Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[Clayton Moore]

You post a moron's website with photos of a fire in Madrid which was fought, but the steel structure on-fire collapsed. In addition, the Madrid building was totaled by fire; your post has building that was destroyed by fire, too weak to be fixed, it had to be taken apart. The reason most of the building was standing, the fires were fought. Showing a building burning at night misleads you to think the fires on 911 were small. 911 fires were bigger than the fires you show from a moronic web site.

He is a moron because he shows cuts made after 911 as his proof of CD. Yes, a moron web site. The idiot posts lies, and you repeat them without thinking, you are good follower, a copy and paste expert 911 truth cult member.

You are posting stuff debunked years ago. Why are you the best 911 truth has?

Your facts are backward, after the fact, conjured up lies.

You can't debunk the many, many coincidences of 9/11.


Simple math shows that the official 9/11 account is CRAP


http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html

 

[sylvan8798]

http://california911truth.webs.com/twintowers.htm

The world's first not so raging pulverizing fire.

You do realize that there is NO WAY "they" could have applied those angle cutting shaped charges to the exterior columns of the WTC, right? Because that is what the nutjobs in your link are implying.

 

[sylvan8798]

Any heat to a steel column or beam is immediately shared/dissipated throughout the entire beam or column.

There is a partial differential equation which describes the distribution of temperature in an object as a function of space, time, and the material. It is sometimes called the Heat Equation, and the one-dimensional simplification is used as an example when teaching students partial differential equations. It is used because the fundamental situation is straightforward to grasp, and because it is analytically solvable and thus very important from both a mathematical and an engineering standpoint.

No one familiar with the Heat Equation would make the statement you have made above. Therefore we can conclude one of two things is true - either the person(s) from whom you obtained that idea know nothing about the Heat Equation, or they know very well and are counting on the fact that *you* don't. You should ask yourself why you are taking them seriously if either case applies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_equation

Countdown to sylvan gets ignored by the twoofers once again in 3....2...1...

 

[Clayton Moore]

You do realize that there is NO WAY "they" could have applied those angle cutting shaped charges to the exterior columns of the WTC, right? Because that is what the nutjobs in your link are implying.

Why not?

 

[brazenlilraisin]

Why not?

Let's just suppose "they" could have. Now explain how the detonation of such a charge initiated collapse on the 96th floor.

 

[sylvan8798]

Why not?

The exterior columns were half in and half out of the building. The window frames were attached to the the sides of the columns. They would have had to punch through the windows or the frames and lace the devices around the OUTSIDE of the building. There were like 64 columns on each side. Any indication from the photos that there are devices strapped around any of those columns?

 

[Clayton Moore]

There is a partial differential equation which describes the distribution of temperature in an object as a function of space, time, and the material. It is sometimes called the Heat Equation, and the one-dimensional simplification is used as an example when teaching students partial differential equations. It is used because the fundamental situation is straightforward to grasp, and because it is analytically solvable and thus very important from both a mathematical and an engineering standpoint.

No one familiar with the Heat Equation would make the statement you have made above. Therefore we can conclude one of two things is true - either the person(s) from whom you obtained that idea know nothing about the Heat Equation, or they know very well and are counting on the fact that *you* don't. You should ask yourself why you are taking them seriously if either case applies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_equation

Countdown to sylvan gets ignored by the twoofers once again in 3....2...1...

For example, if a bar of metal has temperature 0 and another has temperature 100 and they are stuck together end to end, then very quickly the temperature at the point of connection is 50 and the graph of the temperature is smoothly running from 0 to 100.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_equation


Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
Any heat to a steel column or beam is immediately shared/dissipated throughout the entire beam or column.


How is the quote from your link different from what I said?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Let's just suppose "they" could have. Now explain how the detonation of such a charge initiated collapse on the 96th floor.

It was a controlled demolition. There were explosive devices throughout the buildings. That's the why there were THREE global collapses.

Here's your gravity collapse theory in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgtekdw1eyo

 

[Oystein]

There were no raging fires.
Why wouldn't they be operable?

You are either clinically delusioned.
Or a troll.

Either way: That's it: Welcome to ignore.

 

[TSR]

How is the quote from your link different from what I said?

.
Perhaps one could start with your use of the word "immediately", for which you apparently have a non-standard personal definition.

Care to share that definition with us?

