Controlled demolition vs. the towers collapsing

[Anders Lindman]

Okay, what do you know about safety factors in the design of large-scale structures?

I have heard that the general factor is 10 times the needed strength. But I don't know if it applies to buildings of all kinds. Maybe it was for bridges or something like that.

 

[Java Man]

If you were going 590 mph, how far would your parts fly if you hit something that is 95 percent air?

Depends how the 5% is distributed, the density of that 5% and what angle you hit it.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Yes, it was an event, the impact, equal to a 2000 pound bomb. E=1/2mv², can't you do physics?

The impacts were 7 and 11 times the impact design. If the planes had been going 200 mph, instead of 470 and 590 mph, they would have failed to do substantial damage. You have not researched the WTC towers, so you fall for lies and post them due to ignorance.

If you were going 590 mph, how far would your parts fly if you hit something that is 95 percent air?

Take a physics course and try again.

And parts of the wings? Not to mention the three jet engines that somehow evaporated into thin air along with all the black boxes.

 

[Java Man]

I never made any claim, either way about ejected core beams.

You said "never mind" when I put the question forth to Trutherslie. What did you mean by that?

 

[BigAl]

You said "never mind" when I put the question forth to Trutherslie. What did you mean by that?

I meant "never mind".

 

[Java Man]

I never made any claim, either way about ejected core beams.

Why did you care to make the post then?

 

[ergo]

Okay, what do you know about safety factors in the design of large-scale structures?

Hint: I'm going to be questioning you closely on this. You've made a very bold - and wrong - assumption and I want to test how much you really understand the issues you're so confident about.

I answered this here. You obviously aren't even reading the thread.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Basically. So?

But didn't the fuselage for both supposed planes crash into the core columns? And thereby would have been pulverized?

 

[ergo]

You mean like witnesses claiming that it sounded like the 1993 bombing? Oh wait, you claimed this but never provided the quotes.

You don't know how to search text on a web page?

Ctrl-F, type in the letters B O M B. Some accounts do not mention the words 1993 or bomb, but obviously are referring to it. See Marlene Cruz, for example.

 

[Bell]

But didn't the fuselage for both supposed planes crash into the core columns? And thereby would have been pulverized?

How wide were the core columns? And how wide was the fuselage of UA175?

 

[Anders Lindman]

And amateur guessing is constructive how? These arguments are best settled by professional scientists and explained in layman's terms to those who are not.

Amateur hypothesizing is a waste of time, especially when the hypothesis has already been discounted.

I want to have a feel for it myself. To rely only on experts only works when taking the official story for granted.

 

[Anders Lindman]

How wide were the core columns? And how wide was the fuselage of UA175?

Ok, but there were all kinds of columns the plane would smash into:

 

[Bell]

I want to have a feel for it myself. To rely only on experts only works when taking the official story for granted.

So your judgement is as good as those of the people who studied and worked in the appropriate professions for years?

 

[AaronMic22]

I want to have a feel for it myself. To rely only on experts only works when taking the official story for granted.

I empathize with that stance, but it doesn't make amateur guessing anymore valid.

 

[DGM]

Ok, but there were all kinds of columns the plane would smash into:

[qimg]http://algoxy.com/conc/images/WTC.overhead.rails-columns.gif[/qimg]

Why did you point out the braced crane supports?

 

[ergo]

So, regarding these "explosive" "fireballs" that supposedly wrinkled up a 300-pound steel and concrete fire door in the basement, do we have any intelligent account as to how these fireballs would occur, down which fire-protected elevator shafts or some other mysterious shaft? And why they would have been so selective in their damage, i.e., hitting some of the basement floors, but not all of them, completely blowing out the lobbies but hitting no other floors above? And completely ignoring the stairwell? Has there been any intelligent theory outlined about this?

Just curious.

 

[Anders Lindman]

So your judgement is as good as those of the people who studied and worked in the appropriate professions for years?

Not at all. The hypotheses must be verified by experts.

 

[Disbelief]

You don't know how to search text on a web page?

Ctrl-F, type in the letters B O M B. Some accounts do not mention the words 1993 or bomb, but obviously are referring to it. See Marlene Cruz, for example.

I am not here to do your work for you, you tried this in your past incarnations as well. You made a claim, you provide the proof.

 

[Bell]

Ok, but there were all kinds of columns the plane would smash into:

[qimg]http://algoxy.com/conc/images/WTC.overhead.rails-columns.gif[/qimg]

Posting a picture from Christophera's website?

Anyhow... Why does it matter if the planes hit 1, 10 or 100 core columns? Fact is that parts of both AA11 and UA175 and the people they carried were found in the streets near the WTC complex.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Why did you point out the braced crane supports?

Take a look at the picture again and look at the green arrow.