It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 for Dummies?

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 


Eight Years???? You mean in the span of 8 years you have not been able to sit down and calculate the weight of the materials in one tower of the WTC???

Good lord, it didn't take that long to build it!! The plans are online, photos of the construction are online, none of this material was top secret. It was all pretty much standard material used in a unique design. Concrete, deckpans, rebar, truss sections - it really isn't that complicated. Hell, you could have built a mock up by now.


Well I didn't take $20,000,000 of taxpayer's money and produce 10,000 pages of BS.

But I didn't notice you specify the total quantity of concrete in the towers and tell us where the NIST put it in their report.

Ridicule is a nice debating strategy when it doesn't backfire.

psik




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Keeping in line with the OP here:

* WTC was hit by two planes BUT was not the cause of collapse.
* Pentagon hit by aircraft but of what type is unknown.
* Flight 93 was shot down either by terrorists or the gov.
* A lot of lies by the gov and various others as to the official story (OS).

Thats my line and I'm sticking to it.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 



Well I didn't take $20,000,000 of taxpayer's money and produce 10,000 pages of BS.


You haven't produced anything even though you've had eight years to do it.


But I didn't notice you specify the total quantity of concrete in the towers and tell us where the NIST put it in their report.


They also didn't mention how many of the toliet seats in the building were up and how many were down when the plane hit, or how many lights were on, or how many square yards of carpeting were in the buildings or the total weight of the glass in the windows, or how many doors were in the buildings, etc. Why, becaus like you never ending quest for answer that you should be able to calculate yourself, it is irrelevant. Besides, if you can't figure the number out yourself, then what good is having this tidbit of irrelevant information?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooperThey also didn't mention how many of the toliet seats in the building were up and how many were down when the plane hit, or how many lights were on, or how many square yards of carpeting were in the buildings or the total weight of the glass in the windows, or how many doors were in the buildings, etc.


The concrete of one floor assembly weighed 601 tons. There were more than 90 of them each building.

Your sarcasm about toilet seats doesn't change the fact that the concrete had to be a significant factor in the event. The NIST is demonstrating incompetence by not providing the information when they said it was necessary.

www.youtube.com...

NCSTAR 1-2A Baseline == distribution of mass (1 occurance)

NCSTAR 1-5D Ceilings.doc == weight distribution (2 occurances in 1 paragrph)

NCSTAR 1-2 Ch 1-6 == mass distribution (7 occurances mostly about aircraft)

NCSTAR 1-2B Chap 1 thru 8 == mass distribution (6 occurances mostly about aircraft)

NCSTAR 1-2B Chap 9 thru 11 == mass distribution (2 occurances 1 about aircraft the other redundant)
= = = = = =

NCSTAR 1-2A Baseline == distribution of mass


The wind loads were calculated on the basis of 2.5 percent total damping. This value includes the intrinsic damping of the structural systems plus the supplemental damping provided by the dampers.

The differential static and dynamic shears between successive levels were calculated and distributed using two different methods:

• The static wind load to be applied to each floor was determined from the shear diagram.
• The dynamic wind load to be applied to each floor was based on the distribution of mass over the tower height, the fundamental mode shape, and the dynamic component of the lateral wind-induced sway at the roof.

Note that for α = 90 degrees, coefficients were not found in the microfilm of the WSHJ Wind Reports for calculating the static component of the wind forces for WTC 1. Accordingly, the static coefficients were deduced from data for the α = 270 degrees, for WTC 2. By observation of the static coefficient data, it was determined that the basic data for the two towers is shifted by 180 degrees.

Considering the 24 different wind directions and the four combinations of the static and dynamic components of the N-S and E-W components of the building forces listed below, there were 96 different wind load cases for each tower.

= = = = = =

NCSTAR 1-5D Ceilings.doc == weight distribution

2.4.3 Single Impulse Excitations
Accurate estimation of the tower’s motion during the airplane impact required detailed knowledge of the geometry, weight distribution, and impact velocity of the aircraft, as well as detailed knowledge of the geometry, weight distribution, and structural strength of the tower. At the time of this test series (fall 2003), much of this information was unknown, and the impact motion could only be roughly estimated. To allow this estimate to be made quickly, many simplifying assumptions were made regarding the nature of the impact.



NCSTAR 1-2 Ch 1-6 == mass distribution


The densities of specific materials were scaled to obtain the desired magnitudes for the service live loads and superimposed dead loads. The densities of the tower contents (workstations and gypsum walls) were scaled by the appropriate ratios to obtain the desired distribution of live loads in the core and truss floor areas. The densities of all the remaining tower structural components were scaled proportionately to obtain the desired superimposed dead loads. These additional loads were important for obtaining an accurate mass distribution in the towers and inertial effects in the impact response. The in-service live load used was assumed to be 25 percent of the design live load on the floors inside and outside the core.



