Retired Firefighter Tries Debating the Loons

[pomeroo]

A fabulous discussion involving Arthur Scheuerman, who has written a book on the collapse of the towers, and a breathtaking gaggle of morons:

http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2007/08/11/who-is-arthur-scheuerman/

 

[madurobob]

I'd always believed morons traveled in flocks. I now agree that "gaggle" is a more appropriate term.

And thanks, thats a good read. Scheuerman stays on point through an increasingly bizarre exchange.

 

[Brainster]

Excellent! I particularly liked this part, which is something I have speculated about in the past:

I have an engineering question that may explain this. Since the Tower’s outer wall columns pealed out like a banana, they may have been able to break the connections to the floors ahead of the floors being impacted? In other words, would the weight of the wall columns pealing outward from the vertical along with the added horizontal forces of impacting floors projecting debris outwards onto these columns; would these columns while leaning out be able to break the wall-to-floor connections ahead of the level of impacting floors?

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Racist, insensitive, and somewhat evil. You created a great world Dylan.

Also Bldg 7 is the straw that broke the proverbial camels back. Some Muslim with a box cutter must have launched himself toward that building and demolished it with his deadly passport!

 

[Gravy]

I didn't realize that he'd written a book. His WTC 7 paper is well done. It'll be interesting to see how it compares to NIST's final report.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I think he might be wrong about one bit, and that is which walls remained standing on WTC 7. From the images of the debris, the Northern wall had fallen over the top of the rest, which would indicate that it fell last. I suspect that the damaged south wall went down with the second penthouse leaving the shell of the other three to follow it down, and that its collapse was what precipitated the rest of the facade to collapse as it did.

It will be interesting to see what NIST makes of it all.

 

[jezcoe]

He also showed up here

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=14184#comments

 

[gumboot]

Excellent! I particularly liked this part, which is something I have speculated about in the past:

I think his hypothesis is almost a certainly given the floor trusses were connected directly to the exterior columns. So when the exterior columns peeled away those floors were left only being held on by their connections to the core.

-Gumboot

 

[westprog]

A fabulous discussion involving Arthur Scheuerman, who has written a book on the collapse of the towers, and a breathtaking gaggle of morons:

http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2007/08/11/who-is-arthur-scheuerman/

It's the condescension that gets me. Arthur Scheurman seems to have the crazy idea that all the evidence should be examined and the conclusions formed, and joined the "scholars" with that in mind. This seems to have affronted the Gaggle Of Morons, who as usual throw away all the evidence they don't like and start out with the conclusions.

Mr. Scheuerman,
Have you really looked at the video?

Mr. Scheuerman,
I never imagined that such sinister forces could be at work until I found out the truth about OK City.
I feel bad for everyone who learns the truth about “Our America”. It’s your time.
Sit Down, and Learn

 

[Dave Rogers]

I think his hypothesis is almost a certainly given the floor trusses were connected directly to the exterior columns. So when the exterior columns peeled away those floors were left only being held on by their connections to the core.

Agreed, but note that his hypothesis was an attempt to explain faster than freefall collapse, which didn't happen anyway. There are certainly collapse mechanisms that would have happened faster than the Bazant model, which is why collapse time estimates based on column fracture are generally an upper limit.

Dave

 

[gumboot]

Agreed, but note that his hypothesis was an attempt to explain faster than freefall collapse, which didn't happen anyway. There are certainly collapse mechanisms that would have happened faster than the Bazant model, which is why collapse time estimates based on column fracture are generally an upper limit.

Dave

Ah right, I didn't pick up this was a proposed explanation for a "fast" collapse.

Personally I think the entire "calculating energy required to break structure" line of reasoning is inherently flawed because it doesn't reflect what was seen on the day.

The collapse initiation led to a sequence of events that caused the structure to separate into component elements. The exterior columns peeled outwards (this was a force loading they were never designed to resist), and the core columns became misaligned by the twisting of the upper floors.

The upper section never had to smash through a lower intact section, because by the time the falling debris reached the lower section it wasn't intact anymore.

-Gumboot

 

[Disbelief]

Wow, did you catch this one?

Clearly, the way to read Arthur Scheuerman’ analysis is to skip forward to his conclusions. If he doesn’t claim that the towers were demolished, all that complicated engineering stuff can safely be ignored.

 

[timhau]

Sheesh. I read the title as Retired Firefighter Dies Debating the Loons.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Wow, did you catch this one?

I'll give you a couple of hours to nominate that for a Stundie. If you don't, I will.

Dave

 

[Disbelief]

I'll give you a couple of hours to nominate that for a Stundie. If you don't, I will.

Dave

Stundied. I want to reply, but what can you say to someone like that?

 

[Anti-sophist]

Stundied. I want to reply, but what can you say to someone like that?

That is so unbelievable that I caught myself halfway through muttering "You have got to be kidding me..". That looks more like truther parody.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Is that blog moderated? I've tried to post 3 different times on two different browsers, and none of them have appeared yet.

Also: I'm glad that blog published such a rational view, but I'm also surprised. If you go to the rest of the blog, it seems as though a couple of the blog owners are sympathetic to the woo:

http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2007/10/29/martin-sheen-questions-official-911-story/

http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2007/06/29/norman-minetta-confirms-cheney-ordered-standdown-on-911/

Granted, those are different authors than the one who wrote the post linked in the OP here, but still, they're contributors.

 

[jaydeehess]

Wow, did you catch this one?

Originally Posted by Julian H West

Clearly, the way to read Arthur Scheuerman’ analysis is to skip forward to his conclusions. If he doesn’t claim that the towers were demolished, all that complicated engineering stuff can safely be ignored.

I ,,,,,, um,,,,,,,, uh ,,,,,,
speechless!

 

[PhantomWolf]

Ah right, I didn't pick up this was a proposed explanation for a "fast" collapse.

Personally I think the entire "calculating energy required to break structure" line of reasoning is inherently flawed because it doesn't reflect what was seen on the day.

The collapse initiation led to a sequence of events that caused the structure to separate into component elements. The exterior columns peeled outwards (this was a force loading they were never designed to resist), and the core columns became misaligned by the twisting of the upper floors.

The upper section never had to smash through a lower intact section, because by the time the falling debris reached the lower section it wasn't intact anymore.

-Gumboot

While this is certainly possible, I'm not so sure. If the floors beneath the collapse were already moving before the upper section arrived then there would have been less crushing power and less dust. I suspect that the actual mechanism was more the debris hitting the floor area and the truss connections being stripped as they almost instantly overloaded. This is certainly bourne out by the truss seats almost universally being bent almost 180° to where they should have been which whould indicate that they were bent down by the trusses collapsing before the walls started outwards. I'd suggest that the floors went first and then without the support of the floors, the debris pushed the walls outwards into the "banana peel".

 

[PhantomWolf]

Sheesh. I read the title as Retired Firefighter Dies Debating the Loons.

I thought it said Retired Firefighter Tires of Debating the Loons