You guys do a good job here as a group of ridiculing people with a separate view of your own here. Separately you guys are weak, as a group you guys are strong. You are simply a herd. It is ok I never wanted to be part of your group anyways, reminds me of a cult.
How the WTC Core Supports Weakened.
- Thread starter SBrown
- Start date
I don't want to alarm you Sbrown, but strangely enough, the feeling is mutual. Your point of view is based on feelings of course, while our hive mind position is based on facts. Not a character judgement, just saying. The Foundation is Mother, the Foundation is Father.
In seriousness though, the point is that this has been discussed and beaten into the ground. OVER and OVER again. And over even again! You don't like it here because you have to THINK to survive. You don't want to think. You want to believe. Which is fine, but it doesn't make you right. Also, it's generally considered bad form to walk into someone's home and accuse them of being rude when you've done nothing but ignore and insult. Especially in a house of learning which this forum is for most of us.
I'm not nearly as educated as many of the people here, but I can research. And I can weigh the evidence. The simple fact is you don't have evidence on your side... why would anyone here do anything but question your views?
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
If you'll just stick to the point of your OP, you'll learn a lot. Do you have anything to add? Do you realize that the columns were hollow? Have you learned anything new about the subject you introduced?
eta: If you'd like to debate me separately, I'll be glad to oblige. Shall I set up a new thread?
tacodaemon
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 571
I'd love to watch SBrown and Christophera battle it out over whether there were steel core columns in the WTC or not, and whether or not the columns were smaller in the middle of the core (as Christophera likes to claim). Continuing the Star Wars theme: It would be like making the wampas fight each other in the "Shadows of the Empire" video game so you don't have to kill them yourself.
Anyway, the NIST report NIST NCSTAR 1-6D has computer-generated pretty pictures showing how the exterior columns on the north tower's south face appear to have been bowing inward, which caused the top of the tower to tilt toward the south during the collapse. You can see a couple of pages showing both the interior and exterior displacements here:
i3.tinypic.com/15p3mrp.jpg
Anyway, the NIST report NIST NCSTAR 1-6D has computer-generated pretty pictures showing how the exterior columns on the north tower's south face appear to have been bowing inward, which caused the top of the tower to tilt toward the south during the collapse. You can see a couple of pages showing both the interior and exterior displacements here:
i3.tinypic.com/15p3mrp.jpg
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
Hi SBrown. I hope you'll notice that I did not ridicule you, I only asked a reasonable, germane question, which in case you missed it I'll post again: Why do you post here? What is is that you're truly hoping to accomplish? Your original question was politely answered, to which you yourself responded with ridicule. Why did you do that?
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Absolutely. But SBrown's original post seem to imply he was skeptical of these huge columns neatly snapping into sections all along their length in perfect unison with the rest of the collapse.
Had they been single huge columns, this would be a valid point. The beams would no doubt buckle, snap, and fall apart, but I would be surprised if it was as uniform and "neat" as the collapse appeared (no shards of core columns jutting out of the dust and what have you).
But if these columns are actually sections, bolted together, it makes perfect sense that they snap off one after the other along with the overall collapse.
-Andrew
I post here for the same reason everyone else does....cause they can.
Have your seperate view, but what use is it if its actually wrong in reality. None of this panzy 'oh its ok, you have a different opinion' rubbish. Your understanding of the sciences at hand are wrong and your questions get answered only for you to dispute the answer with your incorrect science.
Do you want to walk around thinking its your way or the highway? Why is it so hard to be humble and accept your wrong? God man, I dont care and I dont think anyone cares if your wrong but myself and others here do get p*ssed when people who are wrong will fly in the face of reailty and still think they are right!.
Stuff it. Im not right. IM LEFT.
tacodaemon
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 571
It's an officially licensed video game based on the Star Wars series. Anyway, did the picture I linked to help any? The full collapse report NIST NCSTAR 1-D prepared by NIST, which uses finite element analysis performed for NIST by the engineering firm of Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, has pages and pages of charts, computer models, and annotated photographs showing the varying loads on the columns of both towers prior to collapse. Here you go:
wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-6D.pdf
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Actually, I imagine that most people here post because they're interested in having rational discussions about interesting subjects. Your description of why you post here sounds awfully trollish to me.
Now, you accused us of hiding within the group, and said we were individually weak. I challenge you to prove that. Shall I set up a separate forum where you and I can debate 9/11 issues without interference?
What will it be, SBrown? You're not an intellectual coward like those Loosers at the LC forum, are you?
Nope.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Will you debate me here? Yes or no.
Nope this is not neutral ground and I am BBq'in and drinking beers.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
Actually, that's not the reason I post here, nor do I suspect it's the primary reason the vast majority of people that participate in this forum do. After all, I could post in a million other forums. I choose to post here because I want to discuss things that interest me, learn stuff, and on rare occasions share a piece of knowledge or an opinion. To state "because I can" as your sole reason for posting here is, in my view, an admission on your part that you don't really have a purpose, and that you're not really interested in the civil and honest discussion of issues and topics. After all, why should anyone here even bother responding to someone who has absolutely no interest in what they have to say, but only posts because "they can"?
So, do you really want to leave that as your answer to my question?
ETA: And you didn't answer my other question: Why did you post a rude and snotty reply to R.Mackey in post #7, when his post simply answered your original question, reasonably and politely? (And please don't say "because I can" again, unless you're willing to run the risk of sounding exceedingly juvenile.)
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
As I said, only you and i will be able to post. No interference. LOTS of people will read it though.Nope this is not neutral ground and I am BBq'in and drinking beers.
Tomorrow, the next day, whenever it's convenient for you.
Yes or no?
Sure as long as it is on my podcast.