And you have produced WHAT? EVER?

psik

[edit on 21-1-2010 by psikeyhackr]

[edit on 21-1-2010 by psikeyhackr]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 


Wow, all that and then you use a term like "there were more than 90 of them". There was a very definite and well known number of floors yet the best you can describe is as is "more than 90".

You had time for all that and still have not found the time or the wherewithal to come up with the "holy grail" ratio you are seeking.

Just curious - how did you come up with the 601 ton figure? That's about 28 lbs per sq ft.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 


Wow, all that and then you use a term like "there were more than 90 of them". There was a very definite and well known number of floors yet the best you can describe is as is "more than 90".


More sarcasm but no useful information. You think that gives the impression that you are intelligent?

Those quotes are stored in a file. It is more than a year old.

All of the floors in the WTC were not the same. There were technical floors near the sky lobbies that were different. And the floors near the bottom of the building were also different. I don't recall ever reading the exact number of floors that used the standard truss construction and don't consider it important enough to remember.

But I know I have also never seen the total weight of one specified either. I can compute the concrete weight easily but what did all of the steel pans and trusses weigh? Why haven't many EXPERTS mentioned it often in EIGHT YEARS? We have heard about them pancaking and not pancaking.

That is one of the peculiarities of this business. What the EXPERTS on both sides don't say. I asked Richard Gage about the steel and concrete on every level in May of '08. He gave a LAME excuse about the NIST not releasing accurate blue prints. He is an architect and supposedly has a group of engineers. How much computing power should they have compared to what was available in the early 60s when the WTC was designed? Gravity hasn't changed since then. They already know the basic design of the building. They should be able to come up with decent numbers without the NIST. So why haven't they and why should we pay attention to them since they haven't?

psik



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 


Really, deck pans are pretty standard material and photos of the construction will give you a good idea about how they were fabricated.

But really, what difference does it make?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 


Just another note - I don't think there were any "trusses" I believe the deck pans were on floor beams. Standard I-beam sections.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


To better understand this event you should do yourself a favor. So that you can understand the historical precedent you should first learn about the Spanish American War and the Gulf of Tonken Incident. Once you know more about those two events you can better understand the fact that the USA has faked attacks on itself before.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


mike, I think we all understand what you have been led to beliieve, as indicated by:


* WTC was hit by two planes...



Hallelujah!!!

We actually agree!!

Any of us within the Industry do not dispute this fact --- only some who try to cause dissention AFTER THE FACT ruin it for the rest of us...

...however, this is in dispute:


BUT was not the cause of collapse.


WE do not know this as a fact, it is ONLY being spouted and spewed by people who speak out of their butts....

Many ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS (AND not hundreds, nay, THOUSANDS who have elected NOT to 'join' a certain crowd of colleagues, who are well in the minority) have little doubt, upon reflecton and study, as to why the WTC Towers collapsed, as they did.

ONLY the continued nonsense that other spout has led to the continued baloney about the facts of that day....



* Pentagon hit by aircraft but of what type is unknown.


Well, you are WELL ahead of other so-called "truthers" here.

SO MANY 'theories" abound....but, you've wrapped it up into another illogical conundrum, unsupported by the facts....BRAVO!!!

(Of course, one has to ignore the fact that the FDR was located IN THE WRECKAGE and debris of the Pentagfon...very inconvenient, that FACT)!







* Flight 93 was shot down either by terrorists or the gov.


Jeeze!! Which is it???

We've covered this, at length too...

NOW you are trying to change it, by saying the TERRORISTS "SHOT" down United 93???!!!???


Wait. let's review....


Flight 93 was shot down either by terrorists ...


OK..."shot down" implies, what exactly????

Well, to most people, a "shoot-down" means that (A) A person had the access to a surface-to-air missile, or some such technology, and fired this technology, within range, in order to "shoot-dwon" the target. I wonder if YOU think that the 'terrorist" just happend to be located in or near Shanksville, PA, on that day and on that mnorning, in order to accomplish thi s"shoot-down"???

or, (B), United 93 was 'brought down' by terrorists...which would actually be the case, as they were ONBOARD anbd SUICIDAL to begin with!!!!!!




* A lot of lies by the gov and various others as to the official story (OS).


I've covered this.

It isn't much different from what I've said (multiple times) before.

The simple fact that the Intelligence groups/offices/people, whatever, did NOT "connect-the-dots", for whatever reason, and this slipped through their grasp....well, there is HELL to pay, in retrospect, so a lot of finger-pointing and back-stabbing, and as we've seen....well, THIS sort of nonsense has grown ou tof the debacle.

Folks, it is THAT simple!!!!

ALL OF THE rest is made up!!!

People who wish to find fault, try to connect various 'dots' in ways that would not have existed, had they NOT tried to 'connect' them!!!!

Those of us who have actually WORKED in the airline business aren't surprised at the way it happened --- but, of course, we are the minority when compared to the LAYPEOPLE who come out of hte wordwook!!!

ALSO, we cannot talk openly about certain aspects of the security issues, even now, we cannot discuss them. It hampers our abilities, and furtherws th misconceptions.

I have tried, but I have had to use terms that aren't precise...and I will NOT go beyond that, for obvious reasons....but, of course, THAT just leads to more cries of "INSIDE JOB", and that is ludicrous!!

IF you desire to learn more, then get trained in security issues, and decide to keep your mouth shut....oh, but then THAT is just another part of the "problem", in the world of 'conspiracy'!!!

Meh!!!!

It's pointless, sometimes, to discuss....with amateurs.......

***AND, if ANY of you have recently been through AIRPORT "security" and think that THOSE 'minimum-wage' minions are keeping THEIR mouths shut?????

Don't GET me started!!!!!!

(No offence to the minimum-wage minions....we all have a JOB to ds, RIGHT???)



[edit on 21 January 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Just out of curiosity what is your profession? Are you airport management? An engineer? Construction?



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by mikelee

BUT was not the cause of collapse.


WE do not know this as a fact, it is ONLY being spouted and spewed by people who speak out of their butts....

Many ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS (AND not hundreds, nay, THOUSANDS who have elected NOT to 'join' a certain crowd of colleagues, who are well in the minority) have little doubt, upon reflecton and study, as to why the WTC Towers collapsed, as they did.

ONLY the continued nonsense that other spout has led to the continued baloney about the facts of that day....


So 40 years after the Moon landing does a person need a PhD in physics and a masters in structural engineering to know that the distributions of steel and concrete are important in making a skyscraper support its own weight?

So why can't this silent majority of EXPERTS demand to know that information and make it public. The NCSTAR1 report does not even tell us the total for the concrete in the towers. How can the conservation of momentum of a supposed top down gravitational collapse be done without that information?

psik



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
How important is your quest for truth? If you don't have the patience to read links and books, then you're never gonna learn the truth, because it's very complex.

There are trillions of other subjects of study in the world.

True, but IMO, none that are more important.

Since we've repeatedly been told that 9/11 "changed everything", it's incumbent on every American to thoroughly investigate this "New Pearl Harbor" (many have said that 9/11 is the "New Reichstag Fire.")

Hell, I'd highly recommend investigating the "old" Pearl Harbor.


Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by mikelee
 

Don't GET me started!!!!!!

Too late... again. Do you know the meaning of the word "loquacious?"

JJay55, he's a pilot who spends more time trying to convince anyone who'll listen of the impossible 9/11 official story than flying.

Weed, speaking of FDRs and CVRs, explain to us again why for the first time in history none of the four black boxes were located in the WTC rubble (according to the government, not rescue workers), even though a "hijacker's" passport was found? (in one paragragh or less, please.)


[edit on 1/22/2010 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
So why can't this silent majority of EXPERTS demand to know that information and make it public. The NCSTAR1 report does not even tell us the total for the concrete in the towers. How can the conservation of momentum of a supposed top down gravitational collapse be done without that information?

psik

It's just easier to call it a phenomena rather that understand reality. Defense mechanisms for the weak.

Simply, 19 terrorists flew planes into the WTC and elsewhere. They will continue to attack us. period.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by JJay55
It's just easier to call it a phenomena rather that understand reality. Defense mechanisms for the weak.


I agree. So many "debunkers" on here don't even care to understand the reality of what actually happened that day, like what exactly was causing all of those explosions. They just down-play it as much as they are able in their own minds and tune it out, and just assume they were caused by things other than explosions with absolutely no evidence, just more of their own deluded opinions. Not caring to even know how much concrete was actually in the towers is another example. You're right: defense mechanisms for the weak.


Simply, 19 terrorists flew planes into the WTC and elsewhere. They will continue to attack us. period.


And for those who aren't as simple minded?

There were interests before 9/11 to go into the Middle East to start wars and secure resources. But no good reason to. So 9/11 was staged to invade Afghanistan, and we have plenty of evidence to suggest that now, and more and more people are waking up to the facts and not just plugging their ears out of an emotional response anymore. Then they made up even more BS "terrorism" reasons to go to war with Iraq again too, though we found as soon as we were done destroying the country that they weren't really making any WMDs and weren't supporting al Qaeda, either.

