Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Why are so few willing to discuss the science?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 678
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The speed as I have pointed out was in excess of double the design criteria.

Me: the only problem is you are wrong. Did you not read the link I gave you?

"The results of the test, carried out early in 1964, calculated that the towers would handle the impact of a 707 traveling at 600 mph without collapsing."

"Not only were the towers designed to survive crashes of large jet aircraft, but they were designed to potentially survive multiple plane crashes. This assertion is supported by Frank A. Demartini, the on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, who said on January 25, 2001:

The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen doorthis intense gridand the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

http://www1.ae911truth.org/home/655-faq-9-were-the-twin-towers-designed-to-survive-the-impact-of-the-airplanes.html

//////////////////////////

You can easily see from various news footage that after the initial impacts which did the major damage, the heat from burning fuel finally weakened what was left and the damaged structure finally gave way and the upper floors essentially acted as a pile driver as their weight descended onto the lower ones.

This sounds like a poor misunderstanding of a nonsensical Popular Mechanics article. You can of course provide sources to back your contention.

Edited by Je suis Omar
Link to post
Share on other sites

ame="On Guard for Thee" post="1042881" timestamp="1427862423"]

The speed as I have pointed out was in excess of double the design criteria.

Me: the only problem is you are wrong. Did you not read the link I gave you?

"The results of the test, carried out early in 1964, calculated that the towers would handle the impact of a 707 traveling at 600 mph without collapsing."

"Not only were the towers designed to survive crashes of large jet aircraft, but they were designed to potentially survive multiple plane crashes. This assertion is supported by Frank A. Demartini, the on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, who said on January 25, 2001:

The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen doorthis intense gridand the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

http://www1.ae911truth.org/home/655-faq-9-were-the-twin-towers-designed-to-survive-the-impact-of-the-airplanes.html

//////////////////////////

This sounds like a poor misunderstanding of a nonsensical Popular Mechanics article. You can of course provide sources to back your contention.

Well you are half right, the buildings were designed to be hit by an airliner, because of their location, but not at cruise speed. Again, because of their location which is within the TCA of two major airports, the max speed anticipated in the event of a crash was well below cruise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you are half right, the buildings were designed to be hit by an airliner, because of their location, but not at cruise speed. Again, because of their location which is within the TCA of two major airports, the max speed anticipated in the event of a crash was well below cruise.

How did you happen to miss this?

"The results of the test, carried out early in 1964, calculated that the towers would handle the impact of a 707 traveling at 600 mph without collapsing."

And your sources for your pile driver theory are where? The intense heat passing over 123 yards of open air to heat 7 are forthcoming. And the Shudder Theory.

Edited by Je suis Omar
Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you happen to miss this?

"The results of the test, carried out early in 1964, calculated that the towers would handle the impact of a 707 traveling at 600 mph without collapsing."

And your sources for your pile driver theory are where? The intense heat passing over 123 yards of open air to heat 7 are forthcoming. And the Shudder Theory.

No, there was a suggestion that such a study was done, which could be true, but the paperwork was destroyed. All you have to do is watch the video of the towers collapsing to understand the reference to a pile driver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why did Bin Laden's people bother flying passenger aircraft into the buildings if they had already wired them for demolition?

I recall an edition of Time magazine back in the day that had I think 10 or 15 of the most popular conspiracy theories regarding 9 11, and the debunking of them. It was a hoot, other than the fact there were actually people buying into the stuff. They had 767s with missile rails on the belly, explosive charges preset on every other floor of the towers, and I cant recall all the nonsense. A project for tomorrow I guess to see if they have that archived on line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All you have to do is watch the video of the towers collapsing to understand the reference to a pile driver.

All you have to do is understand the science to realize that the pile driver theory is not supported by science or by observation.

Destruction of the World Trade Center North Tower and Fundamental Physics

By David Chandler

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/ChandlerDownwardAccelerationOfWTC1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

All you have to do is understand the science to realize that the pile driver theory is not supported by science or by observation.

Destruction of the World Trade Center North Tower and Fundamental Physics

By David Chandler

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/ChandlerDownwardAccelerationOfWTC1.pdf

Pretty well displayed in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITa3SzTOY3k

Link to post
Share on other sites

You never explain anything, George. It's a struggle for you to get out more than four or five words. Your ellipses most often constitute the greatest portion of your offerings.

I don't think you understand, Jesus.

This topic was beat to death many years ago with far more detail than you offer today.

Please search the forum archives to catch up to the rest of the group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's stress free though. Omar is the very model of civility and no-one's called me a bigot yet.

You didn't see his introductory blitz of insulting, accusatory posts before he was evidently given a talking to...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is your evidence and moreover why are you so unwilling to discuss the science?

I have a relative who is a schizophrenic. He hears voices. No matter how logical you are in pointing out that he couldn't possibly be hearing voices from, say, the lobby of his building, up there on the tenth floor, you can't ever convince him he isn't hearing voices.

There is no amount of evidence or logic which will convince a conspiracy nut that he's wrong. I've been that route before, and so have others. It's a waste of time. For every considered, intelligent, respected voice of wisdom you produce, they'll produce some frazzle-haired wack job to shriek otherwise., and to them, that trumps all. Conspiracy theorists are psychologically damaged people. I've met a few in person, and their brains just don't work right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody remember where we left this exciting topic years ago...say 2009. Somebody was working the thermite theory real hard,

but then they got banned !

Because nobody would have noticed thermite charges being laid and none of the post disaster investigators would have noticed the effect on the recovered steel beams either. Oh wait, they were all in on it... :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a relative who is a schizophrenic. He hears voices. No matter how logical you are in pointing out that he couldn't possibly be hearing voices from, say, the lobby of his building, up there on the tenth floor, you can't ever convince him he isn't hearing voices.

There is no amount of evidence or logic which will convince a conspiracy nut that he's wrong. I've been that route before, and so have others. It's a waste of time. For every considered, intelligent, respected voice of wisdom you produce, they'll produce some frazzle-haired wack job to shriek otherwise., and to them, that trumps all. Conspiracy theorists are psychologically damaged people. I've met a few in person, and their brains just don't work right.

Does this, in your mind, Argus, constitute a discussion of the science? Why do you try to make this about me. 2300 architects, engineers and scientists, and counting, have studied the official story and found that it doesn't match reality. I haven't advanced any conspiracy theories so why are you even bringing that up. Which leads us right back to the central premise - why are so few willing to discuss the science?

Boges stated, very succinctly, "Tower 7!!!!". Have you looked at the evidence, have you discussed the science? Nope, see your contributions to science above.

Edited by Je suis Omar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why did Bin Laden's people bother flying passenger aircraft into the buildings if they had already wired them for demolition?

Ah, because it wasn't him! It was the international Jewish conspiracy working with the evil CIA and Mossad and the ruthless Bush and Cheney!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...