Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[332nd]

Whoops, you switched gears, now I'm building things?

Not using what you call common sense you're not. In all honesty, with what you've displayed here I can't see you working the sign for traffic

 

[tsig]

Yes. You do understand pancaking resists more than air?

How much more?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Not using what you call common sense you're not. In all honesty, with what you've displayed here I can't see you working the sign for traffic

My bad. I was under the impression that it was common knowledge that many things designed, such as golf courses, clothing lines, perfumes, aren't actually designed by their designer.

Damn it. I keep forgetting my audience. I'm sorry. I'll slow it down.

 

[jaydeehess]

Yes. You do understand pancaking resists more than air?

How much more?

irrellevent anyway since a simplistic pancaking scenario is NOT (despite CM's many attempts to claim it is) what is considered to have occured.

 

[jaydeehess]

So I've been away for a bit and Clayton simply moves a contention from one thread to this one. Why, some might ask? Well perhaps it is to avoid EVER answering the question posed to him;HERE(hilited new)

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
You have no idea what explosive tech was available on 9/11.

We prefer not to have to invoke magical solutions to these scenarios.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
Who the heck is we?

originally posted by jaydeehess
Science and technically savvy persons with a modicum of logical thought.
ETA: Dave's answer above is also quite to the point.
So Clayton, why is it necessary for you to invoke the 'you don't know what they had' appeal to magic?After all I thought it was supposed to be obvious

 

[NoahFence]

Wake up. Never in a gazillion years could the towers pancake and completely collapse in under 30 seconds. It's impossible.

Never? Under no circumstances?

Where's the link to the modern sophisticated explosive devices we keep hearing so much about. My new iPhone is sophisticated and modern too you know. I'd like to know how to protect it from an aircraft impact, fireball and a fire for an hour. Lest I lose some apps.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Never? Under no circumstances?

Where's the link to the modern sophisticated explosive devices we keep hearing so much about. My new iPhone is sophisticated and modern too you know. I'd like to know how to protect it from an aircraft impact, fireball and a fire for an hour. Lest I lose some apps.

So you think the US Government/DOD was twiddling for 50 years after WWII?

 

[NoahFence]

So you think the US Government/DOD was twiddling for 50 years after WWII?

No, they were hard at work I assume. So based on that, you're under the impression that in the last 50 years, the government has successfully created EVERY SINGLE WEAPON that can be imagined by man?

Photon torpedos? Mini nukes that are launched from a rocket launcher? Handheld phasers with varying power settings that can knock you out, or vaporize you depending on the mood of the user?

Listen son - there are NO EXPLOSIVES that can survive the impact of those jets, the fireball, or the fire. Period. If you think there are, PROVE IT.

"They're really, really bad people, I swear!" is NOT FREAKING PROOF.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

No, they were hard at work I assume. So based on that, you're under the impression that in the last 50 years, the government has successfully created EVERY SINGLE WEAPON that can be imagined by man?

Photon torpedos? Mini nukes that are launched from a rocket launcher? Handheld phasers with varying power settings that can knock you out, or vaporize you depending on the mood of the user?

Listen son - there are NO EXPLOSIVES that can survive the impact of those jets, the fireball, or the fire. Period. If you think there are, PROVE IT.

"They're really, really bad people, I swear!" is NOT FREAKING PROOF.

Actually, the US did develop one of these.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Wake up. Never in a gazillion years could the towers pancake and completely collapse in under 30 seconds. It's impossible.

Snort.

 

[beachnut]

So you think the US Government/DOD was twiddling for 50 years after WWII?

Name an explosive other than a nuke that has more energy than jet fuel, or office contents. You have failed to figure out 911, and the holocaust, as you want your America back. It looks like your America is based on ignorance.

 

[332nd]

My bad. I was under the impression that it was common knowledge that many things designed, such as golf courses, clothing lines, perfumes, aren't actually designed by their designer.

Damn it. I keep forgetting my audience. I'm sorry. I'll slow it down.

Oh I see!

I didn't make it clear that St George designed & built the planter & you decided to use that as a way to weasel out of your ignorant comments! Ok let me be clear..

1: If you try to design a structure using "common sense" & not learning how to design a structure, you're most likely going to wind up with a crappy structure.

2: If you try to build a structure using "common sense" & not learning how to build a structure, you're most likely going to wind up with a crappy structure.

3: If you're going to try to slip in a dig toward someone's intellect, its best not to include something like "many things are not designed by their designer." When we are talking about structures, K?*

*Eta: omg wait.... you aren't referring to what sylvian is talking about below are you?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

No clue what that even means....
BUT

You're the one who said they existed. Not me. So if they exist, surely you've seen them?

Here's how the theory works:

See - I'll bet you don't know that there is an attachment for cameras that automatically opens the shudder just before a lightning strike. I'm simply basing that on an assumption.

However, I know for a FACT that they exist. I'm looking at one right now on my camera. (Whilst hoping for a nice thunderstorm)

You might not believe me though. To you it's all hearsay and crap.

Now, this is what I'm looking for FROM YOU:

[qimg]http://ictchaser.com/index_html_files/4.jpg[/qimg]

See that thing on top of the camera? That's it. In my world, what you've just experienced is what we call "evidence". Proof of existence if you will.

