• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
twinstead said:
Whoa, baby steps. Parking validation will come eventually, usually right before you are given the key to the executive wash room.
Click to expand...

I love that one, If they only knew what happens in the 'executive wash room'.:boxedin:
 
DeathDart said:
The steel followed gravity.
You survey the site and mark the visible pieces of steel.
You create a database.
You remove the steel layer by layer, surveying and marking.
Click to expand...

No. Recovering survivors and the remains of the deceased takes priority over anything else.

Sorry, your argument is based purely on personal ignorance.
 
DeathDart said:
No, that is too much trouble, look at pages 3 and 4 of the NIST NCSTAR 1-3B report. They are telling you that they don't have enough samples. They describe by understating how difficult it was to obtain what they did have.

This is supposed to be a report specific to the impacts, not a generic fire in a WTC tower. A single girders condition after the impact can change the out come by several minutes. Several girders actual conditions after impact can explain the timing of events and show actual cause for a collapse.

Or the physical evidence could have told another more obvious story.

The reconstructed floors would still be mangled by the collapse, but information is still there.

Was still there.
Click to expand...

Their models do not recreate anything generic. The NIST used a combination of exterior damage/fire/plane trajectory observations which serve as inputs for the models. They combine these inputs with detailed information about the tower's construction and the material properties (the latter of which tells you every nook and cranny about standard grades of steel used in todays' buildings). Basically the inputs are specific to the event they were analyzing.

They extrapolated those inputs, and matched the model with the observed series of events to get a reasonable failure sequence AKA, determining what events lead to the collapse beginning. They found it was the fire and impact combination.

The models are valid as long as their inputs follow as closely to the observations as possible, and there was no compelling evidence of any other culprit initiating the collapse, so you intend to suggest otherwise you will need to be more specific than saying their "difficulty" in finding usable samples hampered their efforts. Have you scrutinized their model inputs and found anything completely messed up? If you can detail that it may be more compelling.
 
Last edited:
Sunstealer said:
OK. Lets say that every single piece of steel from both WTCs was catalogued and accounted for. So we know exactly which piece was where in the structure and we know which pieces were in the fire affected zones.

What do YOU propose we test for? How are we going to do those tests? What are you expecting to find? etc, etc.
Click to expand...

I will divide it along a couple of lines.

1. The steel shows potential sabotage weakening it. The problem is we can't tell if it happened before or after the collapse.

2. We have a very detailed starting conditions (Un-etched steel) for running the model. We have a thermal history recorded in the steel. Some of the steel was recovered from areas that the survey reported substantial fires. After compensating, for after collapse heating, the model is correctly set up for the extent and temperature of the fire.

The model repeats or nearly repeats the actions of the buildings as observed. Timing of critical events nearly matches observations. The model is robust and does not require any unusual assumptions.

3. Had the damage (acid etching) occurred before the collapse, the model does not repeat correctly. Conclusion the damage (acid etching) occurred after the collapse. No sabotage, the plane impact and fires have reasonable probability of being SOLELY responsible for the collapse.

4. Information dispels conspiracies, illogical information or actions (like where is the steel)? and excessive secrecy feed conspiracies.
 
seewithyourowneyes said:
THE WORLD TRADE CENTER was built and designed to withstand the impact of a jumbo jet. That includes the Boeing models 747,757,767,777.
Click to expand...

Not that you'll respond, but you knowledge of the Boeing line of airfames is SEVERLY lacking. (Read: Non-existant)

The 767 didn't exist untill 1995
http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/767.html

The 777 didn't exist untill 1998
http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/777.html

The 757 didn't exist untill 1982
http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/757.html

And the 747 didn't exist untill 1969
http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/747.html

So, how did the designers of the WTC, which started the design in 1962, plan for planes that DIDN'T EXIST?!?!?!?

BTW, thanks for the stundie!!


seewithyourowneyes said:
Therefore when a Jumbo Jet, consisting primarily of merely a hollow pressurized cabin, impacts the reinforced concrete and steel support beams of the World Trade Center that it crumples on impact on the outside of the building and falls to the ground because of little encroachment into the building.
Click to expand...

Your knowledge of the design of the WTC Twin Towers is lacking too.

The WTC was a steel-framed structure. No reinforced concrete.
 
seewithyourowneyes said:
the fire wasn't hot? what planes? you mean the movie projector planes that Hollywood produced going into the towers....they even got the skyline wrong on one of their fake shots!!! black smoke coming out of a building = a cold fine...no O2 = black smoke...no o2 = cold fire not hot enough to burn or weaken any of the steel in the towers!!! none!
Click to expand...

Wow. The stupidity in this post is STAGGERING!!

One picture debunks the black smoke=cool fire bull *****.

BlackSmoke2.jpg
 
NoahFence said:
Indeed it does. I had my information about 4 seconds into the collapse of the 1st building, and have yet to be proven incorrect.

What's taking you so long?
Click to expand...

We still don't have those detailed starting conditions because the brush wanted to create a conspiracy (around nothing).
 
DeathDart said:
I will divide it along a couple of lines.

1. The steel shows potential sabotage weakening it. The problem is we can't tell if it happened before or after the collapse.

2. We have a very detailed starting conditions (Un-etched steel) for running the model. We have a thermal history recorded in the steel. Some of the steel was recovered from areas that the survey reported substantial fires. After compensating, for after collapse heating, the model is correctly set up for the extent and temperature of the fire.

The model repeats or nearly repeats the actions of the buildings as observed. Timing of critical events nearly matches observations. The model is robust and does not require any unusual assumptions.

3. Had the damage (acid etching) occurred before the collapse, the model does not repeat correctly. Conclusion the damage (acid etching) occurred after the collapse. No sabotage, the plane impact and fires have reasonable probability of being SOLELY responsible for the collapse.

4. Information dispels conspiracies, illogical information or actions (like where is the steel)? and excessive secrecy feed conspiracies.
Click to expand...
I'm confused.

Are you saying that the damage was caused by acid etching or that acid etching could determine a timeline for damage that's present in the steel that's being inspected?
 
triforcharity said:
Wow. The stupidity in this post is STAGGERING!!

One picture debunks the black smoke=cool fire bull *****.

[qimg]http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/BlackSmoke2.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...


The fire is not entirely fuel or contents, the aluminum is now burning. This is like the HMS Sheffield. Nano Aluminum and water ice make a fairly good rocket fuel. Aluminum (with enough oxygen) will burn very hot.

May not be relevant to WTC because there is a lack of samples showing the thermal history throughout the area of impact and fire. Your black smoke is not that relevant to the temperature due to the burning aluminum.
 
Porkpie Hat said:
I'm confused.

Are you saying that the damage was caused by acid etching or that acid etching could determine a timeline for damage that's present in the steel that's being inspected?
Click to expand...

Because of the underground fires and the presence of heated gypsum and carbon monoxide substantial quantities of sulfuric acid (potentially several tons) could have formed, etching or dissolving steel nearby.

The sulfuric acid also produces hydrogen which burns with a flame temperature in air of approx 2400C. This can cause steel to melt. But all of this happens AFTER the collapse.

A computer model that was very detailed (lots of samples) that ran well with un-etched steel and that would fail with etched steel would mean that the steel was intact before the collapse. All the visibly damaged (eaten up steel) steel recovered would not mean anything. Especially if the physical survey placed it near an underground fire.

But a computer model this sensitive is only possible, if enough steel is recovered from the impact and fire floors.

The people doing the steel removal probably started freaking out when they saw the acid etched steel and molten steel. They didn't let the researchers have it because they "Taught it was avidence" Say it with a New York Mob voice.

Irony.... I hate irony.
 
Huhm, maybe Pasquale D'Amuro isn't a rat, that is as far as I go.
 
Last edited:
We still don't have those detailed starting conditions because the brush wanted to create a conspiracy (around nothing).
Click to expand...

I know the starting conditions. I did about 4 seconds into the collapse of the 1st building. Why is it taking you so long to figure out what I did immediately?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom