WTC collapses - Layman's terms again

AZCat said:
That makes more sense than anything I was able to dream up.


Remind me - why are we going through all this again? Heiwa has proven he has no grasp of what actually happened. The guy used his BBQ table as an analogy for the collapses.
Click to expand...

Or rather inspiration. I am always interested in what happens to lifeless objects like tables and WTC towers getting damaged and try to explain it using real, established physics. What happens in the heads of NIST report writers producing nonsense reports, I haven't got a clue. They seem to be confused.
 
Heiwa said:
What happens in the heads of NIST report writers producing nonsense reports, I haven't got a clue. They seem to be confused.
Click to expand...

lol
Heiwa, have you ever heard of the psychological concept of 'projection'?
:lolsign:
 
uk_dave said:
lol
Heiwa, have you ever heard of the psychological concept of 'projection'?
:lolsign:
Click to expand...

have you ever heard of ppl taking "experts" words for granted without having a clue , or not even thinking about theyr words in details? and parrot it as truth?
 
Dictator Cheney said:
have you ever heard of ppl taking "experts" words for granted without having a clue , or not even thinking about theyr words in details? and parrot it as truth?
Click to expand...

Yes, they tend to be 'truthers' and their 'experts' are only expert at attracting attention online.

Have you ever spoken face to face with a real structural engineer on this subject?
 
Heiwa said:
I started one new thread just to present some refinements of my structural analysis of the alleged WTC gravity only driven global collapse, that I thus suggest will be arrested due to unsymmetry, local failures only of some weak structural parts, friction, gravity of course, etc. The refinements are due to, e.g. input from some knowledgable JREF members.

Then we have the clowns that try to be funny on the thread without adding any substance ... and they are not funny at all. Then the monkeys that just chatter about something else than the topic. Sad that the Moderator does not delete all that nonsense.

You can decide yourself to what group you belong. Clown or monkey or both?
Or contribute to the topic with some constructive thinking. Always welcome.
Click to expand...

ok Heiwa, I will act like a clown, a monkey, and be constructive.

1. Take your paper to a real journal and stop wasting your valuable time trying to convince a bunch of unimportant skeptics of your theory.

2. Ask yourself why you, a single engineer, is right on this matter, along with a handful of others in your field, against the hundreds, if not thousands of other engineers who have read the NIST report and have no issues with it. Why are all of the engineers as, or more, qualified than you, wrong on this matter?

TAM:)
 
have you ever heard of ppl taking "experts" words for granted without having a clue , or not even thinking about theyr words in details? and parrot it as truth?
Click to expand...

Actually, believe it or not, this is EXACTLY what the entire truth movement is composed of.

If you understood basic physics, then you would know that the "official story" is actually realistic and explanations involving CDs, "pods," missiles, thermite, aliens, etc. are not.

Consider this...

Heiwa said:
The solid mass (126 columns carrying 10 000 tons) of the WTC1 upper block falling outside the structure below due misalignment will evidently not harm the structure (columns) below. It hits air!
Click to expand...

Yes, this would be perfectly valid if...

The entire upper block completely MISSED the lower block!

Seeing as that's not true, though, the whole line of reasoning kind of falls apart. Oh well. If Heiwa could prove that the entire lower block was actually an illusion and really consisted of "air," then he would have something going.

Likewise, the lowest floor of the upper block contacting the columns of the structure below has too little mass and strain energy built in to damage the 126 columns of the structure below. So there is no impact or any damage of the lower primary structure on that side of the building.
Click to expand...

Let's put it this way. The upper block has lots of mass. The upper block fell on the lower block. Kinetic energy = 1/2mv^2, where m = mass and v = velocity. Since the upper block has tons of mass, it also has tons of kinetic energy. This energy was FAR more than the floor impacted was designed to take...because the building designers did not imagine that a huge section of the building would be dropped on top of the rest of it.

This isn't hard.

By the way, the bike example isn't that hard to debunk either. There are numerous problems with it, one of which is that the lower half of the building is not going to dissipate a lot of the KE focused on it by flying through the air...

Edit: Specific energy calculations can be found in Frank Greening's work.
 
Last edited:
T.A.M. said:
ok Heiwa, I will act like a clown, a monkey, and be constructive.

1. Take your paper to a real journal and stop wasting your valuable time trying to convince a bunch of unimportant skeptics of your theory.

2. Ask yourself why you, a single engineer, is right on this matter, along with a handful of others in your field, against the hundreds, if not thousands of other engineers who have read the NIST report and have no issues with it. Why are all of the engineers as, or more, qualified than you, wrong on this matter?

TAM:)
Click to expand...

after seeing what happened to others that dared to question the NIST report, im pretty sure in the USA, most will not go public with theyr doubts.
 
after seeing what happened to others that dared to question the NIST report, im pretty sure in the USA, most will not go public with theyr doubts.
Click to expand...

Exactly what happened to these individuals who questioned the NIST report?

Let's see:

Alex Jones is living large off anti-semitism and various other cons.

Dylan Avery and his friends are perfectly free to spew.

Killtown likewise is still protected by free speech.

So...

Given the chance to expose the untold mass murder of 3,000 people by the U.S. government, you don't think there's ONE honest engineer out there that would step up to the plate with cohesive evidence, especially seeing as there's little risk of losing his life?

I would also like to remind you that there are many engineers in the rest of the world...
 
Last edited:
Why is Heiwa still hiding behind the "layman's terms" when he's obviously trying to write a technical paper? Is he afraid of real criticism?
 
Apparently, the 'truth' movement has 14 structural engineers who share their beliefs. Can't say I've heard of any of them being made unemployed, arrested or assassinated. What are the thousands of other SEs waiting for?
 
AZCat said:
That is one weird comparison. What do these two things have to do with each other?
Click to expand...

I was referring back to the comment made by CHF when he said:

Yeah, a dynamic load weighing as much as the Titanic or an aircraft carrier should have been stopped by floor slabs.
Click to expand...

So he made the original comparison between the top part of the North Tower and the Titanic, not me. I think Frank Greening also made the same point in a radio interview once. Which descended faster, the top part of the North Tower through the area beneath the impact zone(steel and concrete) or the Titanic through the water?
 
DC:

Please explain to me the repercussions that others have received for questioning NIST???

That is a weak excuse if I ever heard one. Hiding the true perpetrators of the the murders of 3000 people because what? They might get reprimanded? They might lose their jobs?

Please.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
DC:

Please explain to me the repercussions that others have received for questioning NIST???

That is a weak excuse if I ever heard one. Hiding the true perpetrators of the the murders of 3000 people because what? They might get reprimanded? They might lose their jobs?

Please.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

Kevin Ryan for example
 
Myriad said:
I imagine, based on my own experiences with developmentally disabled people my own age, that the people in that video, and their coaches or teachers, worked pretty hard to create that performance.

I don't think they did it to be used to insult people on the Internet.

I'm not pretending to be horribly offended or anything. Just saying what I think.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was iffy about posting it on a forum where most of us aren't scumbags. In the end, it came down to whether it crossed the line or just tip-toed right up to it.

A better man would have left it alone, but then I never claimed to not be a scumbag.
redface.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom