• 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 "Pull It" (Stop yawning people!)

uk_dave said:
Not if you know anything about steel framed structures. Ask a structural engineer.
Click to expand...

oh sorry, i must be wrong then, it is not possible for a one sided damaged building that is on fire to topple over?
can this only happen in earthquakes?
 
Dictator Cheney said:
oh sorry, i must be wrong then, it is not possible for a one sided damaged building that is on fire to topple over?
can this only happen in earthquakes?
Click to expand...

Ask a structural engineer who specialises in steel framed structures. You'll find plenty in your telephone directory.
 
and about explosives in buildings.

in my country, switzerland, we have bridges and tunnels prepared with explosives.
i never realy belived it, it was never officially, its was a urban legend.
till after the fires in several tunnels and partial collapses. they announced that they will not use explosives anymore in tunnels, it is to dangerous in a case of fire.

many ppl laugh about such things like prepositioned explosives. but they are fact, i dont know if WTC7 had that, and im sure its only very hard to prove if they had explosives in the building already.
 
Apollo20:

Silverstein is saying that the people around the building were in danger if the building fell. They pulled the people and the wisdom of this was shown when the building did fall.

I will once again put in a request that Dr. Greening stop allowing CT Frank Greening out in public. He's only embarassing you.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
oh sorry, i must be wrong then, it is not possible for a one sided damaged building that is on fire to topple over?
can this only happen in earthquakes?
Click to expand...
It's very unlikely that a steel framed building would actually topple over. They're simple not strong enough (rigid) to survive. Masonry buildings on the other hand.
 
uk_dave said:
Ask a structural engineer who specialises in steel framed structures. You'll find plenty in your telephone directory.
Click to expand...

i would, but i guess you will not like the answers, cause the 2 most known structural engineers in my country do belive WTC7 was brought down by a Controlled Demolition.

Hugo Bachmann, PhD – Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Author and co-author of Erdbebenbemessung von Stahlbetonhochbauten (Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures) (1990), Vibration Problems in Structures: Practical Guidelines (1995), Biege- und Schubversuche an teilweise vorgespannten Leichtbetonbalken (Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams) (1998), Hochbau für Ingenieure. Eine Einführung (Structural Construction for Engineers. An introduction) (2001), Erdbebensicherung von Bauwerken (Earthquake-proofing Buildings) (2002).
Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: "In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished."
English translation: http://www.danieleganser.ch
Original in German: http://www.danieleganser.ch

Jörg Schneider, Dr hc – Professor Emeritus, Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Former President, Joint Committee on Structural Safety, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Elected member of the Swiss Academy of Engineering Sciences. Former Vice President and honorary lifetime member of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: " In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished."
English translation: http://www.danieleganser.ch
Original in German: http://www.danieleganser.ch
 
DGM said:
It's very unlikely that a steel framed building would actually topple over. They're simple not strong enough (rigid) to survive. Masonry buildings on the other hand.
Click to expand...

aaah now i get it what you mean, prolly topple over is not the right word.

it will oc not keep the shape and just fall over like a massive block.
i think more about falling or collapsing to one side. and so bring danger of damage or even death to other buildings near it or ppl near it.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
they announced that they will not use explosives anymore in tunnels, it is to dangerous in a case of fire.
Click to expand...

Also self debunking.

A bridge or a tunnel wired with explosives as some kind of defensive measure and then "ooooops, that's dangerous if there's a fire, we'd better stop doing it".

So, what are the chances of the US government/military making the same stupid mistake with a 47 storey building in Manhattan?

BTW - Did the Swiss announce it on 1st April?
 
boloboffin said:
Apollo20:

Silverstein is saying that the people around the building were in danger if the building fell. They pulled the people and the wisdom of this was shown when the building did fall.

I will once again put in a request that Dr. Greening stop allowing CT Frank Greening out in public. He's only embarassing you.
Click to expand...

sounds like "experts" are only "experts" aslong they argue in your favor and not against your belive :)
 
Dictator Cheney said:
sounds like "experts" are only "experts" aslong they argue in your favor and not against your belive :)
Click to expand...

Dr. Greening is speaking well outside his field of expertise here. When he does speak inside his field of expertise, he's a force to be reckoned with. Here, he's just as woo-bound as Richard Gage.
 
uk_dave said:
Also self debunking.

A bridge or a tunnel wired with explosives as some kind of defensive measure and then "ooooops, that's dangerous if there's a fire, we'd better stop doing it".

So, what are the chances of the US government/military making the same stupid mistake with a 47 storey building in Manhattan?

BTW - Did the Swiss announce it on 1st April?
Click to expand...

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,165101,00.html

dont have a english source. only dozens of German sources.

i always found it unrealistic, Brisges and tunnel full of explosives? crezy, but it turned out to be fact.
 
boloboffin said:
Dr. Greening is speaking well outside his field of expertise here. When he does speak inside his field of expertise, he's a force to be reckoned with. Here, he's just as woo-bound as Richard Gage.
Click to expand...

but aslong Dr. Greenings talks about the WTC 1 and 2 "collapses" he gets alot kudos from "conspiracy-deniers"

Dr. Greenings is one of the few i really trust, he seems to be honest.
even tho i do belive WTC 1 and 2 was brought down by CD.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
aaah now i get it what you mean, prolly topple over is not the right word.

it will oc not keep the shape and just fall over like a massive block.
i think more about falling or collapsing to one side. and so bring danger of damage or even death to other buildings near it or ppl near it.
Click to expand...
Kind of like WTC 7 did?
 
Dictator Cheney said:
but aslong Dr. Greenings talks about the WTC 1 and 2 "collapses" he gets alot kudos from "conspiracy-deniers"
Click to expand...

I could be uncharitable and suggest that Dr Greening is as inclined towards woo as any other 'truther'. Unfortunately (for the 'truth' movement) he does have the academic integrity to not cook his calcs in order to prop up his beliefs.

In this sense, Dr Greening is a very great problem for the 'truth' movement, as a person who appears to naturally believe some rather fanciful notions about the world and yet doesn't see any reason for explosives to be used in the wtc towers. How do you guys get around that one?

(Hint: Simply ignore it.)

Dr. Greenings is one of the few i really trust, he seems to be honest.
even tho i do belive WTC 1 and 2 was brought down by CD.
Click to expand...

Keep the faith. This time next year your faith may even have removed Bush from office.;)

Ahhhhh the power of the internet!!
 
uk_dave said:
I could be uncharitable and suggest that Dr Greening is as inclined towards woo as any other 'truther'. Unfortunately (for the 'truth' movement) he does have the academic integrity to not cook his calcs in order to prop up his beliefs.

In this sense, Dr Greening is a very great problem for the 'truth' movement, as a person who appears to naturally believe some rather fanciful notions about the world and yet doesn't see any reason for explosives to be used in the wtc towers. How do you guys get around that one?

(Hint: Simply ignore it.)



Keep the faith. This time next year your faith may even have removed Bush from office.;)

Ahhhhh the power of the internet!!
Click to expand...

Bush is no danger :) he is a stupid puppet.
Cheney is alot more Dangerous. and i really hope im totaly wrong and you can all laugh at me next year when NSPD-51 did not get triggered by a new false flag terror atack. we will see :)
 
my impression was that he meant "pull the operation and let nature take its course".

but i also knew that paranoid conspiracy theorists would immediately jump on the quote. and i was right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom