What's your theory about 9/11?

Hans Peper said:
I when I go to sleep, I thought you finish that discussion about N and Y and A and W. Seams that you cant get it out of your head. Do not worry about that, after a few days, it will be better.
As much as I understand will you all together force me to believe what you believe. Why that ? Isn't it better that we have different meanings and learn to respect each other ? Isn't that what Mr. Randi want us to learn ?

What about the link to EWS, Mac ?

regards Hans
Click to expand...

regarding the bolded....

No. 1,000 times, no.

Facts are facts. They can't be disputed, they have no political or social leaning. They are what they are. In this case, the fact is no scene from Full Metal Jacket or any other movie pre-9/11 makes any reference whatsoever to the events of 9/11.

None.
 
Maurice Ledifficile said:
Yo, Hans, since this is the 911 theories thread, and you're an engineer, a statics specialist, could we have your insight on the collapse from that professional point of view?

(Pretty please, with a cherry on top)
Click to expand...

I saw a little in TV. ;) (joker to animal mother in FMJ)

As much as I know are the towers a steel construction combined with concrete slaps in the floors. In Germany we use full concrete constructions without steel pillars.
These two construction react different in case of collapsing.

I saw the life pics at that day, and when the first tower collapsed, my first thought was : This cannot happen. The construction must stand it.

If you have a correct static calculation, the lower rest of the building must stand it until all of the people are evacuated.

I do not know how many levels are lower the impactpoint, but I will say, the building must stand it for minimum 5 hrs or more. You will know it better how long it will take and doubel the time in the end, for security . But they must use the stairs, not the elevators.

If the WTC would have been in Germany, the building will stand it like the damage of the Pentagon building.
It is difficult to get a feeling of the forces which are working in such a moment, but try to imagine the towers are a model as high as you are. And then imagine a little plane as big as your hand will impact slightly under the top. Do ya really think that it will collapse into dust ?

So I cannot say more to that. I am afraid there is no cherry o top.

Hans
 
Hans Peper said:
If you have a correct static calculation, the lower rest of the building must stand it until all of the people are evacuated.
Click to expand...

But the towers did stand, until all the people who COULD be evacuated, WERE evacuated.

The ones who died were either rescuers or people trapped in the upper floors. The latter most likely would have died even if the towers hadn't collapsed.
 
Hans Peper said:
If the WTC would have been in Germany, the building will stand it like the damage of the Pentagon building.
Click to expand...

If it were in America, and had a different construction (as all older buildings do), it also would have withstood the damage. So?

It is difficult to get a feeling of the forces which are working in such a moment, but try to imagine the towers are a model as high as you are. And then imagine a little plane as big as your hand will impact slightly under the top. Do ya really think that it will collapse into dust ?
Click to expand...

So when you studied engineering, they never discussed the problem of scale? The square-cube law?
 
aggle-rithm said:
If it were in America, and had a different construction (as all older buildings do), it also would have withstood the damage. So? So when you studied engineering, they never discussed the problem of scale? The square-cube law?
Click to expand...

I thought that the tower was nearly empty in that time.

If you build a tower like this in Germany, you must give an device with a static calculation, that the building can stand such an impact and the construction must stand fire until it is evacuated + 100 % safty.

Otherwise you get no permission to start with building.
 
Hans Peper said:
I saw a little in TV. ;) (joker to animal mother in FMJ)

As much as I know are the towers a steel construction combined with concrete slaps in the floors. In Germany we use full concrete constructions without steel pillars.
These two construction react different in case of collapsing.

I saw the life pics at that day, and when the first tower collapsed, my first thought was : This cannot happen. The construction must stand it.

If you have a correct static calculation, the lower rest of the building must stand it until all of the people are evacuated.

I do not know how many levels are lower the impactpoint, but I will say, the building must stand it for minimum 5 hrs or more. You will know it better how long it will take and doubel the time in the end, for security . But they must use the stairs, not the elevators.

If the WTC would have been in Germany, the building will stand it like the damage of the Pentagon building.
It is difficult to get a feeling of the forces which are working in such a moment, but try to imagine the towers are a model as high as you are. And then imagine a little plane as big as your hand will impact slightly under the top. Do ya really think that it will collapse into dust ?

So I cannot say more to that. I am afraid there is no cherry o top.

Hans
Click to expand...

That doesn't sound at all like insight from an engineer versed in statics.

I certainly am not versed in engineering or statics, but if you're telling me that you can build a skyscraper without steel, I call nonsense.

When you are ready to give honest answers, let me know.
 
Hans Peper said:
I thought that the tower was nearly empty in that time.

If you build a tower like this in Germany, you must give an device with a static calculation, that the building can stand such an impact and the construction must stand fire until it is evacuated + 100 % safty.

Otherwise you get no permission to start with building.
Click to expand...

Has this always been the law? Was the law different in the early 1970s?
 
Maurice Ledifficile said:
That doesn't sound at all like insight from an engineer versed in statics.

I certainly am not versed in engineering or statics, but if you're telling me that you can build a skyscraper without steel, I call nonsense.

When you are ready to give honest answers, let me know.
Click to expand...

The buildings, we build in this region are not higher than 200 ft. I am sorry, we have no skyscrapper where I live and work. In this moment I make drawings for a 120 feet high Building, so I am not your man.

With that model analogy, I wanted to give people a feeling about the weights of the building and the planes. Not more.

regards Hans
 
NoahFence said:
Has this always been the law? Was the law different in the early 1970s?
Click to expand...

I started to learn my job in 1975. And the laws have not changed a lot.

Every few years socalled " new DIN " came. They changed from KG to Newton and so on. But in the center it is the same.

The forces are the same, and the summary of them must be zero.

And I do not want zero in my pocket, when I make 20 postings or more a day

Hans
 
Hans Peper said:
I started to learn my job in 1975. And the laws have not changed a lot.

Every few years socalled " new DIN " came. They changed from KG to Newton and so on. But in the center it is the same.

The forces are the same, and the summary of them must be zero.

And I do not want zero in my pocket, when I make 20 postings or more a day

Hans
Click to expand...

I happen to know why there are no true skyscrapers in many areas. You need proper bedrock or whatever to have the solid ground needed.

What I'm saying is I see no engineering insight in your answers at all. Perhaps if you explained how the sum of the forces should be zero, or if you explained anything at all...

It is none of my business what you do or claim to do for a living, but if you claim expertise, you should be able to back it up rather easily...

At the moment, all we have are highly speculative hypotheses which are easily refuted.

Until you prove otherwise, I will personally view your expertise, as an iconologist and as an engineer, as entirely made up.
 
Hans Peper said:
I thought that the tower was nearly empty in that time.

If you build a tower like this in Germany, you must give an device with a static calculation, that the building can stand such an impact and the construction must stand fire until it is evacuated + 100 % safty.

Otherwise you get no permission to start with building.
Click to expand...

And the way you test this is to build a model six feet tall and see what it takes to make it collapse?
 
Please refrain from posting in languages other than English, especially when not relevant to the topic. It imposes great difficulty for the moderators as well as being a diversion from the thread's topic.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Loss Leader
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom