Split Thread Was global collapse of WTC inevitable?

[Quiproquo]

Have you?

definitely not.

when I (and others) point out that your attempts at analysis are fundamentally flawed, you claim expertise (or quote others you claim have that expertise).

Yes, I give more credence to someone who has first-hand knowledge of the issue rather that I do to you, who has not. Wheres the problem?

 

[twinstead]

Yes, I give more credence to someone who has first-hand knowledge of the issue rather that I do to you, who has not. Wheres the problem?

What about those with first-hand knowledge of the issue who disagree with you? Do you give them any credence?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Prove that a high-rise steel building, other than the WTC towers, can suffer a total, gravity-driven collapse from fire.

Clearly you do not approve of the changes made to the International and local building codes resulting from the investigation performed by the NIST. I implore you to take your concerns to the body responsible for maintaining the updates to the buildings codes and explain why you believe the changes are in any manner flawed, and while you're at it, make a case as to why we should no longer require tall buildings to have fire protection incorporated during construction. Please let me know of the results, when you have made your case to them.

 

[beachnut]

Prove that a high-rise steel building, other than the WTC towers, can suffer a total, gravity-driven collapse from fire.

Some of the typical fire proofing in the core of the WTC, the insulation was 3 inches of wallboard to keep the fire away from the steel core. Steel quickly, very quickly looses strength and fails.
Simple as this...

The 3 inches of wallboard, blown off by aircraft impacts would have protected the WTC for hours in a normal non-massive-kinetic-energy impact injection of 66,000 pounds of jet fuel. The water system was destroyed at impact, no water to put out fires on multiple floors, started with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel, with heat energy of 315 tons of TNT. Jet fuel has 10 times the heat energy of TNT or thermite; so does burning plastics, so do office fires. This why arsonist don't have to bring TNT and thermite to destroy buildings, they use fire, and accelerant that have massive amounts of heat energy, not weak TNT and thermite. TNT and thermite are moronic scenarios made up by by people with paranoid conspiracy theories to satisfy their idiotic delusions.

Jones made up thermite and you don't have the knowledge and experience to see his fraud. You picked Jones and his thermite, with 10 times less energy than jet fuel, and less energy than office fires. You lost, and add to 9 years of failure.

You have no clue how powerful fire and gravity are, and you are proving it with every post.

What are you theories on the Pentagon and Flight 93? Got some more nonsense for the rest of 911?

 

[Dave Rogers]

I'm talking about hundred of people with PhD's and Master's degrees who constantly do unsafe, sometimes mindless, really, really stupid things.

Hey, don't knock us PhD's. We can generally think of incredibly novel and imaginative ways to do unsafe and really, really stupid things. And on the rare occasions they don't result in complete disaster, we call them "breakthroughs".

Dave

 

[Architect]

Yes, I give more credence to someone who has first-hand knowledge of the issue rather that I do to you, who has not. Wheres the problem?

Because the issues actually revolve around design and structural analysis, together with things like fire engineering. Expertise around tall structures is essential. So:

1. Your "expert" architects, like Gage, have no experience in tall buildings and from their CVs very little in complex structural design issues.

2. Your physics "experts" like Jones have no relevant experience or training at all in these fields.

3. Like I've said and others have told you, I've worked ont he design and delivery of tall buildings projects. Don't take my word for it - check with the mods I showed my bona fides to. Look at my posts and the technical material therein.

 

[TruthersLie]

Lucky for us, someone did create a scale model experiment!

Oh Horatius. He has had that video shown to him repeatedly and he keeps handwaving it away.

The first handwave was that it was faked. (and I showed him that it wasn't).
He then refused to answer any questions about it for a long while
the he has dodged around.

He has made (rather stupid) statements that even the rubble of a "moon sized" amount wouldn't cause the towers to collapse.

he has ignored how loose particles like avalanches, mudslides and tsunami's can cause any damage and tried to handwave them all away.

They are all just loose particles right? I mean we know that water couldn't ever cut through steel, or caue buildings to collapse.

He has stated that you could stand under 1000kilos of sand falling from 3 meters and be unhurt (IIRC, I've been offline for a while).

Of course we cannot also ignore the simple request for him to do a simple diagram of the forces acting upon the blocks... but he has ignored that and dodged it.... Go figure.

 

[ergo]

Architect is an architect in the UK. He's done high rises. Arup is a British Engineering firm. They are very well known.

