expand...
Like this nonsense?
Heiwa said:
What's your opinion about B(azant)? What part does it/he plays in this mass murder? And yourself? What is your agenda?
Click to expand...
Heiwa said:
Anybody suggesting something else is complicity to mass murder.
Click to expand...
Is this yet another condition you have suddenly introduced into this thread whereby you can accuse who ever you wish of being involved in mass murder and nobody can respond? And if they do you can simply ignore the response?

Heiwa can accuse anybody he wishes of being involved in mass murder with total impunity, right ?
 
Last edited:
Heiwa said:
I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, but you are the one spouting nonsense re: Ronan Point and avoiding a thread where your poor grasp of structural issues is being held up to scrutiny. Do feel free to post there, failing which i don't plan on going away.
 
Architect said:
Lads, we're talking about the man who got caught talking bollocks about Ronan Point - a nice progressive collapse - and is avoiding the thread about it like a plague. He's just a troll.
Click to expand...

Lads, lads, lads.

Do you all remember the thread(s) with ChristopherA where we decided that he was quiet clearly mentally ill and stopped posting? Argument, no matter how well reasoned, was making no difference and arguably making things worse.

Well, with respect, I think we've reached the same point with Heiwa. All our arguments are simply washing over him, he's repeating the same bollocks time and time again, and completely ignores his own mistakes.

Let's just leave the poor chap alone. Let's stop posting. He's ill or sufficiently deluded to qualify as ill.

No more posts, please. Stop feeding his illness/habit.

Kittens are acceptable, per normal forum convention at such points.
 
stateofgrace said:
Like this nonsense?


Is this yet another condition you have suddenly introduced into this thread whereby you can accuse who ever you wish of being involved in mass murder and nobody can respond? And if they do you can simply ignore the response?

Heiwa can accuse anybody he wishes of being involved in mass murder with total impunity, right ?
Click to expand...

No,just try to produce a structure as per post #1 and be a Heiwa Challenge winner and not a whiner or NWOner.

Just follow the US new standards in the NIST 911 reports and be guided by prof. Bazant's theory about one-way crushing structures and you are one your way to fame. To avoid future mass murders! Isn't that a good, positive thing?
 
Heiwa said:
No,just try to produce a structure as per post #1 and be a Heiwa Challenge winner and not a whiner or NWOner.
Click to expand...

There's already plenty of real-world examples of this phenomon happening. It's well documented. Why should we waste 100's of hours and 1000's of dollars to replicate this phenomenon?

Just follow the US new standards in the NIST 911 reports and be guided by prof. Bazant's theory about one-way crushing structures and you are one your way to fame. To avoid future mass murders! Isn't that a good, positive thing?
Click to expand...

WTF?
 
Heiwa said:
No,just try to produce a structure as per post #1 and be a Heiwa Challenge winner and not a whiner or NWOner.

Just follow the US new standards in the NIST 911 reports and be guided by prof. Bazant's theory about one-way crushing structures and you are one your way to fame. To avoid future mass murders! Isn't that a good, positive thing?
Click to expand...

I take it that as well as Prof Bazant, you are now accusing those who worked on the NIST reports of being involved in mass murder? Since you raised this topic it is now on topic. So, care to name names?

Your nonsensical challenge as been shown to be, just like yourself, one big fraud and deserves zero attention.
 
Newtons Bit said:
AA. There's already plenty of real-world examples of this phenomon happening. It's well documented.

BB. Why should we waste 100's of hours and 1000's of dollars to replicate this phenomenon?

CC. WTF?
Click to expand...

AA. Are there? Then just copy and be a Heiwa Challenge winner!

BB. Why not? We don't want to be a Heiwa Challenge winner?

CC. ? Wave The Flag!
 
Heiwa said:
AA. Are there? Then just copy and be a Heiwa Challenge winner!

BB. Why not? We don't want to be a Heiwa Challenge winner?

CC. ? Wave The Flag!
Click to expand...

Enough is enough, welcome back on to ignore you deluded fool.There are plenty of examples not just in this thread but the other threads you are avoiding.

