Science > Physics > World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
11 Oct 2006 12:23:29 AM |
| Object: |
World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
"As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings,
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the
remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact)
softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's
outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat,
pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer
columns."
Debunking: For anyone who as actually watched the WTC video's
carefully, you will note that the south tower was struck near the
corner, almost insuring it sustained NO damage to the central core
columns. It also had by far the largest fireball produced, indicating a
substantially larger portion of the fuel was burned in the initial
impact and for the most part outside the building. Oddly, it was the
south tower which fell first after burning for only 55 minutes, and at
a point when the fires had greatly diminished.
In addition, as given by Kevin Ryan who was responsible for the thermal
testing of the WTC Steel when it was certified, the samples tested for
the WTC were certified to withstand a temperature of 2,000 deg for 6
hours without failing their rated load characteristics. And that is
without insulation. The WTC beams were insulated. Jet fuel burns at
only 1200-1300 degrees with an ideal oxygen mixture, something not
indicated by the black smoke that issued from the fires. There was
nothing contained within the buildings that could have raised this
figure, and those that use the example of ancient furnaces that
tempered steel as a argument, again, do not understand the principles
involved. I suggest that if you want the truth, and wish to actually
act like a journalist for a change, you broach this subject with a real
expert, Mr. Ryan. I can put you in touch with him upon request.
But more important than the issue of the likelihood of the steel
failure, is the FACT (not conjecture) that ALL THREE buildings
collapsed into their own footprint at FREEFALL SPEED (i.e. the
unimpeded acceleration of gravity). That means, drop a rock off the
roof, at the moment of collapse, and the roof would hit the ground at
the same time as the rock. This implies, (regardless of what happened
at the fire zone) that the when the top section of the building began
to fall it managed to plow through 70-80 odd floors of pristine and
undamaged steel -- literally thousands of huge beams and concrete
pads-- with absolutely NO RESISTANCE (i.e.. slowing of the rate of
fall) WHATSOEVER. And this sir, is physically impossible and verging
on the absurd, and I (a physicist), and anyone with a shred of
knowledge of engineering, physics, or just plain common sense can
understand that.
And there is a $1,000,000.00 cash challenge (to date unanswered) to
anyone that can suggest a legitimate solution to this nagging little
problem. And lastly, if the official pancake theory is correct, it
lends no explanation whatsoever for why the central core of 47 HUGE
beams, all connected together at numerous levels, would not be left
standing like a spire as the floor connectors failed and the floors
pancaked symmetrically around them. The less resistance to this
collapse scenario exhibited by the building's design, the more likely
the central core would remain virtually untouched. It is a paradox.
Watch the videos. Study the evidence. Talk to the experts and the
scientists who simply can no longer tolerate an explanation so at odds
with the physical evidence and the physical principles of the universe.
And these experts I refer to are ready and willing to debate these
issues with ANYONE you and your ilk choose, ANYTIME and ANYWHERE, as
long as it can be videotaped for posterity.
I will not even get into the dozens of other patently absurd
explanations that Popular Mechanics and other government shills and
publicity hacks have posed to make the painfully obvious physical
evidence at both the WTC and Pentagon fit the official fairy tale,
while suppressing the numerous eyewitness accounts that disagree, but
suffice to say that when "journalists" (and I use that term EXTREMELY
loosely with you), continue to disparage those who simply demand the
truth, and not propaganda; who examine the evidence with open minds and
simply request that the investigation of this murder of 3,000 innocents
be pursued with the same objectivity and forensic vigor that a common
mugging would be given; they only contribute to the ignorance pervasive
and growing in this country, reduce the once noble journalistic trade
to nothing more than corporate propaganda machines, and deface the
sacrifice of the 3000 who were murdered.
Physicist's Letter On 911 PHYSICS To Rocky Mountain News
10-3-6
More info: http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/
.
|
|
| User: "Michael J. Strickland" |
|
| Title: Re: World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
13 Oct 2006 01:30:30 PM |
|
|
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1160544208.960958.280690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
....
But more important than the issue of the likelihood of the steel
failure, is the FACT (not conjecture) that ALL THREE buildings
collapsed into their own footprint at FREEFALL SPEED (i.e. the
unimpeded acceleration of gravity). That means, drop a rock off the
roof, at the moment of collapse, and the roof would hit the ground at
the same time as the rock. This implies, (regardless of what happened
at the fire zone) that the when the top section of the building began
to fall it managed to plow through 70-80 odd floors of pristine and
undamaged steel -- literally thousands of huge beams and concrete
pads-- with absolutely NO RESISTANCE (i.e.. slowing of the rate of
fall) WHATSOEVER.
Somewhere in the impact area, the beams broke. The upper section (top third)
of the building started falling at free-fall speed. When this section hit
the intact floor below, it delivered an enormous force to this floor,
breaking it's supports almost immediately and sending it moving down at a
speed much greater than free-fall. The upper section of the building
continued falling with negligible loss in speed.
I believe the energy required to break the support beams in the floor
immediately below is negligible compared to the kinetic energy acquired by
the upper 1/3 of the building after it has fallen through the height of one
floor.
The collapse continued with the process repeating itself on succeeding
floors all the way to the ground, again, with negligible loss in speed.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Strickland
Quality Services
703-560-7380
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
13 Oct 2006 05:47:17 PM |
|
|
Somewhere in the impact area, the beams broke. The upper section (top third)
of the building started falling at free-fall speed. When this section hit
the intact floor below, it delivered an enormous force to this floor,
breaking it's supports almost immediately and sending it moving down at a
speed much greater than free-fall. The upper section of the building
continued falling with negligible loss in speed.
But that is not what the footage shows. The upper part disintegrated
and the rate of descent did not decrease. Even the angular momentum of
the upper section was not maintained.
Furthermore, the central core should have withstood all that, it was
overengineered.
Even if it gave way, the fact that the outer-columns and the inner core
gave way
symmetrically .. ah uhm...strains credulity.
In other words: Anyone who actually looked at the footage ... goes
quiet.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=911+mysteries
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Russ Rose" |
|
| Title: Re: World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
11 Oct 2006 06:10:43 PM |
|
|
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1160544208.960958.280690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
"As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings,
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the
remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact)
softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's
outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat,
pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer
columns."
Not that I have the blueprints or anything...
I thought the innovation of the building design was there were no internal
columns.
.
|
|
|
| User: "OG" |
|
| Title: Re: World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
11 Oct 2006 08:27:06 PM |
|
|
"Russ Rose" <russrose@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:-cadnVO1iIxs5LDYnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1160544208.960958.280690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
"As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings,
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the
remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact)
softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's
outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat,
pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer
columns."
Not that I have the blueprints or anything...
I thought the innovation of the building design was there were no internal
columns.
Not sure about that, but there is a much claimed ' no other steel framed
building has collaped after a fire', and the Madrid Windsor Tower fire of
2005 is cited as evidence.
What is not pointed out is that the Madrid tower had full reinforced
concrete construction up to floor 17 (of 32 floors) and a reinforced
concrete core above that height (with supporting perimeter columns for the
upper 15 floors).
In the Madrid fire, the reinforced concrete core withstood the 26 hours of
fire, but the higher level perimeter columned floors started collapsing
within a couple of hours of the fire taking hold.
The outer zones of the top 15 floors collapsed and were completely lost -
there's a picture here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TorreWindsor1.JPG
Apologies for the 911 rebuttal, but there may be some people tempted to
believe the unsupported claims of the 911 conspiracists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Protagonist" |
|
| Title: Re: World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
13 Oct 2006 08:16:04 PM |
|
|
OG wrote:
"Russ Rose" <russrose@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:-cadnVO1iIxs5LDYnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1160544208.960958.280690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
"As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings,
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the
remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact)
softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's
outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat,
pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer
columns."
Not that I have the blueprints or anything...
I thought the innovation of the building design was there were no internal
columns.
Not sure about that, but there is a much claimed ' no other steel framed
building has collaped after a fire', and the Madrid Windsor Tower fire of
2005 is cited as evidence.
What is not pointed out is that the Madrid tower had full reinforced
concrete construction up to floor 17 (of 32 floors) and a reinforced
concrete core above that height (with supporting perimeter columns for the
upper 15 floors).
In the Madrid fire, the reinforced concrete core withstood the 26 hours of
fire, but the higher level perimeter columned floors started collapsing
within a couple of hours of the fire taking hold.
The outer zones of the top 15 floors collapsed and were completely lost -
there's a picture here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TorreWindsor1.JPG
Apologies for the 911 rebuttal, but there may be some people tempted to
believe the unsupported claims of the 911 conspiracists.
It still don't look like collapsed down to the basement, like the
twin-towers.
WTC collapse was done by implosion as building 7 was admitted to be,
were blown up.
These buildings were all ready set-up with explosives in case of
terrorist attack, so it can collapse into it's self and not falling on
the hole city.
JS
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: World Trade Center 1-2&7 -- steel softened by kerosine furnace |
13 Oct 2006 08:29:27 PM |
|
|
Protagonist wrote:
OG wrote:
"Russ Rose" <russrose@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:-cadnVO1iIxs5LDYnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1160544208.960958.280690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
"As the fires blazed and the temperatures rose within the buildings,
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) believes, the
remaining core columns (those not severed by the planes during impact)
softened and buckled, transferring most of the load to the building's
outer structural columns. The floors . . . began to sag from the heat,
pulling those columns inward and adding to the burden on the outer
columns."
Not that I have the blueprints or anything...
I thought the innovation of the building design was there were no internal
columns.
Not sure about that, but there is a much claimed ' no other steel framed
building has collaped after a fire', and the Madrid Windsor Tower fire of
2005 is cited as evidence.
What is not pointed out is that the Madrid tower had full reinforced
concrete construction up to floor 17 (of 32 floors) and a reinforced
concrete core above that height (with supporting perimeter columns for the
upper 15 floors).
In the Madrid fire, the reinforced concrete core withstood the 26 hours of
fire, but the higher level perimeter columned floors started collapsing
within a couple of hours of the fire taking hold.
The outer zones of the top 15 floors collapsed and were completely lost -
there's a picture here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TorreWindsor1.JPG
Apologies for the 911 rebuttal, but there may be some people tempted to
believe the unsupported claims of the 911 conspiracists.
It still don't look like collapsed down to the basement, like the
twin-towers.
WTC collapse was done by implosion as building 7 was admitted to be,
were blown up.
These buildings were all ready set-up with explosives in case of
terrorist attack, so it can collapse into it's self and not falling on
the hole city.
JS
WTC conspiracists are part of a govt conspiracy too. The conspiracy is
to make the govt seem all powerful. I get all my politics from South
Park just like most conspiracy typesget theirs from the funny paper.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
18 Oct 2006 02:52:53 AM |
|
|
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
has all you need to know.
But maybe better if you accuse me of forgetting my tinfoil hat
and do not let worrying fact get in the way of your ARABS-DID-IT
fantasies.
Because anyone who says (farts out his mouth these stupidities)
that ARABS-DID-NOT-DO-9/11 ... must be crazy. And that's that, because
it is unthinkable... so much so that it is a sign of lunacy.
Physical facts show that the planes that penetrated the towers did so
because they were soooo fast, that thin aluminium sliced through thick
steel,
like a hot knife goes through butter. Every CHILD knows that.
So, do not even THINK about clicking here:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
You would grant satisfaction to a lunatic woman... and thats exactly
what
must be avoided....
Like 1939.. when germans denied reality.
Q.E.D.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Keith Willshaw" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
18 Oct 2006 04:18:44 AM |
|
|
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
I know how that happened
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
The Cortland St station and 1800 ft of tunnel were destroyed.
Temporary repairs to reopen the lines took over a year and
cost in excess of $200 million
What planet do you live on ?
Keith
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
02 Nov 2006 04:40:06 PM |
|
|
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
What planet do you live on ?
Who cares.
The USA has great philosophers and writers... I made some cartoons for
your enjoyment, composed of famous quotes.
Famous Quotes cartoons:
Best: http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/11/witty-quote-cartoon-no2.html
So so... http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/11/witty-quote-cartoon-1.html
And own words (shallow philosopy style):
Bizarre:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/11/cartoon-this-was-actually-very-first.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 01:11:10 AM |
|
|
Keith Willshaw wrote:
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
I know how that happened
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
The Cortland St station and 1800 ft of tunnel were destroyed.
Temporary repairs to reopen the lines took over a year and
cost in excess of $200 million
What planet do you live on ?
Keith
You are three so far that have no facts to rebut with, only ad hominum.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Keith Willshaw" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 04:50:07 AM |
|
|
"Day Brown" <daybrown@wildblue.net> wrote in message
news:8Si_g.88$fX6.98401@news.sisna.com...
Keith Willshaw wrote:
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
I know how that happened
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
The Cortland St station and 1800 ft of tunnel were destroyed.
Temporary repairs to reopen the lines took over a year and
cost in excess of $200 million
What planet do you live on ?
Keith
You are three so far that have no facts to rebut with, only ad hominum.
I quoted facts that you chose not to rebut
You lose sucker
Keith
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dan" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 06:52:55 AM |
|
|
Day Brown wrote:
Keith Willshaw wrote:
<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
I know how that happened
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
The Cortland St station and 1800 ft of tunnel were destroyed.
Temporary repairs to reopen the lines took over a year and
cost in excess of $200 million
What planet do you live on ?
Keith
You are three so far that have no facts to rebut with, only ad hominum.
He did rebut with a fact.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "slas" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 06:05:42 PM |
|
|
wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
has all you need to know.
But maybe better if you accuse me of forgetting my tinfoil hat
and do not let worrying fact get in the way of your ARABS-DID-IT
fantasies.
Because anyone who says (farts out his mouth these stupidities)
that ARABS-DID-NOT-DO-9/11 ... must be crazy. And that's that, because
it is unthinkable... so much so that it is a sign of lunacy.
Physical facts show that the planes that penetrated the towers did so
because they were soooo fast, that thin aluminium sliced through thick
steel,
like a hot knife goes through butter. Every CHILD knows that.
So, do not even THINK about clicking here:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
You would grant satisfaction to a lunatic woman... and thats exactly
what
must be avoided....
Like 1939.. when germans denied reality.
Q.E.D.
Ironic: the people who accuse the 9/11 doubters of wearing "tinfoil
hats" are really the ones who should be wearing them.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "slas" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 06:05:29 PM |
|
|
wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
has all you need to know.
But maybe better if you accuse me of forgetting my tinfoil hat
and do not let worrying fact get in the way of your ARABS-DID-IT
fantasies.
Because anyone who says (farts out his mouth these stupidities)
that ARABS-DID-NOT-DO-9/11 ... must be crazy. And that's that, because
it is unthinkable... so much so that it is a sign of lunacy.
Physical facts show that the planes that penetrated the towers did so
because they were soooo fast, that thin aluminium sliced through thick
steel,
like a hot knife goes through butter. Every CHILD knows that.
So, do not even THINK about clicking here:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
You would grant satisfaction to a lunatic woman... and thats exactly
what
must be avoided....
Like 1939.. when germans denied reality.
Q.E.D.
Ironic: the people who accuse the 9/11 oubters of wearing "tinfoil
hats" are really the ones who should be wearing them.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dan" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
18 Oct 2006 06:32:09 AM |
|
|
wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
has all you need to know.
But maybe better if you accuse me of forgetting my tinfoil hat
and do not let worrying fact get in the way of your ARABS-DID-IT
fantasies.
Because anyone who says (farts out his mouth these stupidities)
that ARABS-DID-NOT-DO-9/11 ... must be crazy. And that's that, because
it is unthinkable... so much so that it is a sign of lunacy.
Physical facts show that the planes that penetrated the towers did so
because they were soooo fast, that thin aluminium sliced through thick
steel,
like a hot knife goes through butter. Every CHILD knows that.
So, do not even THINK about clicking here:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
You would grant satisfaction to a lunatic woman... and thats exactly
what
must be avoided....
Like 1939.. when germans denied reality.
Q.E.D.
I cracked up looking at that site. "Wing spars are strong but
brittle?" Anyone who has flown a modern airliner has seen how flexible
wings are. Brittle wing spars aren't flexible.
The remainder was equally laughable especially the part about the
buildings being designed to be pulverized to protect the foundations.
I needed the laugh this morning.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
.
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 01:14:35 AM |
|
|
Dan wrote:
I cracked up looking at that site. "Wing spars are strong but
brittle?" Anyone who has flown a modern airliner has seen how flexible
wings are. Brittle wing spars aren't flexible.
Well that's better, at least one fact. Which however, is not relevant.
the flexing you refer to is so slow that you can see the bending with
the naked eye. Trying to bend a wing at the speed at which it flew into
the building... If you are so smart, its kinda funny you did not think
of that effect.
The remainder was equally laughable especially the part about the
buildings being designed to be pulverized to protect the foundations.
I needed the laugh this morning.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
So far its been 3 ad hominums, your irrelevant point, then another ad
hominum. Shall we go for four?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 06:59:55 AM |
|
|
Day Brown wrote:
Dan wrote:
I cracked up looking at that site. "Wing spars are strong but
brittle?" Anyone who has flown a modern airliner has seen how flexible
wings are. Brittle wing spars aren't flexible.
Well that's better, at least one fact. Which however, is not relevant.
the flexing you refer to is so slow that you can see the bending with
the naked eye. Trying to bend a wing at the speed at which it flew into
the building... If you are so smart, its kinda funny you did not think
of that effect.
The cite said the wing spar were "hard and brittle" which I proved
they weren't. Instead of trying to insult me please accept that fact.
The remainder was equally laughable especially the part about the
buildings being designed to be pulverized to protect the foundations.
I needed the laugh this morning.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
So far its been 3 ad hominums, your irrelevant point, then another ad
hominum. Shall we go for four?
My first point was perfectly relevant to the cite given. The comment
about the WTC being built to be pulverized to protect the foundations
was just that; a comment about a point made in the cite that was laughable.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
19 Oct 2006 02:21:53 AM |
|
|
Dan wrote:>
I cracked up looking at that site. "Wing spars are strong but
brittle?" Anyone who has flown a modern airliner has seen how flexible
wings are. Brittle wing spars aren't flexible.
SNIP
JC on burnt toast!! If the damn spars were brittlle, the %$#& wings
would fall off the first time they encountered a gust. I knew that, oh,
around 12 or so....but then, I had an engineer father and actually knew
how to read things like books on airplanes.....
He's peddling pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo designed to impress the
technologivallly illiterate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny Bravo" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 02:26:52 PM |
|
|
On 19 Oct 2006 00:21:53 -0700, "renaborney@aol.com" <renaborney@aol.com> wrote:
Dan wrote:>
I cracked up looking at that site. "Wing spars are strong but
brittle?" Anyone who has flown a modern airliner has seen how flexible
wings are. Brittle wing spars aren't flexible.
SNIP
JC on burnt toast!! If the damn spars were brittlle, the %$#& wings
would fall off the first time they encountered a gust. I knew that, oh,
around 12 or so....but then, I had an engineer father and actually knew
how to read things like books on airplanes.....
One of my favorite bits on the Discovery channel showed Boeing testing a brand
new 757 to destruction. They held the plane up by the wing tips and applied
downward pressure until failure; when the spars finally gave the wing tips were
a good 6-8 feet above their normal position.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 04:30:11 PM |
|
|
Johnny Bravo wrote:
On 19 Oct 2006 00:21:53 -0700, "renaborney@aol.com" <renaborney@aol.com> wrote:
Dan wrote:>
I cracked up looking at that site. "Wing spars are strong but
brittle?" Anyone who has flown a modern airliner has seen how flexible
wings are. Brittle wing spars aren't flexible.
SNIP
JC on burnt toast!! If the damn spars were brittlle, the %$#& wings
would fall off the first time they encountered a gust. I knew that, oh,
around 12 or so....but then, I had an engineer father and actually knew
how to read things like books on airplanes.....
One of my favorite bits on the Discovery channel showed Boeing testing a brand
new 757 to destruction. They held the plane up by the wing tips and applied
downward pressure until failure; when the spars finally gave the wing tips were
a good 6-8 feet above their normal position.
If it was the same show I saw it was a a lot more than 8 feet and I
believe it was a 777.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eugene Griessel" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
18 Oct 2006 03:06:17 AM |
|
|
wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
No, no - conspiracies I can handle. Ignoramuses like yourself is what
pisses me off big time.
Eugene L Griessel
Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter-accusations.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 01:09:12 AM |
|
|
Eugene Griessel wrote:
u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
No, no - conspiracies I can handle. Ignoramuses like yourself is what
pisses me off big time.
Eugene L Griessel
Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter-accusations.
Its becoming kinda obvious that there is no rebuttal, only ad hominum.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tankfixer" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
29 Oct 2006 06:05:59 PM |
|
|
In article <gQi_g.86$zd7.169119@news.sisna.com>,
mumbled
Eugene Griessel wrote:
u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
No, no - conspiracies I can handle. Ignoramuses like yourself is what
pisses me off big time.
Eugene L Griessel
Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter-accusations.
Its becoming kinda obvious that there is no rebuttal, only ad hominum.
There was nothing to rebutt...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Orval Fairbairn" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
18 Oct 2006 12:42:41 PM |
|
|
In article <1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
It was a joint Klingon/Romulan temporal anomaly clandestine operation.
The klingons and Romulans traveled back in time and attacked the WTC
with disrupters to prevent the future creation of the Federation.
Why has nobody checked the wreckage for the signature of disrupter fire?
But ever wondered about the strangely burned cars?
or why the WTC basement (including underground trains)
were not destroyed?
See above.
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
has all you need to know.
But maybe better if you accuse me of forgetting my tinfoil hat
and do not let worrying fact get in the way of your ARABS-DID-IT
fantasies.
See above.
Because anyone who says (farts out his mouth these stupidities)
that ARABS-DID-NOT-DO-9/11 ... must be crazy. And that's that, because
it is unthinkable... so much so that it is a sign of lunacy.