Now, can you do that same exercise please, substituting the lightning trigger for 'sophisticated modern explosive devices' that can survive a fireball?

No, you can't.

http://www.lightningtrigger.com/

If it were inside the building, I think it might melt. But I can't be 100% sure unless I placed it there before a plane hit it....

This might seem unnecessarily pedantic, but I think it's relevant to the thread. You have claimed the existence of a piece of equipment with a given set of parameters (bolded above), as part of an example of how to prove things. But your described parameters are incorrect.

~Photography Tips and Camera Settings ~

Photography with the Lightning Trigger is possible because a lightning flash is not a singular event. A flash is comprised of multiple return strokes occurring over as many as several-hundred milliseconds that are spaced approximately 40 milliseconds apart.

Camera Settings:

Camera Settings Quick List:
* Shutter speed priority mode (daytime)/
Manual mode(nighttime)
* 1/15 to 1/4 second exposure
* Single exposure mode
* Manual focus setting

http://www.lightningtrigger.com/Tips.html#photographytips

The trigger works by responding very quickly to the first part of several of the lighting event. The camera shutter is left open for a very long time, to maximize the odds of capturing the subsequent portions of a lightning event.

So yes, your object exists but it does it's job in a way other than you described.

Now compare this to Clayton Moore's claim that there are bomb triggers which could survive impact and fireball. As you were demonstrating, he fails to provide examples of this technology in any way.

Further, CM would have to make sure he's not making the same mistake you made, above, by misunderstanding/misrepresenting the parameters.

Top Secret stuff doesn't exist in a vacuum. Any piece of TS hardware is based on the current state-of-the-art of the milieu. If you can find other examples of electronic gear that's made to survive an hour or more exposure to massive fire and then operate flawlessly, please provide.

 

[sylvan8798]

My bad. I was under the impression that it was common knowledge that many things designed, such as golf courses, clothing lines, perfumes, aren't actually designed by their designer.

Damn it. I keep forgetting my audience. I'm sorry. I'll slow it down.

Ah, ok, I see. So you are like Brittany Spears, who has a fragrance line, which she herself didn't actually design? In the case of buildings, the structural engineering team may be led by some big wig who gets all the credit, but there are actually numerous lackeys working on it, none of whom are relying on just "common sense" . And none who are relying on the construction workers to find their errors.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Ah, ok, I see. So you are like Brittany Spears, who has a fragrance line, which she herself didn't actually design? In the case of buildings, the structural engineering team may be led by some big wig who gets all the credit, but there are actually numerous lackeys working on it, none of whom are relying on just "common sense" . And none who are relying on the construction workers to find their errors.

Exactly. But it's a team effort. You'd better hope construction engineers are on the lookout for mistakes.

The common sense aspect is that you must know when to delegate.

 

[Clayton Moore]

This might seem unnecessarily pedantic, but I think it's relevant to the thread. You have claimed the existence of a piece of equipment with a given set of parameters (bolded above), as part of an example of how to prove things. But your described parameters are incorrect.

http://www.lightningtrigger.com/Tips.html#photographytips

The trigger works by responding very quickly to the first part of several of the lighting event. The camera shutter is left open for a very long time, to maximize the odds of capturing the subsequent portions of a lightning event.

So yes, your object exists but it does it's job in a way other than you described.

Now compare this to Clayton Moore's claim that there are bomb triggers which could survive impact and fireball. As you were demonstrating, he fails to provide examples of this technology in any way.

Further, CM would have to make sure he's not making the same mistake you made, above, by misunderstanding/misrepresenting the parameters.

Top Secret stuff doesn't exist in a vacuum. Any piece of TS hardware is based on the current state-of-the-art of the milieu. If you can find other examples of electronic gear that's made to survive an hour or more exposure to massive fire and then operate flawlessly, please provide.

 

[000063]

Exactly. But it's a team effort. You'd better hope construction engineers are on the lookout for mistakes.

The common sense aspect is that you must know when to delegate.

Actually, that takes experience too.

 

[000063]

[qimg]http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYGziTDQXXHRqOQP88oZaDd92qdnTrEBotEOkH-SRYn6NDRih5AQ[/qimg]

So you can't prove it exists or does what you claim, since you've never gotten access to it.

So, just argument from incredulity again?

 

[332nd]

Exactly. But it's a team effort. You'd better hope construction engineers are on the lookout for mistakes.

The common sense aspect is that you must know when to delegate.

And you would know when to delegate how?

 

[Travis]

Ah, ok, I see. So you are like Brittany Spears, who has a fragrance line, which she herself didn't actually design? In the case of buildings, the structural engineering team may be led by some big wig who gets all the credit, but there are actually numerous lackeys working on it, none of whom are relying on just "common sense" . And none who are relying on the construction workers to find their errors.

In that case they wouldn't actually claim that Brittany Spears is the designer. They'd hook her to it in marketing but never actually say she designed it.

Le Skanque from Brittany Spears!

Not quite the same as saying she came up with the chemical formula.

Exactly. But it's a team effort. You'd better hope construction engineers are on the lookout for mistakes.

The common sense aspect is that you must know when to delegate.

Actually construction engineers sometimes are the culprits of mistakes. Look up the need to retrofit the CitiCorp Tower some time.

And did you ever get around to explaining why buildings can't pancake in less than 30 seconds?