ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


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.
Reply
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:12 PM   #361
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
I posted the addition in red and stated that i fixed it for you. I understand why you would rather not have this exchange with me though.
.........and so do the rational readers reading this.
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:15 PM   #362
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
.........and so do the rational readers reading this.
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.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:16 PM   #363
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
I think you are double counting the bottom floor.
Of course you'd think that.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:19 PM   #364
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
I m seeing a distinct pattern.
That I give up once I determine you have no affirmative point? Guilty as charged.
__________________
"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

Last edited by DGM; 22nd January 2017 at 08:20 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:21 PM   #365
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
That I give up once I determine you have no affirmative point? Guilty as charged.
My point is that 42m DOES NOT EQUAL 17 storeys.

Do you agree that the building was 42m ? Because at least one of those figures is wrong. Even by the CTBUH own criteria.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:22 PM   #366
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,282
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
You know, I am really smelling the AE911T panic with this Plasco collapse. First they double down on the dumb by declaring it CD, then they start grasping for straws regarding the height of the buikding.

Face it, Tony. Steel frame buildings can collapse from a fire. I know this bursts your, any many others, bubble. But all that bubble is doing is keeping out reality. Embrace it as a shining light entering your life.
Gage et. al is just pointing out the correct procedures as described the NFPA 921.

The Plasco collapse also reinforces what the people interviewed on the Experts Speak Out documentary were saying about how they would expect the collapse to be slower and disorderly.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:24 PM   #367
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
My point is that 42m DOES NOT EQUAL 17 storeys.

Do you agree that the building was 42m ? Because at least one of those figures is wrong. Even by the CTBUH own criteria.
I asked, Who cares and why should we? You didn't answer, why?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:26 PM   #368
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I asked, Who cares and why should we? You didn't answer, why?
Do you think that the storey count and the height of the Plasco building is relevant, in a thread discussing collapse of same ? Try yes or no this time please.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:30 PM   #369
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
Do you think that the storey count and the height of the Plasco building is relevant, in a thread discussing collapse of same ? Try yes or no this time please.
No I don't.
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:31 PM   #370
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
No I don't.
Thanks for that. I needed a laugh.

Ridiculous.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:33 PM   #371
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
Thanks for that. I needed a laugh.

Ridiculous.
Why are you laughing?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:34 PM   #372
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,257
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
Well when I see free fall or near free fall acceleration and focused expulsions from a collapsing building, that was also on fire, both fire and explosives are going to be involved in my initial hypotheses.

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.

.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 22nd January 2017 at 08:36 PM.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:35 PM   #373
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,263
Did anyone think of the possibility that Sunder was misspeaking?
Emporis Standards defines a high-rise as "A multi-story structure between 35100 meters tall, or a building of unknown height from 1239 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
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

Last edited by pgimeno; 22nd January 2017 at 08:40 PM.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:37 PM   #374
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Did anyone think of the possibility that Sunder was misspeaking?
Emporis Standards defines a high-rise as "A multi-story structure between 35100 meters tall, or a building of unknown height from 1239 floors."[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...490#Definition
I actually view it as a moot point.
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:37 PM   #375
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Why are you laughing?
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.

Last edited by Old coarse guy; 22nd January 2017 at 08:38 PM.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:39 PM   #376
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,753
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
Thanks for that. I needed a laugh.

Ridiculous.
Yes it is relevant a 15 story building has significantly less gravitational potential so is much
More unlikely to collapse then a building two stories taller.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:41 PM   #377
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Yes it is relevant a 15 story building has significantly less gravitational potential so is much
More unlikely to collapse then a building two stories taller.
Thank you. And correctly stated. Of course the height and storey count is important, despite what DGM might think.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:42 PM   #378
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
Your serious study of this collapse is on an obscure web forum?

What have the designers stated for the height? Have you contacted the city regulators for plans that have been filed?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:45 PM   #379
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Your serious study of this collapse is on an obscure web forum?

What have the designers stated for the height? Have you contacted the city regulators for plans that have been filed?
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.

Last edited by Old coarse guy; 22nd January 2017 at 08:46 PM.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:48 PM   #380
Whip
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 608
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?
Whip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:49 PM   #381
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Yes it is relevant a 15 story building has significantly less gravitational potential so is much
More unlikely to collapse then a building two stories taller.
This is a generalized statement and frankly is wrong. Without specific knowledge of the design this blanket statement can not be supported.
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:50 PM   #382
Seymour Butz
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 869
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
Thank you. And correctly stated. Of course the height and storey count is important, despite what DGM might think.
About the only significance of all this is at what point/story level do codes change regarding passive fire protection.

If "high rise" has a specific meaning cuz they have different codes, then it matters.
Seymour Butz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:51 PM   #383
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
So, nothing?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:53 PM   #384
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by Seymour Butz View Post
About the only significance of all this is at what point/story level do codes change regarding passive fire protection.

If "high rise" has a specific meaning cuz they have different codes, then it matters.
The weight of water alone in the uppermost floors of this building make the height and storey count all the more crucial. I am sure you have seen the pictures of these features toward the top of the building.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:54 PM   #385
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
So, nothing?
You need to compose a substantive meaningful response.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:56 PM   #386
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,815
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
I am smelling a bunch of individuals on this forum jumping to conclusions on the Plasco building collapse because it fits a narrative they want to believe with WTC 7. It has nothing to do with reality.

I think I am going to see what investigatory details emerge on the Plasco collapse and do some analysis on my own before coming to a conclusion.

There are violent and somewhat focused expulsions emanating from the Plasco building right before and during the collapse which do not immediately lends themselves to natural means.
Just as with the WTC structures, you and AE911T reject the obvious driver of collapse, FIRE, in favour of utter and pure unadultered fiction.

That is of course unless you have some evidence other than "could'a been.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 08:57 PM   #387
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
Will you be posting updates as you receive them in your investigation?

Has the Iranian government included you in their investigation?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:00 PM   #388
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Will you be posting updates as you receive them in your investigation?

Has the Iranian government included you in their investigation?
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.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:02 PM   #389
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
No sarcasm intended. You are actually serious in your investigation?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:05 PM   #390
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
No sarcasm intended. You are actually serious in your investigation?
Yes. But as with any investigation, data is crucial, and to be honest, I am unsure if the lead investigator would share the structural drawings, even if they still exist.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:08 PM   #391
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
Yes. But as with any investigation, data is crucial, and to be honest, I am unsure if the lead investigator would share the structural drawings, even if they still exist.
You are not the lead? What exactly is your role in the investigation?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:12 PM   #392
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
You are not the lead? What exactly is your role in the investigation?
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.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:15 PM   #393
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,379
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
Why do you think he/she would not share their information? Have you contacted them with your concerns?
__________________
"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
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:20 PM   #394
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Why do you think he/she would not share their information? Have you contacted them with you concerns?
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.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:29 PM   #395
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
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?
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:39 PM   #396
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
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?
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.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 09:54 PM   #397
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
He may have misspoken, which isn't puzzling at all.


Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
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
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 10:00 PM   #398
Old coarse guy
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Again, I don't have any reliable sources. 42m is still defined as high rise, though.
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.
Old coarse guy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 10:07 PM   #399
benthamitemetric
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 478
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
When you explain the simultaneous free fall acceleration of all four corners of WTC 7 as being due to fire maybe then we can talk. Until then I am casting my pearls among swine by even contemplating your silly arguments. There is only one explanation for the simultaneous free fall over the full length and width of the building and neither NIST, ARUP, or WAI explain it. That is because it won't comport with what they want to say.

It is kind of like we aren't going to discuss what seat you get at the show when you don't even have the money for admission.
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?

Last edited by benthamitemetric; 22nd January 2017 at 10:08 PM.
benthamitemetric is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2017, 10:15 PM   #400
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by Old coarse guy View Post
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.
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
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:59 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.