|
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. |
23rd January 2017, 06:22 AM | #441 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
http://www.ctbuh.org/HighRiseInfo/Ta...B/Default.aspx
Perhaps this may help you out in terms of the statement by the CTBUH that this building had "17 storeys above ground". I note that elsewhere they give no height for the building. |
23rd January 2017, 06:30 AM | #442 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
23rd January 2017, 06:33 AM | #443 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 06:40 AM | #444 |
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
|
|
__________________
There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021 |
|
23rd January 2017, 06:49 AM | #445 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
23rd January 2017, 06:50 AM | #446 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasco_Building "Roof 42.0 m (138 ft)"
http://en.mehrnews.com/news/122852/R...ilding-tragedy Built and opened in 1962 in Iran, Plasco Building was for some years the tallest construction of the city with a height of 42 meters The sites that I originally checked on came from a search using the native language. Happy to provide more references for you if you need them. |
23rd January 2017, 06:57 AM | #447 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
So it should be easy enough for you to go get a source that agrees with you then. Find me just one source that agrees with you. 42m is admittedly not making any sense whatsoever, but I am quite sure that the Iranians would have measured the height of Tehran's then tallest building accurately.
I do not want to post sites that are in foreign language, but a search for "ساختمان پلاسکو" should bring up Iranian sources for you if that helps. ETA I got the in quotes writing from wikipedia as the persian for "plasco building" |
23rd January 2017, 07:00 AM | #448 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:04 AM | #449 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:05 AM | #450 |
Safely Ignored
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
|
Google image search suggests the large front entrance led into the mall which then extended out of the back of the building. Third photo from the bottom of this page http://shahrefarang.com/en/plasco-tehran/ shows the rear of the building and firefighters using a hose from the roof of the mall.
|
23rd January 2017, 07:13 AM | #451 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:13 AM | #452 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
This is a persian site, the bottom picture shows exactly the layout of the mall.
http://footofan.com/?p=27827 ETA Zoom in to the bottom RHS of the building. |
23rd January 2017, 07:16 AM | #453 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:19 AM | #454 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
He doesn't explain the significance of that height. Any significance you attribute to it is purely your interpretation.
None is needed, as it's a true statement that no building over 15 stories had collapsed due to fire, as Sunder said, even if he was referring to the definition of high rise and misspoke. No, this statement does not mention "over 15 storeys" anywhere. It mentions high rises: 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(bolding mine). You refuse to acknowledge that the statement is incorrect as stated, even if it's painfully obvious. |
23rd January 2017, 07:19 AM | #455 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
YOU need to outline EXACTLY what it is you are trying to say about the issue, why it matters.
As far as the depth of the underground, again, why does it matter? If it isn't 17 storeys, fact remains it was reported as 17 storeys by Iranian officials and that was repeated by news agencies. |
23rd January 2017, 07:22 AM | #456 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
Has anybody zoomed into the pic as I suggested yet ?
http://footofan.com/?p=27827 Bottom picture, bottom RHS of the building. |
23rd January 2017, 07:23 AM | #457 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:24 AM | #458 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:26 AM | #459 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:29 AM | #460 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
http://footofan.com/?p=27827
Apologies for repetition here. Has anyone else zoomed into the bottom RHS of the building in the bottom pic yet ? |
23rd January 2017, 07:30 AM | #461 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
What does that have to do with my observation that the existence of a skylight indicates that this is not a picture taken within the tower(unless for some odd reason the shopping mall pictured was on the top floors of the structure)
Since it is not a picture of the interior of the tower, and it's the tower that collapsed, you might as well have posted a picture of Mall of America for all the relevance it has. |
23rd January 2017, 07:31 AM | #462 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:32 AM | #463 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:33 AM | #464 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:35 AM | #465 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:35 AM | #466 |
Safely Ignored
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
|
I don't see how to zoom in, but are you referring to the collapsed canopy behind the building with the blue roof? There seems to be a lot of debris on it, and there may be damage to the wall of the building above there too. It's hard to make out the detail.
I guess the trail of water around the carpark indicates there was some firefighting vehicle working around there before the picture was taken. |
23rd January 2017, 07:38 AM | #467 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:40 AM | #468 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
Bump for OCG, to ensure he doesn't miss my post.
He doesn't explain the significance of that height. Any significance you attribute to it is purely your interpretation. None is needed, as it's a true statement that no building over 15 stories had collapsed due to fire, as Sunder said, even if he was referring to the definition of high rise and misspoke. No, this statement does not mention "over 15 storeys" anywhere. It mentions high rises: 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(bolding mine). You refuse to acknowledge that the statement is incorrect as stated, even if it's painfully obvious. |
23rd January 2017, 07:41 AM | #469 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
|
|
23rd January 2017, 07:43 AM | #470 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
|
Shyam Sunder's exact quote in discussing the collapse of 7 WTC was:
"This is the first time that we are aware of that a building over 15 stories tall has collapsed primarily due to fires." A true statement back those many years ago, not sure what relevance it has to this discussion. If anyone would like to enlighten us as to the relevance then have at it. I think we can all agree that Plasco was at least 15, possibly 17 stories tall and that fire doesn't really care about the difference. I think we can also all agree that the building was on fire, and that it collapsed during that fire, making fire the only plausible proximate cause for its collapse. Given that, what have the last 5-6 pages been about anyway? |
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts. |
|
23rd January 2017, 07:44 AM | #471 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
|
I will respond to this later.
Have you checked the pic out yet? http://footofan.com/?p=27827 Bottom RHS of the building as you're looking at it. Collapsed canopy from debris, and structural damage. Interested in your opinion of it. |
23rd January 2017, 07:44 AM | #472 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
New guy arguing irrelevant minutiae?
|
23rd January 2017, 07:45 AM | #473 |
Safely Ignored
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
|
It's rather a mess, but we can't tell if it's related to the fire, or if it was part of some building work that was unrelated. The fire seems to be mainly in the upper floors and there's no smoke or dust from around the collapsed canopy to indicate it just fell.
It's very curious, but it's not obvious what we're looking at there. |
23rd January 2017, 07:48 AM | #474 |
Safely Ignored
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
|
|
23rd January 2017, 08:01 AM | #475 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd January 2017, 08:04 AM | #476 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
delete
|
23rd January 2017, 08:04 AM | #477 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 571
|
Falling back on bald assertions, just like always. Your extreme temperature claims were based on the clearly erroneous Korol paper that you have spent 3+ weeks avoiding. And your claims that NIST and ARUP's analyses have been shown "invalid" are nothing more than hollow words you repeat and repeat and repeat as if somehow that makes them true, even though I've already repeatedly demonstrated all such claims you have made are based on your fundamental errors in improperly conflating dissimilar simulations or attempting to use your own laughably incomplete "models" in a hamfisted way to prove something that is far beyond their scope. The claim against ARUP is especially sad because it relies on you deliberately inflating Nordenson's floor collapse propagation calculations with ARUP's floor failure initiation model. It's incredibly dishonest.
You tried to pretend in the other thread that I was the one who avoids specifics, and yet here you go again--baldly asserting your way to your preferred conclusion despite the specifics being aligned against your tired claims. |
23rd January 2017, 08:08 AM | #478 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
23rd January 2017, 08:10 AM | #479 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,692
|
|
23rd January 2017, 08:19 AM | #480 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|