• 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.

The Heiwa Challenge

Status
Not open for further replies.
Justin39640 said:
i dont know if anyone brought this up
but
Richard Gage did the Heiwa Challenge
at about the 6 minute mark his "presentation" begins


looks like we lost :(
architect indeed lol
Click to expand...

Please, please, we don't like laymen criticising our profession.

Leave it to me, I'm more than happy to get stuck into the incompetent buffoon.
 
bill smith said:
T....can you help out on this point ?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4746832&posted=1#post4746832
Click to expand...

Yes, I can. And yes I already have.

Remember I said that you simply take ignore answers that are given to you, and recycle old crap all over again?

http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04T49GGG7HFO/post37992
bill smith said:
Ask him what would have happened if the plane was stationary and you could somehow fly the buiding at it at 500mph ? Wouldn't the plane still enter the building. Is there a difference in he Physics ?
Click to expand...


tomk said:
When two things collide, which one is moving and which one is stationary does NOT change anything. This is a cornerstone of both traditional mechanics and relativity.

But you have to get the "constraints" to be the same for the two cases. That means "how rigid are the pieces held in place" has to be identical. And, in general, things that are moving tend to be light and softly constrained, while things that fixed into the ground tend to be heavy and firmly fixed.

The plane cannot be firmly fixed to the ground tho. It has to be able to "accelerate" backwards as a result of the collision just like the moving plane was able to "decelerate".

...

If you get the constraints set up right, you'll get exactly the same results if you throw the building into the plane at 500 mph as you did by throwing the plane into the building at that speed.
Click to expand...

Nah, you would never, ever just recycle nonsense...
 
Last edited:
Architect said:
Please, please, we don't like laymen criticising our profession.

Leave it to me, I'm more than happy to get stuck into the incompetent buffoon.
Click to expand...

Mark Roberts does an excellent job of handling his side of the debate... I find the forum for their debate to be offensive: two people arguing on the side of AE911 and the moderator does not seem to be unbiased, the moderator also seems to think that regarding matters of the physical world we can "agree to disagree" or "both be right."

Holy hell. Richard Gage should have his license (C19220) revoked for being such a complete numbskull.
 
Typicallucas said:
Holy hell. Richard Gage should have his license (C19220) revoked for being such a complete numbskull.
Click to expand...

if i found out i was workin in a building by him id definitely relocate after that display
i wonder if he does earthquake modeling by taking the foam cut-out buildings and shake them for a few seconds lol (of course while making quake noises "rumbleeeeee")
 
Luckily, any building he builds (besides single story residential and some other types of buildings) will have a licensed structural engineer who, even if he is a AE911 truther as well, will most likely make use of software that follows rigid rules based on reality.

Also, before any building he builds can get a building permit there will be a review of the structural calculations by a (hopefully) well qualified plan reviewer.

It looks like Richard Gage works on schools mainly, so all of his drawings and calculations probably get reviewed in Sacramento by state engineers...

Even still, I feel like repeating what I said 10 days ago

Typicallucas said:
Can you imagine if structural engineers designed high rise buildings by stacking office supplies and saying to each other "Gentlemen, in-boxes stacked on top of each other can withstand the impact of in-boxes dropped on it. This design looks good."

Absolutely moronic.
Click to expand...
 
tfk said:
bill,



Oh, really? Let's let Heiwa speak for himself.




There are NO words indicating "reduction of damage" in any of that. There is nothing but absolutes.

So, bill, you're typically wrong. Heiwa doesn't use (& apparently doesn't recognize) the concept of continuous gradients. He deals in binary states. He is wrong. In this, and so many other things.
You are wrong. In this, and so many other things.

What a pair...




Gee, Heiwa just answered this same question in two separate posts. And not once did he use the term "sequentially", "separated in time" or any comparable phrase.





You apparently do not recognize the difference between "assumptions" and "conclusions".

The above are not assumptions. They are conclusions. They are based on considerations of simple mechanics, velocities & accelerations, geometries and momentum. And all the logic is laid out for you.

Now, IF you think that you have something the slightest bit consequential to offer, feel free to comment.



I understand completely.

LoL.
Click to expand...


You've created some excellent posts in this thread. It must frustrate you to reflect on how small your audience is. The other engineers know the stuff you're explaining. Heiwa and his mindless echoes are incapable of learning anything. So, you're left with maybe a dozen of us who really appreciate your efforts. Speaking just for myself, thank you very much.
 
FineWine said:
You've created some excellent posts in this thread. It must frustrate you to reflect on how small your audience is. The other engineers know the stuff you're explaining. Heiwa and his mindless echoes are incapable of learning anything. So, you're left with maybe a dozen of us who really appreciate your efforts. Speaking just for myself, thank you very much.
Click to expand...

Hear, hear.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Sweet Jesus... not the card board boxes! NO!!!!
Click to expand...

Haha, if someone ever does the cardboard box test in my presence I will drop kick the cardboard box say "Tell me what the box's reaction to my drop-kick tells us about skyscrapers." When they tell me "Nothing." I'll say "Right, now GTFO!!"

ETA: In the video did you notice that at 6:30 when he drops the "two 15-story sections" the one that hits the table sounds like it has a heavy weight in it???? AHAHAHAAA he must have thought it would fall faster with a weight in it!!!! :D :D :D :D

Here is a transcript: "Ready, one, two, three. THUD. Oh my god, the one that had no resistance under it falls at freefall speed.
 
Last edited:
Typicallucas said:
Haha, if someone ever does the cardboard box test in my presence I will drop kick the cardboard box say "Tell me what the box's reaction to my drop-kick tells us about skyscrapers." When they tell me "Nothing." I'll say "Right, now GTFO!!"

ETA: In the video did you notice that at 6:30 when he drops the "two 15-story sections" the one that hits the table sounds like it has a heavy weight in it???? AHAHAHAAA he must have thought it would fall faster with a weight in it!!!! :D :D :D :D

Here is a transcript: "Ready, one, two, three. THUD. Oh my god, the one that had no resistance under it falls at freefall speed.
Click to expand...

It's a pity we don't still have the cardboard boxes that the Towers originally came in. Then we could REALLY have a go with Richrd Gage's demonstration in full scale.lol
 
Last edited:
Minadin said:
Do you think that when the building parts are disconnected, they are 'simply destroyed'? That they no longer contribute their mass and velocity to collapse progression?
Click to expand...

And of course that's what's missing from Heiwa's argument that crush-up dominates over crush-down. He claims that the upper supports are stronger and will therefore fail first, but this ignores the fact that the falling debris has momentum that must be absorbed by the lower structure. Since the only way the lower structure can absorb this momentum is by deformation - it can't react by acceleration, as the upper block can, because it's fixed to the ground - then if there is enough momentum in the falling debris that it can't be absorbed by elastic deformation, the lower structure fails. That is the asymmetry between the upper and lower blocks, and that's why crush-down is expected to predominate over crush-up.

Dave
 
bill smith said:
Right...and then you must knw that a giant skyscraper is never crushed down to the ground by one tenth of itself whatever you are told. This is evidenced by the fact that it has never hppened in the history of worldwide consructon.
Click to expand...

Actually, it happened twice. About 7 1/2 years ago.

bill smith said:
Would you believe that that is exactly what NIST said about WTC7. How far are you prepared to stretch coincidence ?
Click to expand...

Thomas Edison made a whole lot of things happen for the first time ever. Coincidence? Or conspiracy?
 
I cant believe this thread is still going.

It seems that in Heiwa's world all is constructed of cardboard and eggs. Perhaps if we build a skyscraper the size of WTC1/WTC2 out of cardboard and eggs and then smash a commercial aircraft into it, let it burn for a while then see what happens. Oh sorry, we already saw what happens with structures made of more substantial materials. Oh well, it happened twice infront of billions and Heiwa is trying to convince an audience of 60 ish. CTers sure know how to get their story to the masses;)
 
Jackanory said:
I cant believe this thread is still going.

It seems that in Heiwa's world all is constructed of cardboard and eggs. Perhaps if we build a skyscraper the size of WTC1/WTC2 out of cardboard and eggs and then smash a commercial aircraft into it, let it burn for a while then see what happens. Oh sorry, we already saw what happens with structures made of more substantial materials. Oh well, it happened twice infront of billions and Heiwa is trying to convince an audience of 60 ish. CTers sure know how to get their story to the masses;)
Click to expand...

Apparently posting here is the best way to get a new investigation.
 
Jackanory said:
I cant believe this thread is still going.

It seems that in Heiwa's world all is constructed of cardboard and eggs. Perhaps if we build a skyscraper the size of WTC1/WTC2 out of cardboard and eggs and then smash a commercial aircraft into it, let it burn for a while then see what happens. Oh sorry, we already saw what happens with structures made of more substantial materials. Oh well, it happened twice infront of billions and Heiwa is trying to convince an audience of 60 ish. CTers sure know how to get their story to the masses;)
Click to expand...

Actually this thread is a simple Challenge to design any structure A+C that will one-way crush down, when a part C is dropped on part A (=10C). Nobody seems to be able to conceive such a structure but let's face it; it is not possible according to the Björkman Axiom.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom