The Heiwa Challenge

[Heiwa]

So it took you 2 days to try to weasle out of it. Nice try twoof. I bet you were sooooooo

But as we can see, they have only weakened 2 floors in most of the buildings.

Provide PROOF that they have weakened ANY other floors.

I await your citation to back that crapola up.

Be able to withstand a SMALL lateral impact at the top w/out falling apart.

how SMALL?

I mean in one of them , they had to TEAR OUT THE FREAKING WALL to make it collapse. Until the WALL WAS TORN COMPLETELY OUT, I think that counts as a "small" lateral impact. (until the whole wall was torn out)

hahahahahaha.

shift them goalposts. Very nice. But complete and utter bs.

I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.

 

[stateofgrace]

I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.

Why not ? That's all you ever do.

 

[TruthersLie]

I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.

Spam?

I just answered your statement that they failed to meet requirement #4 (a small lateral impact).

They had to TEAR OUT THE FREAKING wall.

that is MUCH MORE THAN a "small lateral impact."

Until the wall was fully torn out, it was taking much more stress and strain than a "small lateral impact" (which you NEVER defined, how small, how lateral, etc....)

My replies are NOT spamming. They are pointed and directed at your challenge. They are real world examples which REFUTE your bs axiom and challenge.

are you now shift shift shifting those goalposts?

 

[EnJaySee]

The Heiwa Challenge


It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it!

This has been proven.

Heiwa obviously gets his jollies seeing this thread bumped. He dodges, ducks, dips, dives and dodges to avoid admitting he's wrong. It's incredibly ridiculous. This Challenge is baloney and this thread does nothing except inflate Heiwa's ego everytime it gets bumped.

 

[Heiwa]

This has been proven.

It has? Has it? Been proven! Link!

 

[willhaven]

No, you do not win! You have to design/build your own structure, etc, etc. You can of course copy WTC 1 or 2 and I look forward to that, i.e. how your structure is designed/built and how you think it will fail, when top is dropped. The path of failures is evidently of interest, to be verified at the real test. Good luck! We are really moving forward here.

Where does the Heiwa Challenge say that I must build the structure myself?

Where does the Heiwa Challenge say that the structure couldn't have been constructed before the Heiwa Challenge existed?

Where does the Heiwa Challenge say that I can't use the WTC towers 1 and 2 as an submission?

I think the WTC towers 1 and 2 fit the challenge and you are unwilling to accept them because they do seem to qualify.

 

[TruthersLie]

It has? Has it? Been proven! Link!

You have 8 proven REAL world examples which have been posted.

You claim they have been preweakened below where they initiated the collapse.

CITATION PLEASE.

Can 49% crushdown 51%? How about 33% crushing down 67%? Come on anders

 

[Newtons Bit]

You have 8 proven REAL world examples which have been posted.

You claim they have been preweakened below where they initiated the collapse.

CITATION PLEASE.

Can 49% crushdown 51%? How about 33% crushing down 67%? Come on anders

US building codes requires that all buildings that are inhabited by workers must have a code-defined minimum of lateral capacity. This is typically not less than 50% of the design wind force for the shortest term construction events.

That more than qualifies for a resistance to a "small" lateral force. Apparently Heiwa wants to discount that because he doesn't have a video of someone pushing on the top. Why can't he just admit that he's wrong already and move on? What a coward.

 

[TruthersLie]

Newton...

I can already see his next dodge.
"but those buildings were in FRANCE, so US building codes don't apply"

ROFLMAO.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Why can't he just admit that he's wrong already and move on?

He's got a million internet bucks riding on it. He will never admit it for that reason alone.

 

[releaseeabode]

Well, I don't think any of us here would consider a polite reminder - and it is excrutiatingly polite - to be bad form at all.

And, I have to ask you, why do you think Heiwa is avoiding the Ronan Point thread which originated in response to one of HIS posts?

A final word of advice; keep popping eveyone on ignore and bandying around the kind of sniping that you have been, and you'll be suspended in a few days. Steady the buffs, as Biggles always said.

You've become a Moderator now have you?

I can be suspended for using the ignore function?

I'll take your definition of "sniping" as meaning pointing out your hypocrisy. I don't like hypocrits so, you can share the honour of joining my ignore list. When you have learnt to show good form I'll be prepared to politely remove it.

One final piece of advice, if I have broken the rules then report me! Simple isn't it.

Unlike others Heiwa, I am not derailing to obfuscate and harrass other posters and while I regret the temporary thread derail it had to happen to put some people back in their box.

 

[releaseeabode]

Really ?

So on your planet comments like this are not insulting and are relevant right?

I would be honoured to be added to your list.

In truth, it's not the way I would phrase it but, given the nonsense that Heiwa has had to field for over 2000 posts I would give him a little more slack than I would the sniping Jackals who should know better! Realistice?

It is unfortunate that sometimes there are people who are right who can make otherwise objectionable statements. It is not Heiwa's motivation you should be attacking, it is his argument.

Emotive politicking arguments aside, all you have to do to nail him is prove him wrong. I notice you all now avoid the Moderated threads on these topics like the plague, that tells me you are afraid of the argument and prefer to attack the arguer.

I have given you a little more slack in terms of ignore because you made an excellent post earlier in the thread and I think you might even have a truly open mind. When I read your more recent posts I find a pattern that cannot be ignored so, I have to ignore it (that sentence is almost poetic).

I award you your badge of honour. You may pin it to your chest alongside your "I was banned at LCF" distinguished service medal.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Thus these French structures (buildings) do not comply with § 4 of The Heiwa Challenge, i.e. : 4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart.

This is a lie. If the structures were unstable, as you suggest, they would collapse due to the small lateral impacts involved in installing the hydraulic jacks. The fact that they are standing prior to collapse initiation is prima facie evidence of their stability. Therefore, Heiwa is deliberately rejecting structures which can be proven to meet the terms of his challenge on spurious grounds. Therefore, if the challenge were to have any meaning, an independent adjudicator would be necessary. Since Heiwa has refused to address this issue, his challenge is a fraud.

Dave

 

[Dave Rogers]

In truth, it's not the way I would phrase it but, given the nonsense that Heiwa has had to field for over 2000 posts I would give him a little more slack than I would the sniping Jackals who should know better! Realistice?

It is unfortunate that sometimes there are people who are right who can make otherwise objectionable statements. It is not Heiwa's motivation you should be attacking, it is his argument.

Emotive politicking arguments aside, all you have to do to nail him is prove him wrong.

This has been done repeatedly. Heiwa simply invents spurious grounds for rejection of all successful entries. This is fraud, pure and simple. If you disagree, please explain how a standing structure can be claimed not to be capable of bearing its own weight, as Heiwa repeatedly implies about the Verinage examples.

Dave

 

[Architect]

You've become a Moderator now have you?

I can be suspended for using the ignore function?

I'll take your definition of "sniping" as meaning pointing out your hypocrisy. I don't like hypocrits so, you can share the honour of joining my ignore list. When you have learnt to show good form I'll be prepared to politely remove it.

One final piece of advice, if I have broken the rules then report me! Simple isn't it.

Unlike others Heiwa, I am not derailing to obfuscate and harrass other posters and while I regret the temporary thread derail it had to happen to put some people back in their box.

Aha. Everyone who disagrees goes on ignore. I see.

 

[zooterkin]

I'll take your definition of "sniping" as meaning pointing out your hypocrisy. I don't like hypocrits so, you can share the honour of joining my ignore list. When you have learnt to show good form I'll be prepared to politely remove it.

How will you know?

 

[stateofgrace]

In truth, it's not the way I would phrase it but, given the nonsense that Heiwa has had to field for over 2000 posts I would give him a little more slack than I would the sniping Jackals who should know better! Realistice?

It is unfortunate that sometimes there are people who are right who can make otherwise objectionable statements. It is not Heiwa's motivation you should be attacking, it is his argument.

Emotive politicking arguments aside, all you have to do to nail him is prove him wrong. I notice you all now avoid the Moderated threads on these topics like the plague, that tells me you are afraid of the argument and prefer to attack the arguer.

I have given you a little more slack in terms of ignore because you made an excellent post earlier in the thread and I think you might even have a truly open mind. When I read your more recent posts I find a pattern that cannot be ignored so, I have to ignore it (that sentence is almost poetic).

I award you your badge of honour. You may pin it to your chest alongside your "I was banned at LCF" distinguished service medal.

Thank you I am truly honoured to be on such a list.

Since I am now being ignored by you, unfortunately you will not be able to see my reply. It would be easy for me to attack you and call your gesture the most pathetic thing I have seen for some time. Rather than do that I prefer to attack your argument that members here should cut your clueless guru some slack. There will be no slack cut or not quarter given to a disgrace to the engineering trade who accuses those who disagree with him of being complicate in mass murder. Nor will there be any slack given to an individual who makes pathetic gestures in an almost cringe worthy attempt to defend such obnoxious and odious acts. He is wrong to make such dreadful accusations and you are wrong to defend such actions but on planet crazy this appears to be the norm. I guess as in most insignificant cults those that are foolish and gullible to buy into such rubbish feel the need to defend their leaders irrespective of how repulsive they are to normal sane individuals. Your clueless guru as been pulled apart on this forum, his and your refusal to accept this is indicative of the entire ilk that laughably call themselves truth seekers.

I find it highly humorous that you decide to defend such actions and feel that you can take the moral high ground and lecture anybody about morality and ask that this sort of post should be excused and some slack cut. It is inexcusable and there will be no slack cut to such an individual. Nobody forces your Guru to come here, nobody forces him to post. He does it of his own free will. If he is unable to conduct himself in a civil and courteous manner he will receive the same treatment in return. If he is unable to substantiate his claims he will be called on it. If he continues to repeat the same rubbish over and over again and not answer his critics he will be called out. If you wish to defend such actions you too will be called on it. Anybody who accuses innocent people of being involved in mass murder deserves nothing but scorn and utter contempt, as does anybody who lamely tries to defend such actions.

I always find that the truthers who, so readily and quickly, choose to ignore members here are the least capable of carrying forward an argument and substantiating their beliefs and this is confirmed by your action. After one post, of three sentences you are unable to answer and resort to type, of course I can't call you a clueless twoofer who blindly defends this master, so I won't.

Oh well since I am on ignore, I guess you won't see this post, but you and I know you will and guess what? I am laughing at you and your ridiculous gesture. I will be waiting for you to reply, because you know you want to. Only problem is though you have stated you have put me on ignore. Oh dear, what should you do?

Reply or Ignore?

 

[Heiwa]

AA. Where does the Heiwa Challenge say that I must build the structure myself?

BB. Where does the Heiwa Challenge say that the structure couldn't have been constructed before the Heiwa Challenge existed?

CC. Where does the Heiwa Challenge say that I can't use the WTC towers 1 and 2 as an submission?

DD. I think the WTC towers 1 and 2 fit the challenge and you are unwilling to accept them because they do seem to qualify.

AA. Nowhere! Daddy may help you!

BB. Nowhere. But then you could not enter it in The Heiwa Challenge until later.

CC. Nowhere. But they have to comply with the rules - see post #1.

DD. WTC 1 & 2 are already destroyed. But you/Daddy can copy them! I will assist you!

Thus: Build a core on ground! Then make four external walls on ground around core. You connect the walls in the corners. Then put/bolt floors, say 100 off, between core/external walls! Put a hat truss on top. This structure is h meters high! Good. Do lateral test!

Then cut core and walls at 1/10 h from top and lift top part a little using hat truss.

You'll note that core and walls of top, 1/10 h high, now hangs from the hat truss! And that 10 floors are positioned between walls/core about h/100 apart.

OK, now you are supposed to drop the 1/10 h top, part C, on lower 9/10 h structure, part A.

Now - what contacts what at impact? The top C core probably contacts part A core! Do the C walls contact the A walls? The walls are pretty thin! Maybe two C walls contact the top A floor just inside the walls and the other two C walls contact nothing? And maybe two A walls contact the bottom C floor? Pls tell me, what contacts what.

What happens then? Well, it depends on what contacts what at impact.

It seems contacts/impact are a bit unsymmetrical, to say the least, e.g. nothing contacts the top A floor at two walls!!

Pls, tell me then how the top A floor will be damaged?

Pls, read http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist3.htm for further tips.

Good luck with your structure/test/entry to The Heiwa Challenge!

 

[Architect]

Reply or Ignore?

Well, we know what Heiwa will do.

 

[Heiwa]

Well, we know what Heiwa will do.

I remind you that this is The Heiwa Challenge thread! Pls do not spam it with your nonsense.