My shrink says that too.
You should listen to them. Sounds like they know what they're talking about...
Offer to the Truth Movement: Let's Settle It
- Thread starter R.Mackey
- Start date
You should listen to them. Sounds like they know what they're talking about...
adoucette
Scholar
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 109
Nope.
I see you didn't bother to check the reference I provided.
If you had you would have found out that each floor had many different column types (~ 10 different exterior column types per floor and ~ 20 different core column types per floor) and that no floors listed were the same as any other floor.
Again see NIST NCSTAR 1-5G Appendix B.
Oh, and while it might seem strange to you that they don't mention center of mass or center of gravity, you do realize that both of these attributes are intrinsic to the FEA models, so unless you can show how their model wasn't sufficiently accurate then your rant is just a long winded strawman.
The ceiling tiles are a sub report, and they were important as their ability to remain intact after the impact forces/vibrations would have a direct bearing on the IMPORTANT ceiling level gas temperatures which in turn affect the IMPORTANT floor Truss temperatures.
Arthur
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
Your argument boils down to nothing but TRUST IN AUTHORITY believe what they tell you regardless of what obvious information they leave out. I have demonstrated that the behavior of the structure should change with the mass and distribution of mass.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q
The accusation of strawman is just rhetorical debating BS. The NIST didn't even specify the total quantity of concrete in their 11,305 PDF pages. Maybe they hid the information in their computer model. I don't care. There should be a table specifying the tons of concrete and tons of steel on every level. Are you saying 232 numbers are too difficult for them to come up with in 3 years with $20,000,000?
Did you search the report to try to prove me wrong about their limited use of "center of mass" and "center of gravity"? ROFL
psik
Confuseling
Irreligious fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,243
Please answer this one question: If the NIST report is full of holes, why don't hostile governments tear it apart?
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
I've been trying to figure out who to email in Iran to ask about that.
Of course I do think that politicians in any country concentrate more on psychological BS than on science and engineering. Raising such a question would tend to encourage their people to think logically. What politician wants that?
But I am much more curious about why so many people who imply that they are smart don't see why the designers of EVERY SKYSCRAPER must figure out how much steel and how much concrete to put on each level. So that being obvious why don't they assume that people analyzing the destruction of the WTC will provide them with that information in an easily comprehensible form as standard operating procedure?
psik
adoucette
Scholar
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 109
What you HAVEN'T demonstrated is that the FEA model doesn't take this into account.
And, NO, NIST taking the time to build the GLOBAL model and entering all the data into a DATABASE is NOT the same as HIDING it.
Your big beef with the NIST report simply boils down to the data isn't in a form that YOU want to see it in.
Big deal.
The availability of the NIST FEA Database TRUMPS a PDF table.
Consider that it took NIST 17 pages of tabular data to display the column data for just 14 floors and even at this level of detail, this did not include the data for the floor trusses, Spandrels, Truss Seats or floor beams (which also vary by floor).
On the other hand, REAL SCIENTISTS can extract the data in A VERY COMPUTATIONALLY USABLE FORM from the Database and use it to compare their results with NISTs, or run their own simulations, or extend the model etc etc etc.
Arthur
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
PHONY SCIENTISTS need to hide their data in computers.
All you have demonstrated is that you BELIEVE without being given the data.
If they have the correct data why should there be a problem with telling EVERYBODY?
The nation that put men on the moon can't tell EVERYONE IN THE WORLD the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of a building designed in the 1960s. ROFLMAO It is curious how the design and construction of the WTC corresponds with the space race, 1959-1973. And then it is destroyed in the year of the title of a ground breaking sci-fi movie about space and computers.
Now we may have computers being used to lie to us about it.
You know what they say about computers, GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT.
2001: A Stupid Odyssey
So they should tell us the data in human readable form.
Maybe I should take that picture of an astronaut saluting the flag on the moon and put a STRAWMAN in his place. Maybe with the WTC in the background on the moon.
psik
AZCat
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,672
It is curious how you have made an irrelevant side topic your central issue with the NIST report. Do you disagree with the rest of their work, other than their failure to present certain information in a manner acceptable to you?
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Do you ever plan to show us how they got it wrong or is this data retrieval (for you) issue the smoking gun?
Hi henkbein. I'm not sure how valuable my opinion is, but you are welcome to it. In my opinion, the answer is none of the above. I believe the only reasonable conclusion is that Secretary Mineta made a simple mistake.
We have had numerous threads on Mr. Mineta's comments here. I believe we can all agree that his statements were wrong, since as you note they conflict with several pieces of harder evidence, and recollection is always subject to errors. I also propose that the effect of Mr. Mineta's mistakes on the overall conclusions of the 9/11 Commission and other investigations was minimal, since the mistake is so easy to detect.
The remaining question is one of motive, viz. "reasons to lie" or whatever. To that, I can see no rational motivation. Had this been a clever lie, one that raised serious doubts in the investigation, then perhaps it would have been beneficial to someone to tell it in the first place. But I have never been impressed with the lie itself. It does not appear to shield anyone or anything, even if it wasn't so easy to dispose of. This biases me toward thinking it was just a mistake.
I have additional basis for that conclusion, and that is, as I mentioned on the Forums once before, that I knew Norm Mineta. He was my congressman in central California until I went off to grad school, and during my youthful introduction to political activism. I met him once. His record, his letters and position statements, and his community meetings all demonstrated to me his (at the very least) above average competence for a representative. Nothing about the man suggests dementia or incapacity.
Furthermore, you may be unaware of this, but Mr. Mineta is and always was a moderate but liberal Democrat. This does not fit in well with any conspiracy theory I have ever heard. I cannot conceive a scenario where it makes sense for Mr. Mineta to lie on behalf of the Vice President, or PNAC for that matter. It would require an exceptional source of motivation to do so, even overlooking the clumsiness of the "lie." Without any such explanation at hand, I can only conclude that it was a simple error.
Everyone makes mistakes. These mistakes aren't even that big. If you believe Cabinet secretaries never make such mistakes, I might remind you of Morgan Reynolds and Paul Craig Roberts, formerly chief economist of the Labor Department and Assistant Treasury Secretary respectively. Mr. Roberts's views on September 11th are not entirely clear to me but he has bought into the "free fall" canard, and Mr. Reynolds actually supports the idea of comic-book superweapons fired from orbit destroying the Towers. Compared against that standard, Mr. Mineta is the very picture of sanity.
Last edited:
psikeyhackr, you've been given the answer to your concern several times. NIST created a very high fidelity model of the Towers. This model is publicly available. The model can be used to derive every single quantity you're asking about. Posters here have demonstrated that process and told you about them personally.
Please, either ask a new question, or else I'm afraid you have my final response.
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
Consider it Comic Relief. Repeatedly pointing out the obvious gets pretty boring.
Has the NIST provided that data in any manner that is comprehensible to anybody?
How much steel was on 80, 81 and 82 of the south tower to weaken in 56 MINUTES.
It is just the people that don't ask and can't think that don't have a problem with its absence. Is it possible to build a 110 story skyscraper without figuring out how much steel and concrete to put on every level? Doesn't every level have to support the combined weights of all levels above?
If you answer yes to both of those question then I don't understand why you have a problem with my questions. The next question is, "Why you haven't been asking for the last SIX YEARS? To not have that information is an insult to the intelligence of all of the grade school kids in the country. I was in grade school in the 60s and built and launched rockets so I payed a lot of attention to the space race and physics. I also went with my class in high school class to see 2001: A Space Odyssey. So mostly I think of the WTC destruction as a grade school physics problem but you [v]must have the right data[/b] to solve it. So this obvious stupidity pisses me off considerably.
psik
psikeyhackr
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 470
That is what Urich did and I listed his core column steel for the basements. He pointed me to the information about the heights of each level. He also admitted that the column sections were 36 feet long.
Now if you check where Urich specified you see that B6 was 11 feet and B4 and B5 were both 10 feet. So 36 foot columns would be taller than the bottom 3 basement levels. So obviously the core column steel tonnage for B4 and B5 should be the same and for B6 it should be 10% more. But that is not what is in Urich's spreadsheet.
So it looks like all you can do is claim and BELIEVE that the data the NIST is using is good.
And I agree the point of no further response is approaching. I notice Apollo20 hasn't been responding either.
psik
AZCat
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,672
What do you consider to be the obvious?
Yes. See the many other responses on this thread.
I don't see how this is relevant.
The NIST was not building a 110 story skyscraper. They were investigating the collapses of two 110 story skyscrapers. As part of this investigation, they determined the DCRs for the various structural members of the towers. The model they used to calculate these is publicly available, as has been mentioned previously in this thread.
The information is irrelevant to the conclusions most of us here have drawn. The collapse of the WTC towers is most definitely not a grade school physics problem. Simulating the behavior of nonlinear systems is difficult, if not impossible.
Last edited:
I've been trying to figure out who to email in Iran to ask about that.
Ahhhh so if only you could master another language you would be able to ejumicate those poor fools as to the real science behind the wtc towers collapse.
Yet another 'truther' with absolutely no self awareness.
Iran! Good one. Iran expertise is kidnapping and taking over Embassies. Oh, the president is a holocaust denier. Good job, send them an email, I expect the president of Iran is at your level of expertise.I've been trying to figure out who to email in Iran to ask about that.
psik
That email and your engineering abilities will not help your lack of knowledge here.
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 18,560
Why stop at Iran, why not email the entire UN....oooh sorry, the UN is engaged in a 60 year plan to take over the US, sorry....okay, well why not email OPEC I'm sure they would be interested in your evidence of an inside job.....oooooops, sorry I was forgetting that they are obviously part of the conspiracy...well how about Amnesty International? Surely they would be willing to protest on behalf of the 'truth' movement, after all you have all that evidence..... oooops sorry, they're commies right? Obviously part of the 'international jewish conspiracy to do something', well there's always the Democrat Party of the US.... silly me, they're obviously part of the conspiracy, as is every single news media outlet throughout the west....the east...the north....and the south...... hmmmmmmm it's a dilemma. Maybe everyone really does approve of 9-11 being an inside job.............
.....or maybe............................
.....or maybe............................
Last edited:
Drs_Res
NWO Acorn Hoarder
Actually, no. The columns have to support all levels, but there are no floors supporting other floors. The floors support the loads placed on them.