Debate (not debase) a Truther

Question: What is the relevance of WTC7's collapse being "unprecedented"? What does precedent have to do with the question of how it happened?

There is no relevance unless you live in Truther fantasy world where there is no such thing as a "first time for everything."
 
You're making an argument that there's no safety concern as anyone can download/buy/pirate Ansys or LS-Dyna. This might be true. That said, not everyone can put together a model that can accurately represent a building.

1. You need to understand how FEA works.

2. You need a good understanding of how buildings are put together and how they work structurally.

An advanced engineering degree for the 1st, and a couple years of experience for the second.

These aren't common. In fact, I would argue that they are very rare. There's a large number of truthers on the internet who would like nothing else than to create a model of the towers with one of these programs and prove "inside job", or that NIST is a bunch of liars, etc. Except they haven't. I postulate that it's not possible. They don't have the ability. Most terrorists, or people who want to do harm to buildings, also don't have the ability. Giving them a large-scale fully functional model would help them in understanding how to bring down buildings.

sure they arent common, but the guys also learned how to fly an airliner, learned how to operate autopilots etc. that aint common either.

learning ansys is no problem, learning the structural engineering part is indeed more trouble. but considering Atta's education it isnt that implausible they could also organise a FEA. but obviously they didnt need them anyway.

i dont really see that security issue. maybe im wrong.

PS: and no Dudalb im not back to my trutherism. sorry to disapoint your prejudice.
 
sure they arent common, but the guys also learned how to fly an airliner, learned how to operate autopilots etc. that aint common either.

learning ansys is no problem, learning the structural engineering part is indeed more trouble. but considering Atta's education it isnt that implausible they could also organise a FEA. but obviously they didnt need them anyway.

i dont really see that security issue. maybe im wrong.

PS: and no Dudalb im not back to my trutherism. sorry to disapoint your prejudice.
I don't think they're expecting to defeat the truly determined, nothings going to do that. What most of these "security reasons" are meant to do is defeat the nuts. You can look-up bomb making on the internet but without the specific skills you end up with something like the NYC (time square) fiasco or the "shoe bomber". I agree to some extent it seems silly but, there is a large group of people to which you don't want to give too much information.
 
sure they arent common, but the guys also learned how to fly an airliner, learned how to operate autopilots etc. that aint common either.

They had to have people teach them how to do it, however. Do you think it would have been possible for them to fly the planes into buildings if they had less or no training?

learning ansys is no problem, learning the structural engineering part is indeed more trouble. but considering Atta's education it isnt that implausible they could also organise a FEA. but obviously they didnt need them anyway.

i dont really see that security issue. maybe im wrong.

The idea isn't to make it impossible, it's to make it less easy. If someone is trying to kill you, don't give them the tools that make that job easier.
 
They had to have people teach them how to do it, however. Do you think it would have been possible for them to fly the planes into buildings if they had less or no training?



The idea isn't to make it impossible, it's to make it less easy. If someone is trying to kill you, don't give them the tools that make that job easier.

but considering the special construction of WTC7 (edison station etc) how much use would the Ansys model be for them?
 
However, this sentence accumulates, once again, grammatical aberrations.

ImANiceGuy reads like an automated translation algorythm. His French is unintelligible.

That's one of the main reasons Bill 101 was implemented. The longer you are out of contact with the French language, the faster you get assimilated, the more your understanding and command of the language erodes.

If Québec hadn't had Bill 101, we'd probably sound like ImANiceGuy right about now. Thank you Camille Laurin. [/derail]
 
Last edited:
but considering the special construction of WTC7 (edison station etc) how much use would the Ansys model be for them?

Lots. It's a funny building. You can learn quite a bit from that.
 
Beachnut - Please tell me you don't live in a condo (Or anywhere close to other dwellings) with that driver setup..:jaw-dropp

But for Gawd's sake clean the fingerprints off the glass!

IMG_1057b.jpg
 
To me if you have to hide what you believe in layers of obfuscation ( i am just asking questions. Or " well i don't really believe everything alex jones says..." or " Not that i think it was an inside job, but....") that should tell you something right off the bat about your beliefs.
 
Beachnut - Please tell me you don't live in a condo (Or anywhere close to other dwellings) with that driver setup..:jaw-dropp

But for Gawd's sake clean the fingerprints off the glass!

IMG_1057b.jpg

keynansubwoofer2.jpg

I have no idea how the fingerprints got there. But my ~25% clones will look into it.

With the windows closed the frogs and crickets are louder at the borders of the yard unless you have it up past 110db in the living-room which requires hearing protection. My AR-9s from 1978 are my surround speakers.

If I have time to build speakers, babysit my grandkids and post, 911 truth proxies should have time to find a cure to repeating lies about 911.

On another note; I mean to call the ideas he posts as delusions; I assume most 911 truthers will recovers and be my superior in all things real (like glass cleaning).
 
Wow someone was joking about the potato method of detecting conspirasists. I guess it really is a valid method.
 
[qimg]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/keynansubwoofer2.jpg[/qimg]
I have no idea how the fingerprints got there. But my ~25% clones will look into it.

With the windows closed the frogs and crickets are louder at the borders of the yard unless you have it up past 110db in the living-room which requires hearing protection. My AR-9s from 1978 are my surround speakers.

I knew there was I reason I liked your style! I use a pair of Klipsch PWK monitors (from the same era) for my "background noise abatement". :D
 
Last edited:
:rolleyes:

Finding some obscure/devious/deceptive way to back up a plain error is a typical Truther tactic. You're doing it again here. Which is partly why people are assuming you are a typical Truther who's simply doing a poor job of disguising the fact.

For the record, what you wrote in the Franglais above translates as is not and becomes a question purely through intonation, rather than the is it not in your original which is (as I recall) known as a question tag.

And I would have thought it should be capable d' utiliser , but then my French is not strong.

Regards

"A foreigner"

as mentioned in the other thread, please read through the entire thread before posting nonsense.

Had you done this, you would have read that I conceded that the "-ce" was necessary in my original context in order to be grammatically correct.

I used the same term (n'est pas) to demostrate that it is not always grammatically incorrect.

Thanks for trying.
 
Building collapse due to fire is not unprecedented at all.



Really unprecedented however would be the demolition of a tall building with thermite, or with explosives that do not go BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! devastatingly loudly.

Not that this lack of precedence means anything - just pointing out that truthers don't think consistently.


I just love how they try and argue is was both loud and quiet at the same time! :D
 
as mentioned in the other thread, please read through the entire thread before posting nonsense.

Had you done this, you would have read that I conceded that the "-ce" was necessary in my original context in order to be grammatically correct.

I used the same term (n'est pas) to demostrate that it is not always grammatically incorrect.

Thanks for trying.

No, you didn't. When you used it in your OP thus...

...Anything is possible, n'est pas? ...

...it was quickly pointed out that it can't be used thus. You insisted:

p.p.s It can also be n'est pas.
...

...and tried to back this up with an Argument from Authority:

Mince....I am french.

It has, however, been conclusively shown that your grasp of the French language is nowhere near that of a native speaker, let alone a true Frenchman.


Your claim now "I used the same term (n'est pas) to demostrate that it is not always grammatically incorrect" fails, because it is incorrect, always.


This is so pathetic - do you enjoy losing so much, or are you a troll?


Your insistence on bad French and the false excuses you try make you a generally untrustworthy person - I will henceforth think that you either don't want to debate civilly or honestly, or that you are incapable to an extraordinary degree of engaging in a reasonable debate.
 
I just love how they try and argue is was both loud and quiet at the same time! :D

That would be your super nano thermite, code named hushaboom. Rocky and Bullwinkle were both members of Skull and Bones and they were working with technology recovered from Area 51.

ETA : Just after posting, my trash was picked up by two guys in a black SUV. Should I be worried?
 

Back
Top Bottom