I agree with other members you are not worth the effort of replying to. Seek help, seriously.
 
stateofgrace said:
Enough is enough, welcome back on to ignore you deluded fool.There are plenty of examples not just in this thread but the other threads you are avoiding.

I agree with other members you are not worth the effort of replying to. Seek help, seriously.
Click to expand...

I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.
 
Heiwa said:
AA. Nowhere! Daddy may help you!
Click to expand...
Good, so it qualifies on those grounds.

Heiwa said:
BB. Nowhere. But then you could not enter it in The Heiwa Challenge until later.
Click to expand...
Not a problem. I'll enter it now eventhough my submission was tested nearly eight years ago. There is plenty of documentation floating around. Surely you've seen much of it.

Heiwa said:
CC. Nowhere. But they have to comply with the rules - see post #1.
Click to expand...
So they comply with the rules and the WTC towers are valid entries? Great!

Heiwa said:
DD. WTC 1 & 2 are already destroyed. But you/Daddy can copy them! I will assist you!
Click to expand...
The rules don't state that the structure couldn't have already been built and destroyed at a previous date.

The original WTC towers 1 and 2 appear to meet the Heiwa challenge in accordance with Post #1. Wouldn't you agree?


Dave Rogers said:
Therefore, Heiwa is deliberately rejecting structures which can be proven to meet the terms of his challenge on spurious grounds.
Click to expand...
Case in point. :)
 
Heiwa said:
AA. Are there? Then just copy and be a Heiwa Challenge winner!

BB. Why not? We don't want to be a Heiwa Challenge winner?

CC. ? Wave The Flag!
Click to expand...

Heiwa, provide me with approximately $20 million and I'll replicate one of those structures for you. If you can't provide the funds for a replica of the buildings that are on video collapsing, then please do us all a favor and shut up.
 
Architect said:
Lads, lads, lads.

Do you all remember the thread(s) with ChristopherA where we decided that he was quiet clearly mentally ill and stopped posting? Argument, no matter how well reasoned, was making no difference and arguably making things worse.

Well, with respect, I think we've reached the same point with Heiwa. All our arguments are simply washing over him, he's repeating the same bollocks time and time again, and completely ignores his own mistakes.

Let's just leave the poor chap alone. Let's stop posting. He's ill or sufficiently deluded to qualify as ill.

No more posts, please. Stop feeding his illness/habit.

Kittens are acceptable, per normal forum convention at such points.
Click to expand...

Come on, guys.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Heiwa, provide me with approximately $20 million and I'll replicate one of those structures for you. If you can't provide the funds for a replica of the buildings that are on video collapsing, then please do us all a favor and shut up.
Click to expand...

Every participate in The Heiwa Challenge must fund his own structure. So keep them simple.

I made a model for abt. $400:- . See http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist1.htm#6
 
shift shift shift twoofie.

now that we know how full of crapola you (and your daddy) are, I can easily put you on ignore.
 
Conditions:

1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size!
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify
2. The structure should be more or less identical from h = 0 to h = h, e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements may be reinforced or made a little stronger, if required. Connections between elements should be similar throughout.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify
3. It is recognized that the structure may be a little higher stressed at h=0 than h=h due to uniform density, elements, etc.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify
4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections between elements cannot rely solely on friction.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify, The buildings were both safe enough to occupy by workmen, able to withstand wind loads, and were able to withstand a small lateral impact at the top via the hydraulic rams acting as temporary bracing.
5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify, In fact they exceed this requirement because they were still braced with structural elements between the two.
6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify
7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify
8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test).
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify
9. In order to easily repeat the test/challenge drop height should be <1.1 h, i.e. C can only be dropped from 2h above ground on A that is 0.9 h high.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify, They were not even dropped from this height.
10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other after test, i.e. drop by part C on A.
Click to expand...
the french demos qualify, They were crushed in entirety with no elements remaining intact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom