|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 10/12/2006 : 11:15:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. MabuseWhen performing controlled demolitions, charges are not set off on every floor. Only the first, or first few to initiate the controlled collapse.
That is simply not true. Watch the video of the stadium in Seattle coming down. There are also a series of explosions throughout the building.
LMFAO!
How disingenious! No one reading this discussion would seriously consider compareing the two. The Seattle Stadium were not constructed like any 16 floor apartment building, much less WTC.
The dome itself is a marvel of engineering that is self-supporting and it had to be sliced in concentric circles because otherwise it would not stay within the foot print of the structure when it was flattened out against the ground. If the dome itself had been allowed to flatten out, much energy from the fall would have been converted to horizontal kinetic energy ejecting building material wide outside the wanted foot print.
Then there were other aspects that had to be taken into account. Read this.
quote:
Controlled Demolition, Inc.:
The greatest technical challenge of the Kingdome Project was to control vibration generated by the fall of 125,000 tons of concrete debris onto a reclaimed section of Seattle whose water table was just a few feet below grade. This vibration-sensitive geotechnical strata lay under critical Seattle infrastructure as well as adjacent historic, commercial and residential structures as close as 95' away.
quote:
quote:
The blast initiate the controlled collapse. Then nature takes its course: first gravity then inertia take care of the rest.
Along with the help of other explosions...
What other explosions? I'm talking about the typical controlled demolition scenario here.
#1) Explosives are used to blow out critical support.
#2) Gravity makes the remaining support collapse, then
#3) Gravity and inertia take care of the rest.
#4) There you have a complete collapse.
No need to involve "other" explosions.
quote:
quote:
In the WTC case, structural failure due to heat and structural damage initiated the collapse. After that happened, gravity and inertia took care of the rest.
But NIST does not provide any evidence that gravity and inertia took care of the rest--because they didn't model "the rest."
They didn't need to model the rest. The only artificial parts of imploding a building is step one. And that was when NIST examined.
#1) Airliner inpact and subsequent fires take out the cri |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 11:24:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
What is the relevance of this in regards to the NIST report?
What I see here is a gigantic Red Herring. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 11:33:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
quote:
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
BWAAAAAAAAA.
Not this again. Holy shit you got to get up to date with your delusions. This is old crap that was shown to be irrelevent long ago.
How was it shown to be irrelevant? Was it also shown to be untrue?
It was shown to be irrelevent because it was shown to be untrue.
If you tried reading something other than paranoid conspiracy theory sites you might actually learn something...
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 11:37:05 [Permalink]
|
Just in case anyone reading this thread doesn't read the other thread, "Just to be clear..."
Here's what I posted over there that seems remotely relevant here:
Visit www.implosionworld.com
Read their interesting analysis on controlled demolition scenario of WTC.
quote:
A critical analysis of the collapse of WTC Towers 1, 2 & 7 from an explosives and conventional demolition industry viewpoint
<snip>
Purpose
The purpose of this analysis is to explore the possibility of explosives or similar suplemental catalysts causing or contributing to the collapse of World Trade Center...
<snip>
This report will not, nor it it intended to, address the much wider scope of unanswered questions regarding those events. Rather this is a reasoned, factual analysis of a single group of questions and allegations that fall within our specific area of expertise. To that end, we hope that this report will be of benefit to all interested parties.
The report address several "facts" that ergo123 has brought up as evidence against the NIST report scenario.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 11:44:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by furshur
quote:
How was it shown to be irrelevant? Was it also shown to be untrue?
quote:
It was shown to be irrelevent because it was shown to be untrue.
If you tried reading something other than paranoid conspiracy theory sites you might actually learn something...
Hmmmm. I noticed you provided no evidence for your claim. I thought everyone who posts here is to support claims with evidence. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 14:30:20 [Permalink]
|
Yeah, we know those "alleged" hijackers were just people that the MIB wanted to frame. Members of an opposing faction of the Illuminati. So the MIB just released the fake story, along with fake video of them going through airport security that morning, so they could never cross into the US again.
Or.... maybe those hijackers were really Cylons, and they just downloaded their program to a new body instants before the planes crashed...
Yeah, and this whole thing is really an ugly manifestation of the MIB-Cylon wars!
Holy crap! Why didn't I think of that sooner! It totally explains why the hijackers were seen back in Cylon territory AFTER the attacks!
And it was the Cylons who used their own version of the "flashy thing" to erase people's memories of them planting all those tons of explosives in the WTC.
Obviously they didn't really need to fly planes into the building to bring them down, but they combined their assassination of a top MIB official Chuck Jones, who was recruited by MIB in 1987 to help fight the space war against the Cylons, and was flying to LA that day. They had to hijack several planes to be sure they got the plane Chuck (obviously a fake name, MIB are apparently fans of Loony Toons) would be on, because those sneaky MIB guys were keeping the exact details of his travel plans a secret.
So the Cylons just used the opportunity to cause as much chaos as they could.
I know this contradicts what I said about the MIB in the other thread, blaming them for the WTC collapse and all.... but I didn't realize until just now that there was Cylon involvement in all this.
When you consider the Cylon threat, it all makes sense!
Thanks ergo for pointing us all in the right direction here!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 14:31:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse[/quote
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. MabuseWhen performing controlled demolitions, charges are not set off on every floor. Only the first, or first few to initiate the controlled collapse.
That is simply not true. Watch the video of the stadium in Seattle coming down. There are also a series of explosions throughout the building.
LMFAO!
How disingenious! No one reading this discussion would seriously consider compareing the two.
