Missile??

tmd2_1 said:
What your asking for is a bit ridiculous. In fact I will tell you what it is kind of like asking for. I assume you accept NIST's analysis as correct...right? Yet they haven't "produced" anything. What I mean by that is the towers haven't been rebuilt and planes flown into to them at the same speeds in the same locations. I mean that's the only way we can be sure what they say is right...would it not? But you still accept NIST's analysis right? But you know I think it's a great idea (of course I know it won't happen), we should build all 3 towers, exact replicas, put them the exact distance from each other, and fly planes into the exact location at the same or similar speeds. Of course we would need people on both sides to make sure things are fair and exactly the way things would have been on that day, you know just in case....I'd love to see the results to that especially 7, most of you would be probably be hyper ventilating, because you have a pretty good idea the results of this experiment would not be what you want to see.
Click to expand...

300 million dollars just for the 767's. 4 or 5 billion dollars for the office towers with all the fittings. Add another half billion for various odds and ends, including recording and testing equipment as well as filling the towers with furniture and office supplies and 2,500 sides of beef (simulating the people inside).

The whole shebang would cost roughly 6 billion dollars, just ballparking it. it would probably end up costing significantly more from scheduling snafus and cost overruns.

Or...

We could take that 6 billion+ dollars, round up all the twoofers in the country, herd them into a prison camp run by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and make sure that they have absolutely no contact with the outside world for at least ten years.

If you were us, TMD... how would you spend that kind of money?
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
300 million dollars just for the 767's. 4 or 5 billion dollars for the office towers with all the fittings. Add another half billion for various odds and ends, including recording and testing equipment as well as filling the towers with furniture and office supplies and 2,500 sides of beef (simulating the people inside).

The whole shebang would cost roughly 6 billion dollars, just ballparking it. it would probably end up costing significantly more from scheduling snafus and cost overruns.

Or...

We could take that 6 billion+ dollars, round up all the twoofers in the country, herd them into a prison camp run by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and make sure that they have absolutely no contact with the outside world for at least ten years.

If you were us, TMD... how would you spend that kind of money?
Click to expand...

With their huge number of supporters surely they could raise the money and do the experiment themselves? After all,they have such geniuses as Gage on their side,it would be a piece of cake for him.
 
tmd2_1 said:
I'm not going to get into this. The perps would have had plenty of time to test whatever they came up with. I see no reason why what he did would not work.
Click to expand...

Define "Plenty of Time" - it all depends on who your cohorts are.

I'll let you figure out why.
 
tmd2_1 said:
What your asking for is a bit ridiculous. In fact I will tell you what it is kind of like asking for. I assume you accept NIST's analysis as correct...right? Yet they haven't "produced" anything. What I mean by that is the towers haven't been rebuilt and planes flown into to them at the same speeds in the same locations. I mean that's the only way we can be sure what they say is right...would it not? But you still accept NIST's analysis right? But you know I think it's a great idea (of course I know it won't happen), we should build all 3 towers, exact replicas, put them the exact distance from each other, and fly planes into the exact location at the same or similar speeds. Of course we would need people on both sides to make sure things are fair and exactly the way things would have been on that day, you know just in case....I'd love to see the results to that especially 7, most of you would be probably be hyper ventilating, because you have a pretty good idea the results of this experiment would not be what you want to see.
Click to expand...

Wow.

I guarantee that if a 47 story building were set ablaze on multiple floors and allowed to burn for a full afternoon without so much as a firefighter wizzing on it, it would collapse.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Or...

We could take that 6 billion+ dollars, round up all the twoofers in the country, herd them into a prison camp run by Sheriff Joe Arpaio and make sure that they have absolutely no contact with the outside world for at least ten years.

If you were us, TMD... how would you spend that kind of money?
Click to expand...

Personally, I think incarcerating the lot of them is a bit draconian. But if it must be done, then I would have to allow them Internet access. The computers would setup to deliver an electrical shock if they try to go to YouTube though. Gotta rehabilitate them somehow.
 
tmd2_1 said:
What your asking for is a bit ridiculous. In fact I will tell you what it is kind of like asking for. I assume you accept NIST's analysis as correct...right? Yet they haven't "produced" anything. What I mean by that is the towers haven't been rebuilt and planes flown into to them at the same speeds in the same locations. I mean that's the only way we can be sure what they say is right...would it not? But you still accept NIST's analysis right? But you know I think it's a great idea (of course I know it won't happen), we should build all 3 towers, exact replicas, put them the exact distance from each other, and fly planes into the exact location at the same or similar speeds. Of course we would need people on both sides to make sure things are fair and exactly the way things would have been on that day, you know just in case....I'd love to see the results to that especially 7, most of you would be probably be hyper ventilating, because you have a pretty good idea the results of this experiment would not be what you want to see.
Click to expand...

Feel free to do it. Good luck coming up with the billions to buy two 767s and build replicas of the buildings.

In the real world, however, no sane person is going to do this because it would be a gigantic waste of money. Us sane people already know exactly what happened.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
However. you were asked how this missile could be missed by the commercial pilots during the walk walkaround....
Click to expand...


I'm glad they do these things...Before a planned flight from Dallas to Denver the Pilot found a crack in the wing of our plane and AA had to find another aircraft for the flight. I suspect that old plane never flew again.....

The idea that a pilot could miss such a thing is absurd...but then again, so is everything TMD claims.............
 
NoahFence said:
Wow.

I guarantee that if a 47 story building were set ablaze on multiple floors and allowed to burn for a full afternoon without so much as a firefighter wizzing on it, it would collapse.
Click to expand...

I sure as heck would get out of it and well clear.........with 3 out of 3 such buildings doing just that, I would bet on it coming down.
 
AJM8125 said:
Personally, I think incarcerating the lot of them is a bit draconian. But if it must be done, then I would have to allow them Internet access. The computers would setup to deliver an electrical shock if they try to go to YouTube though. Gotta rehabilitate them somehow.
Click to expand...


Put them all in top floor of a 50 floor steel framed building and set fire to the bottom few floors and let it burn............ with the promise to come put the fire out after say ten hours :D
 
tmd2_1 said:
What your asking for is a bit ridiculous. In fact I will tell you what it is kind of like asking for. I assume you accept NIST's analysis as correct...right? Yet they haven't "produced" anything. What I mean by that is the towers haven't been rebuilt and planes flown into to them at the same speeds in the same locations. I mean that's the only way we can be sure what they say is right...would it not? But you still accept NIST's analysis right? But you know I think it's a great idea (of course I know it won't happen), we should build all 3 towers, exact replicas, put them the exact distance from each other, and fly planes into the exact location at the same or similar speeds. Of course we would need people on both sides to make sure things are fair and exactly the way things would have been on that day, you know just in case....I'd love to see the results to that especially 7, most of you would be probably be hyper ventilating, because you have a pretty good idea the results of this experiment would not be what you want to see.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you would like to read this just to check your "position":

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/02/the-911-conspiracists-vindicated-after-all-these-years/
 
AJM8125 said:
Stundied.
Click to expand...

No kidding. I love how he equates a multi-year study:
  1. That covers multiple lines - not pieces, lines i.e. complete collections - of evidence.
  2. Applies known principles of material behavior to recorded observations (known principles which have been validated time and time again over the course of decades if not centuries).
  3. Draws initial conclusions from such observations which guides their examination of one line of evidence (recovered steel) and is validated by the predicted states of those steel pieces.
  4. Tests explanations for the multiple observations against computer models.
  5. Applies more complex levels of engineering knowledge gained from either specific incidents, or specific tests (obviously referring to the Cardington tests here).
  6. Creates a theory which either encompasses conclusions drawn by other numerous, independent studies, or is actually validated by them (the Purdue study, the various Worcester ones regarding the corrosion, and so on), and which provides a legitimate base of knowledge for dissent (Arup, James Quintiere).
  7. Subjects that theory to open commentary by soliciting direct commentary/critiques
  8. And was compelling enough of a theory that various bodies are actually implementing the findings into building code, even today.
.... with a simple drawing and some pages of text for a proposal of a new product.

facepalm.gif


Yeah. I totally see the equivalence. :rolleyes:
 
And on a more serious note:

This fantasist suffers from an abysmal ignorance of what exactly the NIST report is. The reason you don't need to build a physical mockup of the Twin Towers - even a scale one - is because the whole point of the investigations was to apply known material properties as well as engineering knowledge to analyze the event and construct an explanation of the collapse. There's no need to physically model things because the individual elements of the theory - namely the effect of the fires on the steel and the effect of the design in handling the loads and damage - have already been modeled in the past. They've not been modeled as a total system before, but don't tell me that experiments like the Cardington tests do not inform engineers as to how steel assemblies react in fires. And don't tell me that such knowledge cannot be applied to real-world circumstances; if that were the case, not a single vehicle crash in the world would be describable from other wrecks in the past.

