|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
22nd January 2017, 08:12 PM | #361 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:15 PM | #362 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
YOu have a habit of saying that you "are done with me". I m seeing a distinct pattern.
You are discussing a specific building here on this thread. I am saying that the stated height is 42m, and that does not tally with 17 storeys. You are avoiding this by asking me why the height and storey count of the building matters. I am comfortable with people drawing their own conclusions from that. |
22nd January 2017, 08:16 PM | #363 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:19 PM | #364 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:21 PM | #365 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:22 PM | #366 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:24 PM | #367 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:26 PM | #368 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:30 PM | #369 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:31 PM | #370 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:33 PM | #371 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:34 PM | #372 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,488
|
Explosives alone are not effective against steel-framed buildings if the proper preparation of the steel structure is not undertaken. That was evident during the detonation of a huge vehicle bomb beneath WTC 1 in 1993 and again as WTC 1 and WTC 2 absorbed major impacts from B-767s. After the impacts, the steel structure of each building simply redistributed their structural loads around the damaged areas, which was also the case involving WTC 7, where it's south wall suffered major impact damage. The reason why I asked you in another thread in reference to the significance of structural redistribution in the presence of uncontrolled fires that raged for hours, was to ascertain your level of knowledge regarding structural load redistribution and the ineffectiveness of explosives in regard to steel-framed buildings if proper preparations are not undertaken. I am very sure that you can find a video where steel structures withstood the blast effects of a nuclear detonation and photos of the Chinese embassy that absorbed 5 JDAM GPS-guided precision bombs. Needless to say, the building did not collapse. It should be evident by now as to why demolition teams must first pre-weaken steel structures before explosives are placed, a process that would that would have taken many months of preparation that would not have gone unnoticed in the occupied WTC buildings. . |
22nd January 2017, 08:35 PM | #373 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
Did anyone think of the possibility that Sunder was misspeaking?
Emporis Standards defines a high-rise as "A multi-story structure between 35–100 meters tall, or a building of unknown height from 12–39 floors."[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...490#Definition ETA: Here's the actual definition: https://www.emporis.com/building/sta...-rise-building |
22nd January 2017, 08:37 PM | #374 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:37 PM | #375 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
Because it is clearly important that we garner accurate information as to the dimensions, structural design, materials etc of this building in order to discuss it's collapse. If we cannot even establish the basics of height and storey count, what chance have we got of gaining accurate information beyond that, in order to better inform our discussion? NONE
I am saying that the only height reference I can get for this structure is 42m. That does not tally with the CTBUH's own stated criteria for calculating same. If you are not armed with accurate information, how can you discuss the building in an informed manner ? ETA "for calculating same in terms of a 17 storey building" that should have been. |
22nd January 2017, 08:39 PM | #376 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:41 PM | #377 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:42 PM | #378 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:45 PM | #379 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
Actually yes, I have made an initial approach to them. To the ministry of the appointed investigative lead. In the interim absence of a response I am trying to get details elsewhere.
ETA, I should add that the height reference that I have got so far is 42m. And searches of native Iranian media and sites state mostly 14 or 15 storeys. |
22nd January 2017, 08:48 PM | #380 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,474
|
so why hasn't building height been an issue for the 15 years of this truther dog and pony show until now other than running out of strawmen?
|
22nd January 2017, 08:49 PM | #381 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:50 PM | #382 |
Muse
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 884
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:51 PM | #383 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 08:53 PM | #384 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:54 PM | #385 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:56 PM | #386 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
22nd January 2017, 08:57 PM | #387 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 09:00 PM | #388 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
Of course, if I garner more data and information on the building and can do so I will share it. As for inclusion in the investigation, I am not part of the Iranian ministry, and given that you already know that they have as yet not responded to me, I can only take your 2nd question as an attempt at sarcasm.
Try again. |
22nd January 2017, 09:02 PM | #389 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 09:05 PM | #390 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
22nd January 2017, 09:08 PM | #391 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 09:12 PM | #392 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
I think you misunderstood me. The lead investigator from the Iranian ministry would be hesitant to share the drawings if they exist. I am not involved in the ongoing investigation into the building collapse which is underway and being undertaken by the relevant Iranian minister appointed to lead it.
|
22nd January 2017, 09:15 PM | #393 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
22nd January 2017, 09:20 PM | #394 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
I don't think they will have them to be honest. As to my contacts with them, I don't want to elaborate on that. But I will share anything that I can get from them which is allowed to be in the public domain.
What I am interested in right now is the very basics. The building height and the amount of storeys. I am so far working on the presumption that the building was 42m high, and therefor would not have 17 storeys above ground. You have stated that you don't think that this is at all relevant. |
22nd January 2017, 09:29 PM | #395 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
That qualifies as a high rise.
A high-rise building is a structure whose architectural height is between 35 and 100 meters. A structure is automatically listed as a high-rise when it has a minimum of 12 floors, whether or not the height is known.https://www.emporis.com/building/sta...-rise-building Now what? |
22nd January 2017, 09:39 PM | #396 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
Yes, I can accept that definition if it suits.
Shyam Sunder clearly states 15 storeys though, and that cut off point and the reason for it is somewhat puzzling. The CTBUH also have a stated method for ascertaining storeys and height of buildings. Certainly 42m does seem low even for a 15 storey above ground building, let alone a 17 storey. Hence my initial interest in getting the height of the building accurate. As I said, the best I can get so far is 42m, I am more than happy to look at any source you have which states anything different to that. |
22nd January 2017, 09:54 PM | #397 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
He may have misspoken, which isn't puzzling at all.
Again, I don't have any reliable sources. 42m is still defined as high rise, though. Do you agree, then, that this point in AE911T's AIA Convention resolution is no longer true after that building's collapse? WHEREAS, prior to and since September 11, 2001, no steel-framed high-rise has ever suffered a total collapse, except buildings demolished through the procedure known as controlled demolition |
22nd January 2017, 10:00 PM | #398 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
Yes, it may well be. But as per the CTBUH own criteria for storey/height assessment 42m does not equate to 17 storeys above ground. As I said, at least one of those numbers is wrong. If you do find a source that states anything other than 42m I trust you will let me know.
|
22nd January 2017, 10:07 PM | #399 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 571
|
Holy shifting goal posts, batman. Just wow. This is Tony Szamboti admitting he has no actual argument as to why WTC 7's global collapse could not have been initiated by fires; instead, he is now retreating to the position that, even if fires could have initiated a global collapse, that such global collapse wouldn't have involved the four corners of the outside frame falling as observed. Because he has some sort of model of the global collapse? Because he has some principled take on how such a complex system must behave? Because he has some back of the napkin calculations on column buckling? No, no, and no. Because he has given himself over to a fantasy and so the engineering and evidence don't even matter anymore.
Can you even be intellectually honest enough to acknowledge you were wrong about the heating and that your girder model was flawed, Tony? If you want to change the scope of the discussion to talk about the final global collapse, we can. But you should at least demonstrate you can be honest. Everyone has watched you flounder on these questions for weeks now and we all know your mistakes. Why not just own up to them and approach the next topic honestly? |
22nd January 2017, 10:15 PM | #400 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
Yes, I will. Now, since you agree that it fits the definition of a high rise, do you agree that this point in AE911T's AIA Convention resolution is no longer true after that building's collapse?
WHEREAS, prior to and since September 11, 2001, no steel-framed high-rise has ever suffered a total collapse, except buildings demolished through the procedure known as controlled demolition |
Thread Tools | |
|
|