Then watch any of the others on the site you linked to. Most of them show charges going off up the building.
quote:
The blast initiate the controlled collapse. Then nature takes its course: first gravity then inertia take care of the rest.
quote:
Along with the help of other explosions...
quote:
What other explosions? I'm talking about the typical controlled demolition scenario here.
#1) Explosives are used to blow out critical support.
#2) Gravity makes the remaining support collapse, then
#3) Gravity and inertia take care of the rest.
#4) There you have a complete collapse.
No need to involve "other" explosions.
Again, watch your own referenced site. And why would you expect, if the towers were brought down by explosives, it would be done in a typical way. Because my guess is that whoever would do such a thing (if indeed such a thing was done) would not want it to look like a controlled demolition. I'm guessing they would want it to look like, oh, I don't know, maybe like a plane flown by terrorists brought the whole thing down.
quote:
quote:
In the WTC case, structural failure due to heat and structural damage initiated the collapse. After that happened, gravity and inertia took care of the rest.
But NIST does not provide any evidence that gravity and inertia took care of the rest--because they didn't model "the rest."
quote:
They didn't need to model the rest. The only artificial parts of imploding a building is step one. And that was when NIST examined.
Nice try--but in the "typical" controlled demolition, the first explosion is at the base of the support columns. Do you know where the base of the support columns were for the twin towers? In the basement.
quote:
You are claiming that a "natural" collapse could not be complete without demolition, and you argue that position by pointing out that no building has ever experienced a total collapse from fire.
But absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.
True. But for the intellectually honest, it is a reason to question and investigate the full event--not just up to the when the towers were poised to collapse.
quote:
Just because it has never happened before does not exclude the possibility that it can happen.
True. And it happened Wednesday in NYC. Smaller plane hit a smaller building. Not sure how long the fires burned before they went out, leaving the building standing... But you are right--it could happen. Pigs could evolve to have wings and fly. Is that what this site is all about--coming up with unlikely, unprecedented things that could happen?
quote:
In WTC the fire suppressant failed du to aircraft impact and the generous amount of fuel for the fire. The fire suppressant was never designed to put out thousands of litre of aricraft fuel.
Besides, have you ever tried to put out a petroleum fire with water? Or with CO2 (or Halogens) for that matter?
If the fuel was such a big factor, why does NIST say "The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes," and "office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in a given location...which was consistent with out tests." (NIST Final Report; p. 183 & 184). They distinguish the jet fuel fires from the "fireball" which they estimate consumed about 40% of the likely 10,000 gallons of fuel on board. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 14:33:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
What is the relevance of this in regards to the NIST report?
What I see here is a gigantic Red Herring.
Finally--someone else who sees the NIST Report as a gigantic red herring. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 14:38:30 [Permalink]
|
ergo(my hero)123 said:
quote:
Again, watch your own referenced site. And why would you expect, if the towers were brought down by explosives, it would be done in a typical way. Because my guess is that whoever would do such a thing (if indeed such a thing was done) would not want it to look like a controlled demolition. I'm guessing they would want it to look like, oh, I don't know, maybe like a plane flown by terrorists brought the whole thing down.
Read my post just before yours!
The planes were just a subplot of the whole day. Cylons wanted to destroy MIB headquarters in NYC, which was obviously UNDER the WTC towers, so they rigged the building with explosives. The planes crashing into them were the assassination of a high level MIB leader.
Damn man, I just need to thank you for enlightening us skeptics here. We may have never found out about the MIB-Cylon wars if not for you!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 15:08:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
What is the relevance of this in regards to the NIST report?
What I see here is a gigantic Red Herring.
Finally--someone else who sees the NIST Report as a gigantic red herring.
That wasn't what he said. Or you being deliberately dishonest or did you just not read carefully? |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 15:27:01 [Permalink]
|
tomk80 asked:
quote:
That wasn't what he said. Or you being deliberately dishonest or did you just not read carefully?
ergo has given up all pretense of honest debate on these forums. He is just trolling for a response now, trying to make people mad.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 15:28:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
What is the relevance of this in regards to the NIST report?
What I see here is a gigantic Red Herring.
Finally--someone else who sees the NIST Report as a gigantic red herring.
That wasn't what he said. Or you being deliberately dishonest or did you just not read carefully?
None of the above. I was making a joke. Jeesh, no wonder you guys have been fooled by NIST. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
McQ
Skeptic Friend
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 15:31:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
What is the relevance of this in regards to the NIST report?
What I see here is a gigantic Red Herring.
Finally--someone else who sees the NIST Report as a gigantic red herring.
That wasn't what he said. Or you being deliberately dishonest or did you just not read carefully?
None of the above. I was making a joke. Jeesh, no wonder you guys have been fooled by NIST.
Yes, as ergo's conspiracy grows ever-larger, his arguments get more desperate and weaker. And suddenly, he's "just joking". |
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 15:53:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by McQ
Yes, as ergo's conspiracy grows ever-larger, his arguments get more desperate and weaker. And suddenly, he's "just joking".
Oh, I'm not joking about seeing a lot of things that don't add up between NIST and the collapses and the aftermath of the towers falling. Just the herring. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2006 : 17:00:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
In reality, we don't know why those planes were chosen. But we could ask some of the "terrorists" that were supposedly on those planes--because British Intelligence reported seeing some of them walking around in Saudi Arabia after 9-11-01.
What is the relevance of this in regards to the NIST report?
What I see here is a gigantic Red Herring.
Finally--someone else who sees the NIST Report as a gigantic red herring.
What a pathetic attempt at being funny.
Nothing exceptional but a garden variety conspiracy theorist. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
 |
|
NIST Report Deserves Skepticism
Topic Locked