In short, the whole NIST project in regards to the WTC was an exercise of applying what's known to what happened. Steel components of a structure have suffered fires before and their behavior well studied and described. And entire university disciplines as well as professional ones exist around knowing how a structure's design influences how it handles loads and damage. They took all that and applied it to a specific set of cases.

And then they did model the collapses. But virtually, via computer FEA.

So why the truther insistence on actual, physical reconstructions (this guy's not the only one who's proposed this)? Is it for the same reason that they insist on critiques of their hero's papers also being peer reviewed i.e. because they don't actually know how things work and they're pulling things out of their (*bleep*)s?
 
AJM8125 said:
Stundied.
Click to expand...

dafydd said:
You have lost touch with the reality of 911. That is just nonsense. Stundie of the month? That is the all time winner.
Click to expand...

No kidding. That has got to be close to the "silliest" (I'm being polite here) thing I've read in my 10 years on this forum.

tmd, you should retire from the field. You have defeated yourself.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
No kidding. I love how he equates a multi-year study:
  1. That covers multiple lines - not pieces, lines i.e. complete collections - of evidence.
  2. Applies known principles of material behavior to recorded observations (known principles which have been validated time and time again over the course of decades if not centuries).
  3. Draws initial conclusions from such observations which guides their examination of one line of evidence (recovered steel) and is validated by the predicted states of those steel pieces.
  4. Tests explanations for the multiple observations against computer models.
  5. Applies more complex levels of engineering knowledge gained from either specific incidents, or specific tests (obviously referring to the Cardington tests here).
  6. Creates a theory which either encompasses conclusions drawn by other numerous, independent studies, or is actually validated by them (the Purdue study, the various Worcester ones regarding the corrosion, and so on), and which provides a legitimate base of knowledge for dissent (Arup, James Quintiere).
  7. Subjects that theory to open commentary by soliciting direct commentary/critiques
  8. And was compelling enough of a theory that various bodies are actually implementing the findings into building code, even today.
.... with a simple drawing and some pages of text for a proposal of a new product.

facepalm.gif


Yeah. I totally see the equivalence. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Exactly. Translated from trutherese, he's basically saying "Hey, you all put blind faith in the NIST Report, so cut me some slack and let me put my blind faith in this." Out freakin standing. :boggled:
 
tmd2_1 said:
What your asking for is a bit ridiculous. In fact I will tell you what it is kind of like asking for. I assume you accept NIST's analysis as correct...right? Yet they haven't "produced" anything. What I mean by that is the towers haven't been rebuilt and planes flown into to them at the same speeds in the same locations. I mean that's the only way we can be sure what they say is right...would it not? But you still accept NIST's analysis right? But you know I think it's a great idea (of course I know it won't happen), we should build all 3 towers, exact replicas, put them the exact distance from each other, and fly planes into the exact location at the same or similar speeds. Of course we would need people on both sides to make sure things are fair and exactly the way things would have been on that day, you know just in case....I'd love to see the results to that especially 7, most of you would be probably be hyper ventilating, because you have a pretty good idea the results of this experiment would not be what you want to see.
Click to expand...

With all the "work" and "investigating" already performed by your fellow travellers coming up -0-, I'd say the NIST report will stand the test of time, even though the gurus of "truth" will find gainful employment for many years selling snakeoil to the marks.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
So why the truther insistence on actual, physical reconstructions (this guy's not the only one who's proposed this)? Is it for the same reason that they insist on critiques of their hero's papers also being peer reviewed i.e. because they don't actually know how things work and they're pulling things out of their (*bleep*)s?
Click to expand...

The truthers seize on coincidences and force them into sequences they deem to be logical and significant. They handwave eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence away, claiming it to be part and parcel of the overall conspiracy. Apparent anomalies that seem to "enhance" their theories are displayed without actual consideration of what they're attempting to "prove".

Pulling things out of their arse is a common theme they refuse to see.
 
Mr. Skinny said:
No kidding. That has got to be close to the "silliest" (I'm being polite here) thing I've read in my 10 years on this forum.

tmd, you should retire from the field. You have defeated yourself.
Click to expand...

I have often commented that a post by a delusionaut was the stupidest thing that I have ever read here,by way of hyperbole,but this time it is true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom