10 Questions for 9/11 Truthers

reply to post by psikeyhackr

The vertical supports did not collapse. The roadbed fell off the supports.

The comparison is idiotic.

psik

I'm not saying the collapse sequence is identical.

I'm saying the overpass used very large 'I' beams. Larger than WTC.
And they warped very badly from heat from a fuel fire alone, no impact damage.
And it happened in only 15 minutes.

So it should be no surprise that the steel in WTC warped to destruction. Especially when you add the impact damage. Maybe that's why all the worlds physics experts and engineers are not demanding the things you are demanding.

reply to post by psikeyhackr

The vast majority of physicists are saying NOTHING.

How do you know? Does everyone with a degree in physics report to you directly?

How are physicists doing physics without data?

All necessary data is contained in the report.

The NCSTAR1 reports does not even specify the total for the concrete in the towers.

How would you know? You've admitted time and time again that you never read the report.

Why can't you tell us how much and where it is in the report if you have read it?

Its on page.....wait, maybe you should give a look first.

10,000 pages and can't specify the concrete.

Only to those who haven't read the report.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Hi dave
do you have a head ache?
You know besides no flames the whole don't fit da plane, da plane BOSS.
hi dave ljb

Seeing that planes did in fact hit the towers...as proven by 100,000 eyewitnesses all throughout Manhattan watching what was going on as well as a few million viewers watchign te broadcasts at home...it necessarily means that the hole IS plane sized whether you care to agree with the statement or not.

Originally posted by samkent

Here is a link to a tanker truck carrying fuel that crashed under an overpass. The fire heated the steel to the point of failure in just 15 minutes. Tanker trucks carry 9000 gallons max. That's 24 tons of fuel.
There's your physics. No structual calculations needed.

More OSer nonsense.

Nothing failed except the rubber that goes between the joints. That is nothing but media not getting the story straight and sensationalizing it.

All the original steel was re-used in the repair.

The results came back the next day -- the fourth day after the collapse. I-880 had suffered no serious structural damage to the concrete, Caltrans concluded. The freeway connector could be jacked up and supported with temporary braces while workers used a heat-straightening technique to repair warped steel girders underneath. Contractor ACC West completed the work quickly, and I-880 was reopened to traffic after being closed for just eight days.

www.sfgate.com...

Originally posted by samkent
So it should be no surprise that the steel in WTC warped to destruction. Especially when you add the impact damage. Maybe that's why all the worlds physics experts and engineers are not demanding the things you are demanding.

If steel warped it doesn't mean it would cause a complete collapse, that is a complete stretch.

For one the only steel that could get hot enough to warp is steel in direct contact with fire, whcih was a very small percentage of the whole building.

It doesn't address that the collapse was complete, when the majority of the steel was not in contact with fire. Fire can not take away the resistance of the undamaged floors and columns.

Plus the steel in the towers was much more massive than the steel in that bridge. The reason the bridge collapsed is due to its design, not the steel failing but the rubber. The steel has rubber between the joints, the rubber melted allowing the steel to fall. The steel itself didn't fail, it warped slightly from the heat, and was repaired and re-used.

Do you think they could repair and re-use this?....

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Hi dave
do you have a head ache?
You know besides no flames the whole don't fit da plane, da plane BOSS.
hi dave ljb

Seeing that planes did in fact hit the towers...as proven by 100,000 eyewitnesses all throughout Manhattan watching what was going on as well as a few million viewers watchign te broadcasts at home...it necessarily means that the hole IS plane sized whether you care to agree with the statement or not.

Hi Dave
Well, how do you explain David Copperfield's ability to make the entire Statue of Liberty dissapear? Right before the eyes of New Yorkers. And many years before 911. And then go get it and put it back.
later
Oh BTW a witnesse's testimony is only of value after cross examination.
Can you name the lawyer or lawyers that cross examined those folks?

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

10,000 pages and can't specify the concrete.

Only to those who haven't read the report.

You keep saying that but you never say how much concrete there was and tell us where it is in the report.

psik

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

10,000 pages and can't specify the concrete.

Only to those who haven't read the report.

You keep saying that but you never say how much concrete there was and tell us where it is in the report.

psik

And you continue to claim to be an expert on what is and what is not in a report that you proudly admit would be a waste of time to read. Wow.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by samkent
So it should be no surprise that the steel in WTC warped to destruction. Especially when you add the impact damage. Maybe that's why all the worlds physics experts and engineers are not demanding the things you are demanding.

If steel warped it doesn't mean it would cause a complete collapse, that is a complete stretch.

For one the only steel that could get hot enough to warp is steel in direct contact with fire, whcih was a very small percentage of the whole building.

It doesn't address that the collapse was complete, when the majority of the steel was not in contact with fire. Fire can not take away the resistance of the undamaged floors and columns.

