Moderated Steel structures cannot globally collapse due to gravity alone

[Christopher7]

I don't see any 90 degree turn there, the path he drew looks more like 30 degrees.

The object is about 100 feet from the tower and is falling as it travels at 72 mph away from the tower. If you were to actually think about it and consider the parabola of the path back to the tower, you would realize that it left the tower more or less horizontal.

 

[Architect]

Ah, Bob, I think you've run away. All mouth, no show.

 

[bob the analyst]

Still waiting, Bob. Having second thoughts? Wanting to welch? Or just waiting for the penalty kick that the Italians just missed?

just said that you were busted, quit being so angry about uit,. get over it, quit dwelling on it,,,,quit begging all your fellow shills for sympathy because I tore you up very fast

so whtra if you lost all your credibility that you thought that you alleged had here with other people... I oproved what a fake you are...you were easy to dismiss

 

[funk de fino]

Does anybody want to give n opinion on the video I post here ? This is an analysis the sworn testimony of 503 9/11 firefighters taken in he days weeks aand months after the attacks. There can be no doubt as to the autenticity of the statements as all 12,000 pages are available online. Equally there can be no doubt that a more expert group of witnesses would be hard to find. Can anybody comment on why they think the 9/11 Commission ruled all of this evidence inadmissable ?

I suspect that this post may be met by a wall of silence. In that event I think we can all draw the obvious conclusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study

NIST studied all that testimony and also interviewd a lot of the same first responders.

None of them thought it was CD.

 

[bob the analyst]

the poor, poor fake architect, i put him on the spot and he cowered from my questions, oh well, and another one bites the dust, and another one bites the dust, and another one bites the dust oh yeahhhhh

 

[bill smith]

Classic shifting the burden off proof (compelling answer). Classic False Dillema (opposite conclusion). if you are not able to demonstrate that flight TF 798 crashed due to servo failure I'm lead directly to the opposite conclusion that the company owning the plain blew it up with a bomb.

It has already been explained to you. It is quite trivial. People use the word "explosion" to describe whatever loud transient sound they hear, irrespective off the cause of the sound. Bolts snapping, rebar snapping, building materials snapping, falling debris that hits an obstruction, electrical transformers exploding, gas bottles exploding, detonations etc etc. people will describe using the word "explosion". Therefore when people use the word "explosion" we can't derive the cause of the transient sound they heard.. there is a wide range of transient sound casing phenomena that all get mapped to "explosion" wording.

A 4 year old will be able to understand this. MacQueen should be able to understand this. Yet he defines his criterion for the use of explosives as being "witnesses using the word "explosion"." As explained above this runs contrary to the scientific approach he purports to follow. He also claims to look for evidence that contradicts his "CD hypothesis" yet he misses the obvious one that the sounds of detonations are absent in collapse video. The video is therefore a fraud.

-Beachnut shifted the burden the burden of proof unto himself by saying that a scientifically carried out analysis was 'a fraud' without giving adequate reason.or examples of same. Therefore if he cannot motivate his claim with evidence it will point to the analysis being correct and by extension that 9/11 was an inside job. With me so far.....?

I agree that people occasonally use the word 'explosion' somewhat incorrectly but this will seldom occur in the ranks of expert professional firefighters and never in such numbers in the space of an hour or two on a single day. 118 firefighters reported exploions that day and testified to them. Not trivial explosons either but explosions they clearly thought had something to do with the collapse. 'That friggin' noise.....pop-pop*pop-pop-pp like you hear when they bring a building down'. 'We saw low-level flashes and then the building started to come down' ''Threw me 40 feet and I was covered with hat white ◊◊◊◊' 'flashes going up and down and all around the building' Lots more like that.

As you can see in the video the sounds of explosions were beautifully recorded and combined with 118 sworn statements of explosions from expert firefightrs we can say that the case is proven.

Your rebuttal is hereby rejected for the reasons given above .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study

 

[Architect]

the poor, poor fake architect, i put him on the spot and he cowered from my questions, oh well, and another one bites the dust, and another one bites the dust, and another one bites the dust oh yeahhhhh

Is that so Bob? Do you want to recant before you look like an arse?

 

[funk de fino]

the poor, poor fake architect, i put him on the spot and he cowered from my questions, oh well, and another one bites the dust, and another one bites the dust, and another one bites the dust oh yeahhhhh

So steel framed buildings are not damaged by fire?

 

[Architect]

Come on Bob, answer the question. I'm enjoying this.

 

[bob the analyst]

Is that so Bob? Do you want to recant before you look like an arse?

we are all still waiting for the testing that you have been involved in for joint stress and failures


will it be much longer of a wait?

 

[Architect]

No, Bob, you're trying to evade the point.

You tried to call me out on professional qualifications and experience. Specifically, I design and construct tall buildings for a living. And you, it would appear, don't.

Now let's be quite clear. Are you absolutely sure about this? Think carefully before you answer, because otherwise you're going to have to show that you design space elevators for a living.

 

[bob the analyst]

So steel framed buildings are not damaged by fire?


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_1824447b1cfcfa7614.jpg[/qimg]

I like that, a 1 story building with a corregated and asphalt roof collapsed...pretty nice pictures of meaningless stuff...do you have more pics?

 

[Hellbound]

Careful, Architect.

"I've cut your arm off!"
"No you haven't!"
"What's that then?"
"It's a flesh wound! Have at you!"

 

[bob the analyst]

No, Bob, you're trying to evade the point.

You tried to call me out on professional qualifications and experience. Specifically, I design and construct tall buildings for a living. And you, it would appear, don't.

Now let's be quite clear. Are you absolutely sure about this? Think carefully before you answer, because otherwise you're going to have to show that you design space elevators for a living.

please just specify the testing, duty and life cycle-test to failures, that's all we want to hear from you, either post it or say that I nailed you to the cross, baby jeebus

 

[bill smith]

NIST studied all that testimony and also interviewd a lot of the same first responders.

None of them thought it was CD.

The evidence speaks fr itself. Of course nobody thought of CD as a reason. Why would anybody have thought that in the day of 9/11 ? Their testimony describes CD down to he last detail though which makes itall the more significant.

 

[Gravy]

I've got bob the analyst on ignore, but can see his replies when quoted. That post about testing Twin Tower joints one million times against a 727 impact and testing the metal in a 3800-degree oven is by far the most hilariously kooky thing I've read this year. I hope Heiwa is resting up on his vacation: he's got a long way to go to match this guy.

World Trade Center worker:
"Damn, 18 more planes hit this morning. This is so distracting. I shouldn't have asked for the corner office."

"How many is that in total?

"I don't know, and I'm kinda glad the counter billboard is broken. A few months ago they said it was 240,000."

"Well, at least we're safe for a good long while, unless air traffic really picks up. You going out for lunch?

"Nah, staying in. Must be at least 2,600 degrees today."

 

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

I will out you as a complet fraud, fake and phony...you design buildings as much as I design space elevators,

What's your point, Wimpy?

Zooming "completly" over your head at Mach 4, Whiz Kid.

Quelle surprise.

 

[phunk]

The object is about 100 feet from the tower and is falling as it travels at 72 mph away from the tower. If you were to actually think about it and consider the parabola of the path back to the tower, you would realize that it left the tower more or less horizontal.

You can't just say that and make it true. You have to find the vertical component of it's speed, know its terminal velocity, and how high it fell from, to determine if it had 0 vertical velocity when it left the building.

 

[bob the analyst]

Edited by Gaspode: 

Edited for civility

 

[BenBurch]

Actually it can depend on the design and size of the respective members. But, as it happens, large timber beams are more stable for longer than their steel equivalents.

Correct. I am drawing the distinction carpenters draw between timber and lumber. Lumber is generally thin enough to burn through or reach failure before the limiting properties kick in.