*Then* you could use the rest of the math cited to define for us the exact time it would take in the case of the WTC for this equilibrium to be reached, and show that the differential is insufficient either in time or intensity to inflict the damage it caused.

You *could*, that is, if you understood the math and the materials science involved, which you have demonstrated that you do not.
.

 

[Animal]

Why not?

Her you go champ..........explain how charges attached to these columns. (236 per floor) would NOT be noticed.

 

[Animal]

http://california911truth.webs.com/twintowers.htm

The world's first not so raging pulverizing fire.

<YAWN> So many lies and deceptions for such a short website.

 

[Clayton Moore]

.
Perhaps one could start with your use of the word "immediately", for which you apparently have a non-standard personal definition.

Care to share that definition with us?

*Then* you could use the rest of the math cited to define for us the exact time it would take in the case of the WTC for this equilibrium to be reached, and show that the differential is insufficient either in time or intensity to inflict the damage it caused.

You *could*, that is, if you understood the math and the materials science involved, which you have demonstrated that you do not.
.

Your quibbling response has earned you a Clayton Moore time out for a few days.

 

[TSR]

.
...and your running away earns you even more of the pointing and laughing that pretty much everyone but you is doing.

No, wait: a few days is "very quick," and so by your 'reasoning' I am immediately (which, to everyone else, means "without interval of time") out of "time out".

Care to address the math now?
.

 

[Oystein]

For example, if a bar of metal has temperature 0 and another has temperature 100 and they are stuck together end to end, then very quickly the temperature at the point of connection is 50 and the graph of the temperature is smoothly running from 0 to 100.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_equation


Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
Any heat to a steel column or beam is immediately shared/dissipated throughout the entire beam or column.


How is the quote from your link different from what I said?

I highlighted the main difference:

...Any heat to a steel column or beam is immediately shared/dissipated throughout the entire beam or column.
...

We should add that "very quickly" is of course vague. Just how quickly? That depends on material properties. In the case of long pieces of steel (beams, columns, bars, swords...) it is a matter of experience that one end could be red hot or hotter, such that it can be bent by mere muscle power, while the other end is cool enough to be held with bare hands. If heat would dissipate in steel as quickly as you try to make us believe, no one would have the family name "Smith". As there are many people with the surname "Smith", you should entertain the possibility that it is possible, and has been very commonly tried successfully throughout the centuries, to heat long pieces of steel locally by fire to temperatures where they become soft and malleable.

 

[240-185]

So "TruthMakesPeace" has been banned because of a not so peaceful behavior?
How ironic.

 

[000063]

Isn't it weird how thermite can cut through the columns in one spot over a short time without heat dispersion, but fire heating up a much larger section of that same column over an hour or so cannot?

 

[sylvan8798]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_equation

For example, if a bar of metal has temperature 0 and another has temperature 100 and they are stuck together end to end, then very quickly the temperature at the point of connection is 50 and the graph of the temperature is smoothly running from 0 to 100.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore
Any heat to a steel column or beam is immediately shared/dissipated throughout the entire beam or column.


How is the quote from your link different from what I said?

Read, Clayton. The temperature afterwards is running from 0 to 100. The temperature becomes distributed in the bar, but it is not "shared" or "dissipated". The implication of the persons from whom you got that idea is that the temperature in the bar does not heat up to 100, but that it would be uniformly shared at some much smaller (given the amount of steel present in the WTC) value. The fact that the other parts of the steel would heat up is utterly irrelevant to whether you can heat up a certain section.

If it were impossible to heat up a localized section, then it would be impossible to weld anything to the structure.

 

[Edx]

Your facts are backward, after the fact, conjured up lies.

Did the Windsor tower's steel floors collapse? yes or no?

Did the concrete reinforcment and concrete core stop the rest from collapsing? yes or no?

Was the WTC reinforced with concrete? yes or no?

Was the WTC fire fought? yes or no?

10 years because 911 structural engineers thought One Merdian Plaza was at risk of a "pancake" collapse, why would they think that if these buildings can't collapse from fire?

 

[triforcharity]

Sure it would, but nothing will change the fact that industrial steel will always offer some minimal amount of resistance unless it is demolished. WTC 7 was clearly demolished.

Do you think a buckled column offers any amount of resistance?

Now if you demonstrated that WTC 7 never reached free fall we could talk.

You've been shown dozens of times that 7WTC did not achieve free fall acceleration.

Why do you insist on being obtuse?