Of course -- it was the Klingons and Romulans!
Physical facts show that the planes that penetrated the towers did so
because they were soooo fast, that thin aluminium sliced through thick
steel,
like a hot knife goes through butter. Every CHILD knows that.
I suppose you don't think that water can be used to cut steel, either?
So, do not even THINK about clicking here:
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2006/10/judy-wood-is-my-new-heroine.html
You would grant satisfaction to a lunatic woman... and thats exactly
what
must be avoided....
Like 1939.. when germans denied reality.
Q.E.D.
It is all a massive alien conspiracy!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tankfixer" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
29 Oct 2006 05:34:30 PM |
|
|
In article <orfairbairn-FC2EBD.13424018102006@news.west.earthlink.net>,
orfairbairn@earthlink.net mumbled
In article <1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
It was a joint Klingon/Romulan temporal anomaly clandestine operation.
The klingons and Romulans traveled back in time and attacked the WTC
with disrupters to prevent the future creation of the Federation.
Why has nobody checked the wreckage for the signature of disrupter fire?
We did but all we found were bits of Photon Torpedoes
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 01:20:27 AM |
|
|
Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article <1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
It was a joint Klingon/Romulan temporal anomaly clandestine operation.
The klingons and Romulans traveled back in time and attacked the WTC
with disrupters to prevent the future creation of the Federation.
Why has nobody checked the wreckage for the signature of disrupter fire?
And this is the 7th in a string of ad hominum and lame attempts at humor
rather than dealing substantively with the facts we have to go on.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
24 Oct 2006 09:00:38 PM |
|
|
Day Brown wrote:
And this is the 7th in a string of ad hominum and lame attempts at humor
rather than dealing substantively with the facts we have to go on.
You have yet to state a fact which supports your ridiculous claims.
Jack
.
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
26 Oct 2006 08:48:13 PM |
|
|
Jack wrote:
Day Brown wrote:
And this is the 7th in a string of ad hominum and lame attempts at
humor rather than dealing substantively with the facts we have to go on.
You have yet to state a fact which supports your ridiculous claims.
What claims have I made? so far, most of what I've done is draw ad
hominum and one liners from you guys.
Like most Americans, I dont have claims, I have *questions*. I dont see
answers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fat.... |
27 Oct 2006 08:00:06 PM |
|
|
Day Brown wrote:
Jack wrote:
Day Brown wrote:
And this is the 7th in a string of ad hominum and lame attempts at
humor rather than dealing substantively with the facts we have to go on.
You have yet to state a fact which supports your ridiculous claims.
What claims have I made? so far, most of what I've done is draw ad
hominum and one liners from you guys.
Like most Americans, I dont have claims, I have *questions*. I dont see
answers.
You claim to have "...the facts we have to go on...."
And, you draw bizarre conclusions -- which you label "questions".
You waste a little of our time, because we are slightly amused. You
waste a great deal of your own, because you are...oh, how you say?
"Nuts", I think describes it pretty well.
Jack
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dan" |
|
| Title: Re: 911 -- Conspiracy Fatigue |
21 Oct 2006 07:17:20 AM |
|
|
Day Brown wrote:
Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article <1161157973.274172.19980@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:
I know I know...
you had enough of 911 conspiracies.
You no longer care how the towers were brought down (form above)
and how building 7 (WTC7) collapes at 5pm.. (from below)
It was a joint Klingon/Romulan temporal anomaly clandestine operation.
The klingons and Romulans traveled back in time and attacked the WTC
with disrupters to prevent the future creation of the Federation.
Why has nobody checked the wreckage for the signature of disrupter fire?
And this is the 7th in a string of ad hominum and lame attempts at humor
rather than dealing substantively with the facts we have to go on.
The "facts" given by the OP were NOT facts, just opinions base on a
blog that was utter manure on the face of it.
Instead of insulting us why don't YOU show us where the cite is
actually correct. The cite tells us the buildings were designed to be
pulverized in the event of an aircraft collision so as to protect the
foundations. In fact the buildings were designed to stand up to the
biggest airliner if the day: Boeing 707. The cite tells us wing spars
are "hard an brittle," I demonstrated that was wrong. Prove otherwise
instead of insulting me. The cite says the subway and basements were
undamaged, Keith proved that was wrong. Please prove otherwise instead
of insulting him.
It seems a tad rude of you to accuse us of "ad hominum attacks" when
that is exactly what you have been doing.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
