|
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. |
2nd August 2007, 02:09 PM | #121 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
Everyone knows what exactly happened to WTC7. People like you just like to bring up stupid questions. I'm not the 1 being a child asking questions about a building that we know was brought down by fire and it's own weight.
Asking the same questions about WTC7 is babbling. You want to act like a little child pointing the finger at me? Go right ahead! |
2nd August 2007, 02:11 PM | #122 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
You couldn't handle the truth about WTC7 Dabljuh.
|
2nd August 2007, 02:27 PM | #123 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 496
|
dabljuh, read the links this whole thread is about. One side collapsed, then the other side fell on top of it. Basically you're whole premise is wrong.
|
2nd August 2007, 02:35 PM | #124 |
Downsitting Citizen
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
|
For two reasons:
1) A 47-story steel-framed skyscraper cannot "topple over" without a very large lateral force being applied. Where would such a force come from? No, such buildings are made of thousands of interconnected parts. When those parts loose crucial support or become misaligned, they fail. One major failure can rapidly lead to others, resulting in collapse. When the building collapses, it falls down, not over, as it must. 2) The damage that brought WTC 7 down was fire in the center interior of the building, not the external damage you see in photos. YouTube is not a reliable guide to forensic engineering.
Quote:
Quote:
Eyewitness accounts of WTC 7 fires Eyewitness accounts of WTC 7 damage Eyewitness accounts of withdrawal and hold back from WTC 7 due to danger |
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard |
|
2nd August 2007, 09:20 PM | #125 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
Mark, I mean Gravy! You're a legend man, I mean the way you prove all of these Conspiracists wrong is making me laugh beyond all reason. I've watched your video about the 9/11 Truthers at Ground Zero: "The Ground Zeros" and I couldn't contain myself. We all know that Les is an idiot and he's always attacking your 1st Amendment. I like how you got him scared on that subject. And that guy in the glasses, I call him "Gilliagan" because in Abby Scotts video he's wearing a "fishing" hat.
I've also seen you debate with Loose Change director Dylan Avery and his "researcher" Jason Bermas on Hardfire. Dylan only had very little to say and not much rebuttal from him. Jason on the other hand is just wrong. They're both wrong! And Dr. James Fetzer! He's another one that got proved wrong by you. Thank god there's people on this earth like you Gravy! |
3rd August 2007, 01:36 AM | #126 |
Muse
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 600
|
That's wrong, a skyscraper *will* topple over unless the damage caused is at the center. If you only blow out one side with explosives in controlled demolition, the building will fall to the side, without a lateral force being applied.
Hence I would expect a building that was severely damaged on one side to topple over, rather than to fall pretty much straight down like the video hints at.
Quote:
The thing is: Yes, temperature will weaken steel. But will the temperature of the fires be enough to weaken it below 1/6th of the original strength? I have not seen any evidence anywhere whatsoever that points at this is what happened. P.S: Got some links on WTC6 burning? |
__________________
Damn me, for I am Troll Skilled above-average and aware of it String Theory Sucks! If you're american and your position is largely reflected by the mainstream media, you are almost certainly wrong. |
|
3rd August 2007, 11:27 AM | #127 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
Hey Dabljuh, do you really want to pi$$ with Mark Roberts (Gravy)? Do you really want to challenge his claims and say he's "wrong"?
Gravy's got links out the wazzoo about everything including WTC6. What links do you got of WTC6 BTW? |
3rd August 2007, 11:32 AM | #128 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 496
|
|
3rd August 2007, 01:52 PM | #129 |
Downsitting Citizen
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
|
I'll reply here, but if you wish to discuss these issues further I ask that you do so in new threads. You will do well to use the forum search feature before making claims that have been discussed here ad nauseum.
First, you do not address the fact that, as I noted above, the worst damage to WTC 7 was caused by the fire, which was in the interior of the building. Next, there are several ways that you could have supported your opinion. 1. You could present an example of a similarly-constructed building toppling for any reason. 2. You could cite engineering texts that support your claim. 3. You could do your own analysis of the structure, damage, and fires. You have done none of these things.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
When you read that report, take note of which truss failed the test. You should also read NCSTAR 1-5B.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1. The collapse did not initiate in the area circled in red below, or 2. If you agree that the collapse did initiate in that area, as NIST's working hypothesis states, why a major failure there would cause the building to topple. Be sure to include the collapse of the east mechanical penthouse in your analysis.
Quote:
See also FEMA 403, chapter 4, and videos shot by Steve Spak. Again, if you wish to continue this discussion, please do so in a new thread, and search the forum and links in my signature to be sure your questions haven't been answered a thousand times. |
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard |
|
3rd August 2007, 03:55 PM | #130 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
Gravy, once again you're knowledge is overwelming and powerful. I salute you my fellow American!
|
3rd August 2007, 04:18 PM | #131 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,448
|
|
3rd August 2007, 05:38 PM | #132 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
I've got so many truther scalps I could make a gorilla suit out of them.
I'm a debunker, just like so many on the streets and the internet. Truthers can go to hell! |
6th August 2007, 08:22 PM | #133 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
|
15th August 2007, 09:59 PM | #135 |
Downsitting Citizen
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
|
|
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard |
|
16th August 2007, 08:56 PM | #136 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 405
|
my pleasure Here is a full text of the Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl study in case it is not included in the press release about the study on your site as well:
http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~astaneh/...per%202003.pdf I think a look at these mechanisms is really important in understanding the demise of building 7, given that the failure originated at the east penthouse, and is likely to have propagated from there. I wish I had more time to really get into them though! |
30th August 2007, 03:45 PM | #137 |
New Blood
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 11
|
Being an ex-truther, I think your websites need some nice videos with lots of quotes and truthers walking around to ominous music. Also, would it kill you to put up a few blog buttons and a countdown timer of some sort?
I'm not sure your movement is going to be very good.. |
31st August 2007, 02:56 PM | #138 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,293
|
|
__________________
“If every trace of any single religion were wiped out again and nothing was passed on, it would never be created exactly that way again. If all of science were wiped out, it would still be true and someone would find a way to figure it out again." - Penn Jillette in God, No! |
|
2nd September 2007, 04:01 AM | #139 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
A fantastic amount of research details there Gravy, but it's not what is there that is interesting, more like what is NOT there. How about a detailed explanation of Condoleeza Rice's comments after 9/11? You can make all the sand-castles you like, but when the tide comes in , they 'll all be washed away. All that vast researching shows to me , is you have about as much of a life as the average "twoofer" away from this subject!
|
2nd September 2007, 04:13 AM | #140 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
Remember - 'Motive' and 'Opportunity' are the usual starting points in a criminal investigation; and only someone devoted to maintaining the status quo would deny that some members of the current administration had each of those factors!
p.s. How was your trip to Barbados, or wherever it was you were going the other night? |
2nd September 2007, 05:52 AM | #141 |
Downsitting Citizen
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
|
I don't make sand castles. I present facts. You want me to do your work for you? Sorry. You have a claim? You do the homework and write your report. Whining on the internet will never advance your claims.
Quote:
Why not gather evidence instead of idly speculating and arguing from ignorance? Are you afraid of what you'll find? I look forward to reading the results of your investigation.
Quote:
Think I'm wrong? Then tell me who you have evidence against that allows you to make a charge of complicity to mass murder, and present your evidence. Right now. Nothing? I thought not. Okay, please explain which parts of the 9/11 terrorist plot and attack would require U.S. government involvement. You may want to read the 9/11 Commission report before you try to tackle this one.
Quote:
|
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard |
|
2nd September 2007, 05:57 AM | #142 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
Look, you're the "investigator", I'm just a critic. You do your work, I'll do mine. When the information comes in, I'll be back to you.
Don't forget your sun-cream. |
2nd September 2007, 06:01 AM | #143 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
Only a fool would make this claim;
"Only a fool would apologize for terrorists while making accusations of mass murder against others that aren't supported by a single shred of evidence." |
2nd September 2007, 06:06 AM | #144 | ||||
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
And stop being so righteously indignant
|
||||
2nd September 2007, 06:09 AM | #145 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
|
|
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts) |
|
2nd September 2007, 06:16 AM | #146 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
As long as he doesn't refer to me as a fool Redibis, we'll be fine!
|
2nd September 2007, 06:23 AM | #147 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
|
|
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts) |
|
2nd September 2007, 06:25 AM | #148 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
Then enlighten me!
|
2nd September 2007, 06:48 AM | #149 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
|
3rd September 2007, 09:55 AM | #150 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
I've noticed that most of the objections to even the slightest possibility of any conspiracy accusations being likely, is the matter of complicity. "How dare you imply that G.W. could be involved in such a heinous crime!", "So, the entire administration are murderers are they?", etc, ad nauseum. But, consider (Now you need an open mind to do this properly, but don't be scared; it can actually be a quite liberating experience.) the possibility that Bush is simply the 'puppet-master's' head, and the military, etc. relate to different parts of the body. Do you not want to know who has his, or her hand up your governments arse? Because I WOULD, and do. Forget quibbling over the cost of an entirely independent, full inquiry,i.e. Done by a different country, into the events a month either side of September the 11th, 2001. The outcome either way would be the best money your country has ever spent. If it concludes that the initial inquiry was correct, and the only fault of your government was to underestimate 'the enemy', then the government is absolved of any involvement, and you all can shout, "Told ya so!" until you are hoarse.
Does that not seem like a reasonable request or demand, when the future of "Democracy" is at stake? |
3rd September 2007, 10:29 AM | #151 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
|
|
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win." |
|
3rd September 2007, 10:34 AM | #152 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
|
3rd September 2007, 10:38 AM | #153 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
|
This is not a thread for discussion.
|
3rd September 2007, 10:51 AM | #154 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 190
|
|
3rd September 2007, 10:52 AM | #155 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
|
Start a thread.
|
5th September 2007, 10:27 AM | #156 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,219
|
Thanks, Gravy.
I was visiting a friend of mine yesterday, and when I got ther,e he was watching some truther videos with his roommate. When he asked me what I thought of Alex Jones, I told him. "He's a liar, and there's no evidence to support anything he says." Even when Alex Jones quotes a "zombie survey" as saying that 92% of New Yorkers "agree with us" and the next scene in the truther movie showed results of 50% (probably a bogus survey in any case) he stuck to his conspiracy theory. "You're insulting my intelligence," he said. "No, I'm not. I'm telling you there's not a shred of evidence to support his clams. Look, I'd believe him if he had evidence. What would it take to change your mind?" "Nothing! Nothing can change my mind!" Oi. Thanks, Gravy. Sometimes, however, facts are of no use. |
5th September 2007, 04:39 PM | #157 |
Downsitting Citizen
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
|
You should feel good for speaking up. Your friend may come around eventually, remember your words, and not be so quick to jump on the woo wagon next time.
Facts are always useful, if only as a defense in your trial for wanton dope-slapping. |
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard |
|
5th September 2007, 05:53 PM | #158 |
Scholar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 48
|
Cool.
Thanks for your work. |
6th September 2007, 06:47 PM | #159 |
New Blood
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 24
|
Just wondering any chance of a ground zeros part 2? Also make sure you are there on sept 11 because someone needs to be there so they don't get there "facts" across. Or better yet just send mongo!
|
10th September 2007, 10:08 PM | #160 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 405
|
Some additional engineering resources for WTC bibliography
Use of High-Efficiency Energy Absorbing Device to Arrest Progressive Collapse of Tall Building Qing Zhou and T. X. Yu Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130, 1177 (2004)
Recent advances in fire–structure analysis Fire Safety Journal, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 20 August 2007, Dat Duthinh, Kevin McGrattan and Abed Khaskia Coupled fire dynamics and thermal response of complex building structures Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, Volume 30, Issue 2, January 2005, Pages 2255-2262 Kuldeep Prasad and Howard R. Baum Prasad and Baum is somewhat redundant since it is used directly in NCSTAR1-5F and G, but it is worth reading nonetheless. and also: http://nistreview.org/WTC7-COLLAPSE-SCHEUERMAN.pdf sorry if any of these are repeats, I tried to find new sources that I had found personally useful. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|