Enough with the dishonest behaviour Truthers - I'm calling you out.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


Great post, I supposed I shouldn't have created my threads on such considering you've just pointed it all out in a much better way.

''Truthers'' Definition - To pass on lies and misinformation and call it evidence.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Elbereth

 

That the NIST failed in its mandate is no conspiracy fantasy and the best argument I know for a new investigation.

Sorry, the idea that there is a professionally conducted disagreement is not evidence of "mandate failure" and does not require any new investigations. Knowledgeable professionals, will, from time to time disagree. This is not evidence of a conspiracy, but real evidence of appropriate conduct.

That's how I see it because NIST failed to definitively establish causation.

On a side note, this is the British version of the airplane that policemen stormed the plane just this past week...

www.dailymail.co.uk...

So these people were trying to get into the mile high club? Never, when you are flying to Detroit.

Originally posted by GenRadek

I love this one:
screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

Richard Gage Opposed to NIST Safety Regulations
Usually I just make fun of these idiots, but the recent debate between Richard Gage and Chris Mohr shows just how scary these people can be. I suppose we should be thankful that Gage is now a full time nutter and not an actual working architect anymore. Based just on this exchange regarding the NIST World Trade Center 7 report, he should have his license pulled. From around 1:52 into the debate.

Mohr: Do you also oppose the fire and safety regulations that NIST has proposed in these reports?

Host: Well we have one minute now for Richard to discuss that, perhaps Richard would like to…

Gage: In fact I do, there are billions of dollars that are spent needlessly as a result of the recommendations that NIST forced, that were forced on several other building codes.

Mohr: That would scare me.

Gage: It is needless, and architects and engineers, 1400 of us are crying for a new investigation.

---------------------------------

It is clear to me that the AIA agrees with Gage.

76,000 member AIA’s written testimony for the House Science Committee's hearing on NIST's Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse:

The World Trade Center collapse provided the design and construction industry with an opportunity to evaluate and reexamine its processes and practices. Based upon the outstanding success of these buildings under extraordinary circumstances, it is clear that the design community can be trusted to create redundancies for typical building emergency situations, that codes are developed in a manner that provides sufficient input from all quarters to ensure adequate life safety for typical emergency situations, and that no upgrading of code requirements is warranted given the performance of these buildings.

my bolding

reply to post by Sphota


The point is, some people have problems accepting that paper/cardboard items can survive an airliner accident. Columbia was mentioned because similar items survived being exposed to fire much longer and still survived.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Sphota

 

The point is, some people have problems accepting that paper/cardboard items can survive an airliner accident. Columbia was mentioned because similar items survived being exposed to fire much longer and still survived.

And in the FL 1771 crash, the guy that caused the crash - a disgruntled employee - wrote down his suicide note on a barf bag, and it was also found intact in the debris.

It is of note that 1771 was also flown into the ground at high speed and resulted in comments from searchers like those from Shanksville.

Originally posted by liejunkie01
Liejunkie has been reading up on Newton's Laws.

I will soon have a Physics challenge with Bones and Anok.

This has got to stop. What I am reading and what them two are saying do not colesce too well.

Newton's third Law does not explain everything guys.

Actually the three laws of motion do...

These three laws form the foundation of what is known as classical mechanics, or­ the science concerned with the motion of bodies being acted upon by forces. The bodies in motion could be large objects, such as orbiting moons or planets, or they could be ordinary objects on Earth's surface, such as moving vehicles or s­peeding bullets. Even bodies at rest are fair game..

science.howstuffworks.com...

Those three laws are all you need to describe the action of bodies and their motion. You have to understand all three laws but the important one for collisions, collapses, is the 3rd law that explains equal and opposite reaction, and what happens when objects collide.

What about the second law? We can calculate the amount of force, velocity, and mass. Something that Lj01 is about to spend some time on when I get the time......

The 2nd law does not contradict the 3rd law, they all work together. The 2nd law explain the relationship between force, mass, and acceleration. You have to consider the 3rd law in context. The 3rd law states that when two objects collide the forces on both objects is EQUAL, which is why 15 floors can not crush 95 floors. An increase of mass, or velocity, of one object increases the forces felt by BOTH objects, again equally.

The fact that you are confused over this is why you can't see a problem with the NIST explanation of the collapses. I know it's hard to get your head around, and just reading about it on line might not help you understand what you're reading.

Do they not teach this stuff in high school any more?

Originally posted by ANOK

The fact that you are confused over this is why you can't see a problem with the NIST explanation of the collapses.

NIST didn't really investigate the collapse progression, so there's nothing solid for you to dispute there.They only investigated the collapse initiation, correct? It's a common criticism of truthers that they didn't, so it's not debatable.

You can dispute Bazant's paper if you like, and the myriad examples of papers examining the energetics/momentum transfer involved though.

How hard is it not to believe that they've found passports of the terrorists. Its obvious if a plane crashes into a building, things will fall out of the plane.

reply to post by liejunkie01


wow sad thing when your just reading up on them now....and you actually think that newtons laws of physics are going to change to suit your needs...amazing....

get reading...but to come in and say your going to read up on them....and then try and teach people the laws of physics....and your an OSer oh lord helps us all.

I can't wait till you make a thread and it gets destroyed....

here i will help you out a bit...

An object at rest will remain at rest unless acted on by an unbalanced force. An object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.
This law is often called
"the law of inertia".

So lets see...the towers and buliding 7....ahhhh at rest all is soooo peaceful

Acceleration is produced when a force acts on a mass. The greater the mass (of the object being accelerated) the greater the amount of force needed (to accelerate the object).

hmmm now there is a disturbance in the force....they are no longer at rest....they are being...accelerated....

9.8m/s2 what is this accelerating force....none other than gravity.

For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action.

well lets see...equal and opposite ....now ...hmmm...what thell has happened....the physics is all messed up now....how can this be.....this is madness....

upper block apparently fall...hits lower block...which is of far greater mass....SMASH....but all is not right...the equal and opposite reaction does not occur....the lower block does not appear to having an equal and opposite reaction with the upper block...where is all the resistance....the world has gone mad...absolutely mad.

Originally posted by plube

upper block apparently fall...hits lower block..

No. It hits a floor. The inertia/momentum can be transferred to the columns, but only as much as the connections from the floors to the columns can transfer.