Plus the steel in the towers was much more massive than the steel in that bridge. The reason the bridge collapsed is due to its design, not the steel failing but the rubber. The steel has rubber between the joints, the rubber melted allowing the steel to fall. The steel itself didn't fail, it warped slightly from the heat, and was repaired and re-used.

Do you think they could repair and re-use this?....

edit on 3/29/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)

I agree with you bro, yeah steel may have melted but only at the impact zone, in which firefighters managed to make it to. People can be seen near, or within the impact zone waving for help. (I don't know the melting point of human flesh but I doubt it's higher than steel) To me, that doesn't sound like a blazing inferno with all this interior destruction occurring. You need to watch this video and see how EVERY SINGLE floor below the impact zone shoots out in complete sync, one after the other in perfect union. In my opinion, if you watch each "collapse" video from each impact zone, it looks as if the top portion of each tower is a separate demotion once the top begins collapsing every floor below starts giving away while keeping up with the falling debris

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

10,000 pages and can't specify the concrete.

Only to those who haven't read the report.

You keep saying that but you never say how much concrete there was and tell us where it is in the report.

psik

And you continue to claim to be an expert on what is and what is not in a report that you proudly admit would be a waste of time to read. Wow.

I keep calling it grade school physics and you say that is claiming to be an EXPERT.



The problem is the EXPERTS are pretending this is a difficult problem. The NIST admitted that the distribution of weight of the WTC was necessary to analyse the impact and then they didn't do it. Search the report for "center of mass" and "center of gravity" and they never talk about the center of mass of the top of the south tower that tilted 22 degrees. Some say 25 degrees.

The EXPERTS are so brilliant!

psik

reply to post by psikeyhackr

The EXPERTS are so brilliant!

Yes they are! That's why they (unlike you) are called "experts"! They know and can communicate what needs to be known and why, about the collapse of the towers. And they did. In a report. Which you refuse to read. And then continue to comment about the contents of the report. Which you haven't read. Amazing.

I'll bet the "experts" read everything before they make a comment.

reply to post by ANOK


You are so far off the mark on this one.

More OSer nonsense.

Nothing failed except the rubber that goes between the joints. That is nothing but media not getting the story straight and sensationalizing it.

All the original steel was re-used in the repair.

Rubber is uses in the expansion joints between the steel beams. Two beams sit on top of the concrete supports.
Look at this link.
Here and here

If you think they 're used' all the origional steel you are sorely mistaken.
Lets clear up one point.

I580 collapsed onto I880. Not the other way around. They cleared the debris from the overpass and reopened I880 in very short order. The 580 overpass was replaced an reopened in 25 days.

If steel warped it doesn't mean it would cause a complete collapse, that is a complete stretch.

It would if it was stressed beyond what the designers intended and if it were part of the key supports for all the floors above. It's no stretch at all.

For one the only steel that could get hot enough to warp is steel in direct contact with fire, whcih was a very small percentage of the whole building.

When it's part of the core it becomes the weakest link. When you lose the core on one floor everything above comes crashing down.

It doesn't address that the collapse was complete, when the majority of the steel was not in contact with fire. Fire can not take away the resistance of the undamaged floors and columns.

See above.

Plus the steel in the towers was much more massive than the steel in that bridge. The reason the bridge collapsed is due to its design, not the steel failing but the rubber. The steel has rubber between the joints, the rubber melted allowing the steel to fall. The steel itself didn't fail, it warped slightly from the heat, and was repaired and re-used.

This picture says it all.
You are wrong.
The steel warped and I580 collapsed onto I880. They did not reuse I580 steel.

The parts of the WTC core that survived impact warped by fire and collapsed. It just took longer then the 15 minutes on I580. If it only took 15 minutes on I580 then an hour for WTC is very reasonable.
No conspiracy needed.
No distribution of steel and concrete needed.
No physics calculations needed.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

The EXPERTS are so brilliant!

Yes they are! That's why they (unlike you) are called "experts"! They know and can communicate what needs to be known and why, about the collapse of the towers. And they did. In a report. Which you refuse to read. And then continue to comment about the contents of the report. Which you haven't read. Amazing.

I'll bet the "experts" read everything before they make a comment.

ROFL

So in TEN YEARS no EXPERT has pointed out that the NCSTAR1 report does not specify the total for the concrete. So I guess it must be there. So what is the amount? Where is it?

We have spent ten years being handed BS by the experts that will talk.

But the vast majority of them say nothing. Neil de Grasse Tyson was a witness. He took videos. He released a book about Black Holes in 2007 so presumably he knows something about gravity.

I have not seen or heard ANYTHING from him about what he thinks destroyed the buildings. There must be lots of structural engineers in this country but only a programmer in Sweden has produced a table with steel and concrete data and he admits he did an interpolation of some of it.



psik

reply to post by psikeyhackr

ROFL

Ditto

So in TEN YEARS no EXPERT has pointed out that the NCSTAR1 report does not specify the total for the concrete. So I guess it must be there. So what is the amount? Where is it?

Read the report.

We have spent ten years being handed BS by the experts that will talk.

Nice that you have an opinion - but that's all it is, an opinion. Besides, you expect every "expert" in the world to produce some kind of spreadsheet with updates about every report that is produced and their review? Doesn't work that way.

But the vast majority of them say nothing.

Yep, because they agree. Actually is more like all of them.

Neil de Grasse Tyson was a witness. He took videos. He released a book about Black Holes in 2007 so presumably he knows something about gravity.

Yes, I imagine he does. However, he is an "expert" and a "professional" ans as such he doesn't go around commenting about areas in which he does not have education, training or expertise. Unlike you.

I have not seen or heard ANYTHING from him about what he thinks destroyed the buildings.

Why don't you send him a letter? I am pretty sure he is not familiar with all your concerns.

There must be lots of structural engineers in this country but only a programmer in Sweden has produced a table with steel and concrete data and he admits he did an interpolation of some of it.

So what's your problem? Use his data and tell us the big secret! You of course realize that all the data would be based on some assumptions, right? I mean its not like they took the remains of the building, reconstructed it somewhere in Kansas and then carefully measured the weight of each piece.

They always make it sound like it
had to be a massive conspiracy.
Dick Cheney's money and about
20 Blackwater soldiers is all that was needed.
Having complete access to the crime scenes
before and after didn't hurt either

Originally posted by sealing
They always make it sound like it
had to be a massive conspiracy.
Dick Cheney's money and about
20 Blackwater soldiers is all that was needed.
Having complete access to the crime scenes
before and after didn't hurt either

Why don't you define what you think the conspiracy is and then we can begin to estimate what figures are reasonable.

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

The EXPERTS are so brilliant!

Yes they are! That's why they (unlike you) are called "experts"! They know and can communicate what needs to be known and why, about the collapse of the towers. And they did. In a report. Which you refuse to read. And then continue to comment about the contents of the report. Which you haven't read. Amazing.

I'll bet the "experts" read everything before they make a comment.

Hi hoop,
Looks like yer at it again.
Relying on those stupid old reports. UNSUBSTANCIATED reports,reports,reports.
Get a clue dude.

Originally posted by sealing
They always make it sound like it
had to be a massive conspiracy.
Dick Cheney's money and about
20 Blackwater soldiers is all that was needed.
Having complete access to the crime scenes
before and after didn't hurt either

So how did "Dick Cheney and 20 Blackwater soldiers" get NIST *and* FEMA *and* MIT *and* Perdue to sign onto these coverups? While you're at it, how did they manage to plant all that fake aircraft wreckage on the Pentagon lawn in front of a highway of witnesses without anyone seeing them? While you're at it, how did they manage to hide the hundreds of tons of sabotaged building parts from the hundreds of ground zero cleanup crews?

We're not the ones making it sound like a massive conspiracy. You are. The more you attempt to try to justify how your square conspiracy peg fits into the round 9/11 hole the more people you need to accuse of "being in on it." Heck, there's one guy here who's even accusing the Red Cross of "being in on it".

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by sealing
They always make it sound like it
had to be a massive conspiracy.
Dick Cheney's money and about
20 Blackwater soldiers is all that was needed.
Having complete access to the crime scenes
before and after didn't hurt either

So how did "Dick Cheney and 20 Blackwater soldiers" get NIST *and* FEMA *and* MIT *and* Perdue to sign onto these coverups? While you're at it, how did they manage to plant all that fake aircraft wreckage on the Pentagon lawn in front of a highway of witnesses without anyone seeing them? While you're at it, how did they manage to hide the hundreds of tons of sabotaged building parts from the hundreds of ground zero cleanup crews?

We're not the ones making it sound like a massive conspiracy. You are. The more you attempt to try to justify how your square conspiracy peg fits into the round 9/11 hole the more people you need to accuse of "being in on it." Heck, there's one guy here who's even accusing the Red Cross of "being in on it".

Hi davo
It is really quite simple. Unglue your eyes from those ignorrant reports and google "How Murdock is pulling the cops and Downing street down with him."
You will be a changed person.
later lju

reply to post by longjohnbritches

Hi hoop,

Hi back and its Hooper.

Looks like yer at it again.

What is it?

Relying on those stupid old reports. UNSUBSTANCIATED reports,reports,reports.

Yep. Better then relying on your own vivid imagination. Well, I guess not if your goal is too live in your own delusion.

Get a clue dude

I got plenty. You're the one lacking clues. Or evidence. Or facts. But not imagination!