And corrupt factions involved with our government will continue to lie and exaggerate a threat that is not really there, and continue to spend trillions on wars that goes straight to military industrial corporations, until they are held accountable for it. They will probably go to war again with Iran, Syria, Yemen, or Pakistan, or any combination of those, just to continue this military campaign, no different than the Nazis going on a military conquest after staged events and exaggerated threats just the same. Another historical fact: we brought back Nazi scientists and propagandists after WW2, including some of their highest ranking officers. And we employed them here.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by bsbray11
For example, there were numerous explosions coming from all parts of those buildings.

Typical response? "Oh, it was electrical generators/exploding cleaner bottles/etc."

What evidence is any of that based on?


No, it's reasoned out by rational people.

Any high explosive is so loud that they would be undeniable.

You mean like these?




posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 02:51 AM
link   
I feel that this post I made in another thread is appropriate here. It describes my feelings about 9/11 as expressed to me by people who were actually there.

You know, its funny. Life. Humanity. Stupidity. Ignorance. All of that and more. I had friends that went to this very place as firefighters and EMTs. I also had friends go to NYC to help there with the same purpose in mind. When they returned and were telling me the horror stories and showing me pictures they failed to mention a government conspiracy or cover-up of any kind at either site. Maybe it just escaped them at the time as they probably forgot most of the horrific things they saw on the short drive back to the outskirts of Pittsburgh. Or maybe not.

It is easy for you kids to stand up and cry conspiracy and I fully understand that this site is ABOUT conspiracies, but you have NOTHING to base what you say on. You never cleaned up a plane crash. You never picked up pieces of peoples bodies from a field or street and dumped them into plastic containers. Get some actual fact, or go back to reading and not posting.

I am not trying to be rude or anything, but I had my friends who are grown men literally cry telling me the stories of the things they saw. These are hardened men who have put many long years into their firefighting and medical services. Men who have seen some of the worst things a human has to see on a daily basis and they are weeping like women into their laps because they simple do not have any other way to release the horror they saw. Conspiracies are one thing, but you need to respect the people who lost their lives and the people who are still alive but lost theirs as well. Until you spend the day picking up tiny bits of people from a field or street, shut the hell up about things you have know experience in.


I would make a new thread for this post, but I am not allowed yet.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker]
Many ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS (AND not hundreds, nay, THOUSANDS who have elected NOT to 'join' a certain crowd of colleagues, who are well in the minority) have little doubt, upon reflecton and study, as to why the WTC Towers collapsed, as they did.


Even the original NIST computer model concluded that neither the plane impacts nor fire causd the collapse. I sugget you do some research.


Of course, one has to ignore the fact that the FDR was located IN THE WRECKAGE and debris of the Pentagfon...very inconvenient,


Please show a proper and official report matching the serial number of the FDR to the plane.




[edit on 23-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by A-E-I-Owned-You
You know, its funny. Life. Humanity. Stupidity. Ignorance. All of that and more. I had friends that went to this very place as firefighters and EMTs. I also had friends go to NYC to help there with the same purpose in mind. When they returned and were telling me the horror stories and showing me pictures they failed to mention a government conspiracy or cover-up of any kind at either site. Maybe it just escaped them at the time as they probably forgot most of the horrific things they saw on the short drive back to the outskirts of Pittsburgh. Or maybe not.

It is easy for you kids to stand up and cry conspiracy and I fully understand that this site is ABOUT conspiracies, but you have NOTHING to base what you say on. You never cleaned up a plane crash. You never picked up pieces of peoples bodies from a field or street and dumped them into plastic containers. Get some actual fact, or go back to reading and not posting.

I am not trying to be rude or anything, but I had my friends who are grown men literally cry telling me the stories of the things they saw.


The laws of physics don't give a damn about conspiracies or emotionalism.

Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up. The designers must figure out how to distribute the steel for them to do that. They must know the distribution of concrete to determine the distribution of steel.

So why don't we have that information after EIGHT YEARS? If the buildings could hold themselves up then they could not collapse like that.

www.youtube.com...

Some people just prefer to BELIEVE that they could because they want to avoid the EMOTIONALISM that the obvious conclusion would force them to. The laws of physics don't care about Islam, Christianity, America, Freedom or Human Beings in general.

psik



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by A-E-I-Owned-You


It is easy for you kids to stand up and cry conspiracy and I fully understand that this site is ABOUT conspiracies, but you have NOTHING to base what you say on. You never cleaned up a plane crash. You never picked up pieces of peoples bodies from a field or street and dumped them into plastic containers. Get some actual fact, or go back to reading and not posting.



A lot of people Cried that day, world wide.

Then some people went out to find what made them cry.

You ask for experts in plans crashes, demolition, here you go Generals, Colonel Generals, Plane Recovery Experts ,, Time for you to start reading

I made it real easy , just scroll and read patriotsquestion911.com...



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join