Who is "Architect" then? What's his name?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Hey, don't knock us PhD's. We can generally think of incredibly novel and imaginative ways to do unsafe and really, really stupid things. And on the rare occasions they don't result in complete disaster, we call them "breakthroughs".

Dave

Oh, like when your experiment leads you to breakthrough the wall, breakthrough the floor, breakthrough the other wall...

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Hey, don't knock us PhD's. We can generally think of incredibly novel and imaginative ways to do unsafe and really, really stupid things. And on the rare occasions they don't result in complete disaster, we call them "breakthroughs".

Dave

I'm not knocking you guys. Like I said, you've kept me gainfully employed for the last 30 years.

My job is to help you make "breakthroughs" more often.

 

[Architect]

Who is "Architect" then? What's his name?

Bona-fides have previously been exhibited to the mods, who know my details. At least one other poster here has been in my office. But you know this already.


Now, you seem to be overlooking the "Physics" thread, where you were asked to defend some of your statements......

 

[1337m4n]

Who is "Architect" then? What's his name?

Have you dropped the 500 lb of sand on your head yet?

What's taking you?

Can you not obtain the resources? It should be pretty simple. All you need is a lever-operated trapdoor and 500 lb of sand. Trapdoors are pretty easy to make (I can build one out of LEGO bricks) and sand is pretty easy to come by; just go outside and dig.

Put the sand on the trapdoor, stand underneath it, and have a volunteer pull the lever for you.

This is a very simple experiment to pull off and yet you have not done it yet; why?

 

[1337m4n]

Or if that's too much manual labor for you, here's an easier experiment: Go skydiving, except without a parachute, over a deep body of water.

Since in your own words a liquid cannot be treated the same as a solid, you should survive the fall. Water is just like rubble or sand in that it isn't one solid chunk.

You see it all the time in video games. In video games you'll take damage if you fall from a height onto solid ground, but if you fall into water you never take any damage.

And as all Truthers know video game physics are perfectly realistic.

 

[ergo]

Bona-fides have previously been exhibited to the mods, who know my details. At least one other poster here has been in my office. But you know this already.

Why would I know this already? Why would the mods care who you are? And if you're claiming to be from Arup, why not just state your name? Are you embarrassed to be a bee dunker?

 

[TruthersLie]

Why would I know this already? Why would the mods care who you are? And if you're claiming to be from Arup, why not just state your name? Are you embarrassed to be a bee dunker?

Still waiting for you to explain how that car managed to get crushed by the water. I've been away for a few months... have you ever managed to provide an explanation? I mean the water is just "loose" particles right?

Or how avalanches manage to crush people, they are just loose snow right?

or a Tsunami is able to destroy islands, and kill thousands of people... how does that collection of "loose" water manage to do that?

Still waiting.

 

[1337m4n]

Why would I know this already? Why would the mods care who you are? And if you're claiming to be from Arup, why not just state your name? Are you embarrassed to be a bee dunker?

I see you have resorted to derailing your own thread in order to avoid inconvenient questions.

This thread is not about Architect. If you would like to discuss Architect, make a new thread entitled "Architect's Credentials".

Just answer whether or not you'll be dead if you drop 500 lb of sand on your head. Or if you skydive into water without a chute.

 

[ergo]

Still waiting for you to explain how that car managed to get crushed by the water. I've been away for a few months... have you ever managed to provide an explanation? I mean the water is just "loose" particles right?

Or how avalanches manage to crush people, they are just loose snow right?

The avalanche example, as I've already pointed out at least twice in my short time here, is not only incorrect, but stupid. If you don't understand why then we'll just chalk that up to the fact that you're a bee dunker and probably can't.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The avalanche example, as I've already pointed out at least twice in my short time here, is not only incorrect, but stupid. If you don't understand why then we'll just chalk that up to the fact that you're a bee dunker and probably can't.

Did you remember to post the difference between the potential energy of a 1kg rock at an elevation of 10 metres and 1kg of sand at an elevation of 10 metres, or are you finding it too difficult to work out?

Dave

 

[ergo]

I don't know what the equations are. If you want to provide them, I'll happily do the calculations. If not, perhaps you should do them yourself. But please don't attempt to treat particulate matter as a solid object.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I don't know what the equations are. If you want to provide them, I'll happily do the calculations. If not, perhaps you should do them yourself. But please don't attempt to treat particulate matter as a solid object.

You're lecturing us on the properties of solids and particulates and you don't even know how to calculate their potential energy, even though I've already told you how in this thread?

Really, some people might think you were a shockingly ignorant idiot, rather than the local expert on the properties of materials.

Dave