IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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 15th February 2013, 07:45 AM   #441
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
Has anyone pointed out to yankee (who obviously has me on ignore) that the steel doesn't have to be "cut" by the wings? The force only has to break the weak points, not slice it like salami.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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 15th February 2013, 09:42 AM   #442
thedopefishlives
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
Has anyone pointed out to yankee (who obviously has me on ignore) that the steel doesn't have to be "cut" by the wings? The force only has to break the weak points, not slice it like salami.
What weak points? Steel is obviously harder than aluminum, therefore inside job.
thedopefishlives 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 15th February 2013, 10:46 AM   #443
Trifikas
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 301
So, wait...

Why worry about the Density of the objects? Force = MASS x Acceleration, not Density X whatever. For the support to resist the impact, it has to accelerate (well, decelerate. not important.) the plane down to 0 m/s over the time of the impact. The ammount of force it applies to the Plane, the support has to resist as well. For every action, equal and opposite reaction. so regardless of the relative strength of the materials, the same force applies to both objects in the collision.
Trifikas 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 15th February 2013, 10:52 AM   #444
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by Trifikas View Post
So, wait...

Why worry about the Density of the objects? Force = MASS x Acceleration, not Density X whatever. For the support to resist the impact, it has to accelerate (well, decelerate. not important.) the plane down to 0 m/s over the time of the impact. The ammount of force it applies to the Plane, the support has to resist as well. For every action, equal and opposite reaction. so regardless of the relative strength of the materials, the same force applies to both objects in the collision.
The amount of time during the impact varies with the density of the objects colliding. So you have the same average force, but a less dense object will spread that over a slightly longer time because the object is larger per unit mass.

However, you don't have to look far to see that something still happens. Tim McVeigh destroyed half a building with high velocity air.

I always thought the confusion would go away if collisions could be viewed at the atomic level. Atoms of aluminum and iron hitting each other gives a better picture for me. Neither type of atom is "soft."

Last edited by marplots; 15th February 2013 at 10:54 AM.
marplots 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 15th February 2013, 10:53 AM   #445
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
Has anyone pointed out to yankee (who obviously has me on ignore) that the steel doesn't have to be "cut" by the wings? The force only has to break the weak points, not slice it like salami.
I pointed that out to him.

ETA: it's on the No Planer Calls for Scientific Study thread.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles

Last edited by LSSBB; 15th February 2013 at 10:55 AM.
LSSBB 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 15th February 2013, 04:20 PM   #446
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redwood

Steve, please enlighten poor ignoramuses such as AJM and me how a putative lack of a Dun & Bradstreet rating shows that firms such as Union Bank of California, Oppenheimer Funds, or AT&T did not have actual offices in the Twin Towers. You were the one who brought it up, remember?

Obviously, if it proves these firms don't really exist, you win. If they do exist, and you can't explain how a lack of a Dun & Bradstreet listing proves they didn't have offices in the Twin Towers, you can ask your soulmate "Steve WarRan" to explain it for you.

Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
Brilliant. We share the same first name, so we're obviously the same person. I linked to a document of his, so now I espouse everything he's ever written and should answer for his work because, after all, we're named Steve.
Steve, I didn't say you and "Steve WarRan" were one and the same person. If you aren't, then you have found a soulmate. You are both at the apex of trutherism, posting Mt. Everest-sized non-sequiturs. Any other gibberish that "Steve WarRan" may have written is irrelevant. What is relevant is the particular piece of gibberish that you freely and willingly quoted. Now will you finally explain to us how does a Dun and Bradstreet listing relate to whether or not a firm had offices in the Twin Towers?, or ask your soulmate to explain it for you, or admit that the whole thing is nonsense?

Like other truthers, you make yourself look foolish by never backing down, never admitting you made a mistake. If you admit that the article by "Steve WarRan" is a giant manure pile, and that it was foolish to cite it, you will not lose one shred of credibility.
Redwood 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 15th February 2013, 06:20 PM   #447
Animal
Master Poster
 
Animal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
you will not lose one shred of credibility.
It is difficult to lose something that one never had
Animal 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 15th February 2013, 06:33 PM   #448
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redwood
you will not lose one shred of credibility.
Originally Posted by Animal View Post
It is difficult to lose something that one never had
In which case, it's still a break-even!
Redwood 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 15th February 2013, 06:37 PM   #449
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
Steve, I didn't say you and "Steve WarRan" were one and the same person. If you aren't, then you have found a soulmate. You are both at the apex of trutherism, posting Mt. Everest-sized non-sequiturs. Any other gibberish that "Steve WarRan" may have written is irrelevant. What is relevant is the particular piece of gibberish that you freely and willingly quoted. Now will you finally explain to us how does a Dun and Bradstreet listing relate to whether or not a firm had offices in the Twin Towers?, or ask your soulmate to explain it for you, or admit that the whole thing is nonsense?

Like other truthers, you make yourself look foolish by never backing down, never admitting you made a mistake. If you admit that the article by "Steve WarRan" is a giant manure pile, and that it was foolish to cite it, you will not lose one shred of credibility.

I have already admitted several mistakes and this is another. I stand corrected.
yankee451 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 15th February 2013, 06:38 PM   #450
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
I pointed that out to him.

ETA: it's on the No Planer Calls for Scientific Study thread.
When does the building get to break the weak points on the jet.
yankee451 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 15th February 2013, 06:58 PM   #451
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
TJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,899
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
I have already admitted several mistakes and this is another. I stand corrected.

TJM 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 15th February 2013, 07:01 PM   #452
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
When does the building get to break the weak points on the jet.
The moment it hits, parts at a time. Not 100% broken, that took a few whacks as it went through. Momentum carries all of it through anyway, whether all of the parts of the plane are connected or not.

You do understand momentum, don't you? I hope you don't go around cutting in front of trucks on the highway.

Let's say an iceball hits a wide mesh, and the ice is hard enough to bend and break some of the wires. The iceball breaks in the process though. Would the iceball not go through the mesh, or would the pieces continue on past? What if the iceball was hollow in some places, but hard and moving really fast. The pieces would still go through the mesh, if the iceball was moving fast enough.

Hopefully you can understand the metaphor above, and not get all hung up on ice vs. Mesh strength, etc. It's really a question of energy vs. Shear strength. Enough energy, the column shears. What is left of the wing doesn't stop there. If there is remaining energy, it keeps going, until all of it is spent. At some point it isn't a whole plane, it's fragments with their own energy. Anything left goes shooting out the other side of the building.

And that matches what video, witnesses and models have all shown. You know, that pesky evidence you want to go away. Real people who saw real things. Real people who's remains were found afterwards, who were on the planes. Real plane parts, that match the plane inventory and have radar data tracking them all the way back to their point of origin.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 15th February 2013, 07:17 PM   #453
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
It's good to know you guys are working so hard to keep me honest, I'm not in this game to be right, but to learn the truth and I appreciate your perspectives. This is the closest thing to a peer review I am going to get, so thank you.

So back to the really hot fires.

Rumors of fires so intense they could melt steel were started by the FDNY, NYPD, FEMA, etc. and were continued by the Truth Movement. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why they would all be singing the same song. The theme was the same everywhere for the first few years, everyone was talking about the molten steel, the dust, the missing debris.

Quote:
everything from molten steel beams to human remains
http://waste360.com/mag/waste_dday_ny_sanitation
These rumors came from the authorities, as seeen in this video:
http://911conspiracy.wordpress.com/2...atures-at-wtc/

The media, the authorities, and the "Truth Movement" all singing the same tune until today when virtually everyone takes for granted the towers fell because of really hot fires. But there weren't any.

I may have fallen for Steve WarRan's false lead about Dun and Bradstreet, but that doesn't mean the buildings were fully occupied, it just means I need to be more careful. I've been corrected on a few things already, so don't stop now.

If the buildings were fully occupied, where are the floors to the left and right of the hole? Where is the raging inferno of office material on the nonexistent floors?, and even if a jet could do such a thing, in order to bend the panels like that, they couldn't have been backed by three acres of concrete each. I stand corrected on Dun and Bradstreet. Where are the floors?


Last edited by yankee451; 15th February 2013 at 08:58 PM.
yankee451 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 15th February 2013, 09:14 PM   #454
fess
Graduate Poster
 
fess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
The media, the authorities, and the "Truth Movement" all singing the same tune until today when virtually everyone takes for granted the towers fell because of really hot fires. But there weren't any.
Really?




Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
If the buildings were fully occupied, where are the floors to the left and right of the hole? Where is the raging inferno of office material on the nonexistent floors?, and even if a jet could do such a thing, in order to bend the panels like that, they couldn't have been backed by three acres of concrete each. I stand corrected on Dun and Bradstreet. Where are the floors?

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...ng-floors-.jpg
The lightweight flooring material and lightweight trusses were destroyed during the impact
__________________
My boss told me to stop procrastinating. I think I will… tomorrow.
fess 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 15th February 2013, 11:12 PM   #455
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by fess View Post
Really?
http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f...NorthTower.jpg

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f...C_on_fire9.jpg



The lightweight flooring material and lightweight trusses were destroyed during the impact
The trusses went wall to core.

The jet's fuselage was about 17 feet wide and after the cockpit was creamed against the steel the hollow tube of the fuselage and it's contents was hardly a battering ram, and even if it was it was only 17 feet wide. And hollow.

So not only does the hollow fuselage damage the dense steel (is it the air pressure inside the cabin that gives it density?), it also damages an area twice its diameter and wipes out three acres of concrete, even thought it woudn't have touched most of the trusses.

There are no bodies hanging in the hole, no desks piled up, no filing cabinets or cubicles, no doors or office partitions, or any window coverings visible in the hole. Nothing but building and nothing that could be identified as a truss or a concrete floor slab.

It's remarkable how powerful your jet is, truly. It's amazing we spend a million dollars a pop on missiles when just a few 767s could have wiped out Tripoli.
yankee451 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 15th February 2013, 11:16 PM   #456
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
There are no bodies hanging in the hole, no desks piled up, no filing cabinets or cubicles, no doors or office partitions, or any window coverings visible in the hole. Nothing but building and nothing that could be identified as a truss or a concrete floor slab.
Why should there have been? A plane just bulldozed it's way in.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 15th February 2013, 11:23 PM   #457
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Why should there have been? A plane just bulldozed it's way in.
A bulldozer would have had better luck but even it wouldn't have wiped out a whole floor. Trusses were parallel to the impact trajectory and the jet wasn't a bulldozer, it was well, a hollow tube 17 feet wide. You saying the first class passengers wiped out the concrete?

Last edited by yankee451; 15th February 2013 at 11:24 PM.
yankee451 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 15th February 2013, 11:31 PM   #458
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
The floors were lightweight concrete poured over a very lightweight truss system. That they would be destroyed is not even something you can pretend away.


Oh and where did you get this idea about the FDNY talking about molten steel?
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Zingiber Officinale

Travis 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 15th February 2013, 11:43 PM   #459
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
The floors were lightweight concrete poured over a very lightweight truss system. That they would be destroyed is not even something you can pretend away.


Oh and where did you get this idea about the FDNY talking about molten steel?
Hoo hoo, molten steel.

12 Threads on the subject:

Molten Steel VS Molten metal at GZ....
So there was melted steel
Cotton melts steel!
Today's XKCD: Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel
Debris removal specialist: Richard riggs saw melted beams, molten steel
Merged: Molten metal observations
Truthers: Why didn't the Hindenburg's steel melt?
Is a Kerosene blaze hot enough to melt steel?
Split Thread: Molten steel at the WTC towers
Motlen Steel - Continuation
Molten Steel
Melting steel

Amount of material analyzed in a lab and determined to be molten steel: 0
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 15th February 2013, 11:54 PM   #460
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
The floors were lightweight concrete poured over a very lightweight truss system. That they would be destroyed is not even something you can pretend away.


Oh and where did you get this idea about the FDNY talking about molten steel?
They were allegedly a lot of things except 'there'.

I am well-versed with the trusses, the dampers and the alleged concrete. They were more than just weight bearing trusses they, were designed to create a diaphram to withstand lateral wind shear equivalent to the impact of an ocean freighter. They kept the tower walls stiff and square. The trusses and concrete floors not damaged by the impact would have stayed-put. And before the big wall panels could have been pushed in like that, the three floors behind it had to have been removed.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...back-small.jpg

Edited by LashL:  Changed over-sized image to regular link. Please don't post over-sized images in-thread as they mess with the formatting of the thread.


The FDNY were among those who gave us the molten steel:

Quote:
You'd get down below and you'd see molten steel, molten steel, running down the channel rails, like you're in a foundry, like lava
Etienne Sauret - Documentary "Collateral Damages" - FDNY Captain Philip Ruvolo
Quote:
"Even before the twin towers of the World Trade Center fell, Sarah Atlas and her canine partner, Anna, a black-faced German shepherd, were deployed by New Jersey’s Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue. By the end of the day on September 11, they were at Ground Zero, where they stayed for ten days in a fruitless search for survivors.

“The [NYFD] people who called us had been killed,” Atlas considered as she surveyed the tons and acres of wreckage. “Nobody’s going to be alive.” Fires burned and molten steel flowed in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet."

Penn Arts & Sciences

People turned to dust:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnnXT...layer_embedded

All BS.

Last edited by LashL; 16th February 2013 at 12:56 PM.
yankee451 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 15th February 2013, 11:57 PM   #461
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Hoo hoo, molten steel.

12 Threads on the subject:

Molten Steel VS Molten metal at GZ....
So there was melted steel
Cotton melts steel!
Today's XKCD: Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel
Debris removal specialist: Richard riggs saw melted beams, molten steel
Merged: Molten metal observations
Truthers: Why didn't the Hindenburg's steel melt?
Is a Kerosene blaze hot enough to melt steel?
Split Thread: Molten steel at the WTC towers
Motlen Steel - Continuation
Molten Steel
Melting steel

Amount of material analyzed in a lab and determined to be molten steel: 0
Yep, that's the point. It's a bunch of hogwash - a rumor started by the authorities over here, but denied by the authorities over there, but confusing everyone in between. Divide and conquer you know.
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 12:00 AM   #462
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
Yep, that's the point. It's a bunch of hogwash - a rumor started by the authorities over here, but denied by the authorities over there, but confusing everyone in between. Divide and conquer you know.
Authorities, or untrained eyewitnesses? Name the authorities who "started" these rumors.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 16th February 2013, 12:01 AM   #463
Scott Sommers
Illuminator
 
Scott Sommers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,866
I keep saying this,
Wierzbicki, T. and Teng, X. (2003). “How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center.” J. of Impact Enrg. 28, pp.601–625.

Oystein has kindly provided a summary of the article here.
If you want a full copy of the paper, send me your e-mail and I will send it to you.
__________________
See my blog,
Wonders of the Invisible World

Last edited by Scott Sommers; 16th February 2013 at 12:05 AM.
Scott Sommers 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 16th February 2013, 12:14 AM   #464
fess
Graduate Poster
 
fess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
The trusses went wall to core.

The jet's fuselage was about 17 feet wide and after the cockpit was creamed against the steel the hollow tube of the fuselage and it's contents was hardly a battering ram, and even if it was it was only 17 feet wide. And hollow.

So not only does the hollow fuselage damage the dense steel (is it the air pressure inside the cabin that gives it density?), it also damages an area twice its diameter and wipes out three acres of concrete, even thought it woudn't have touched most of the trusses.

There are no bodies hanging in the hole, no desks piled up, no filing cabinets or cubicles, no doors or office partitions, or any window coverings visible in the hole. Nothing but building and nothing that could be identified as a truss or a concrete floor slab.

It's remarkable how powerful your jet is, truly. It's amazing we spend a million dollars a pop on missiles when just a few 767s could have wiped out Tripoli.
The trusses? Yes they did go from the exterior “wall” to the core. And you seem to forget that they were lightweight trusses. And how were they anchored?

Still trying to hold onto the idea that the fuselage of an airliner is hollow? You didn’t learn much from your bush pilot buddies did you?

You do realize that it took 1/3rd of a second for the aircraft to obliterate the area where it impacted don’t you? That’s simple math that even you should be able to do. But yet you think desks should be piled up against the wall, and maybe a few employees sitting around having coffee. And you have the nerve to call other people fools?
__________________
My boss told me to stop procrastinating. I think I will… tomorrow.

Last edited by fess; 16th February 2013 at 12:24 AM.
fess 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 16th February 2013, 12:31 AM   #465
fess
Graduate Poster
 
fess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
They were allegedly a lot of things except 'there'.

I am well-versed with the trusses, the dampers and the alleged concrete. They were more than just weight bearing trusses they, were designed to create a diaphram to withstand lateral wind shear equivalent to the impact of an ocean freighter. They kept the tower walls stiff and square. The trusses and concrete floors not damaged by the impact would have stayed-put. And before the big wall panels could have been pushed in like that, the three floors behind it had to have been removed.
I never took a class on structural engineering, but, I don’t have to be structural engineer to know that this is a pile of bunk.

You do know that the building would sway in a stiff wind… don’t you?
__________________
My boss told me to stop procrastinating. I think I will… tomorrow.
fess 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 16th February 2013, 12:43 AM   #466
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by fess View Post
No trusses? No wonder the floors weren’t there.

Still trying to hold onto the idea that the fuselage of an airliner is hollow? You didn’t learn much from your bush pilot buddies did you?

You do realize that it took 1/3rd of a second for the aircraft to obliterate the area where it impacted don’t you? That’s simple math that even you should be able to do. But yet you think desks should be piled up against the wall, and maybe a few employees sitting around having coffee. And you have the nerve to call other people fools?
Looks pretty hollow to me.

That 1/3 of a second won't mean much after the cockpit is wiped out on impact and the rest of the fuselage tube walls acting like a long cookie cutter of thin aluminum. You guys make it sound like the air in the cabin makes the jet a battering ram.


Hollow Inside

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...-jet-crash.png


Edited by LashL:  Changed oversized image to link, as overly large images mess with the formatting of the thread.


http://www.airliners.net/photo/South...8H4/2137913/L/

It should have been going the speed of sound, that would have obliterated that blast barrier, eh?

Hollow and No Match Concrete.

Last edited by LashL; 16th February 2013 at 12:57 PM.
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 12:46 AM   #467
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by fess View Post
I never took a class on structural engineering, but, I don’t have to be structural engineer to know that this is a pile of bunk.

You do know that the building would sway in a stiff wind… don’t you?

They swayed 10 feet in the breeze. On very windy days they couldn't run the freight elevators because the cables would rub against the walls.

I'm referring to the floors around the impact point.

If you were tasked with faking a jet crash, wouldn't you prep the site?
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 12:53 AM   #468
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Authorities, or untrained eyewitnesses? Name the authorities who "started" these rumors.
Name the untrained witnesses able to create a police museum exhibit in the largest city in the country. I can also name a dozen or so newspaper and television accounts of the same hogwash.

You guys want to wave it all off as "too big" and someone would talk with a conspiracy of this size;, but to whom would they talk? You deny the proof right before your eyes. It's really quite simple; this is the big lie. Look around, the evidence is everywhere, just look at the last 11 years of bloodshed. This barbarism must stop, and it all begins with speaking the truth.

Last edited by yankee451; 16th February 2013 at 01:05 AM.
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 01:20 AM   #469
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by fess View Post
I never took a class on structural engineering, but, I don’t have to be structural engineer to know that this is a pile of bunk.

You do know that the building would sway in a stiff wind… don’t you?
I have already said the building would sway, and it did according to the books I've ready, quite a bit.

What's your beef? You can't do your thinking until you have an expert tell you what to think? You can't envision what would happen to the hollow aluminum jet wing/fuselage if it struck an acre of laterally braced concrete sideways? It wouldn't look anything LIKE what the NIST/MIT/RMackey want you to think, that's for sure. That's why they didn't use a jet and in order to bend the colunns in, they had to remove some floors.

Maybe you should take a class, maybe then you could picture how few options they had for the destruction of these towers.
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 01:39 AM   #470
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by Scott Sommers View Post
I keep saying this,
Wierzbicki, T. and Teng, X. (2003). “How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center.” J. of Impact Enrg. 28, pp.601–625.

Oystein has kindly provided a summary of the article here.
If you want a full copy of the paper, send me your e-mail and I will send it to you.
I have already commented on the obviously sleazy-propaganda piece here.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...aft-Impact.pdf

Their language is ambiguous and emotional. They take up all the aluminum in the wing and roll it into a big ball of play-doh, but even though the large bulk of a wing's mass is between the fuselage and the engine, they redistributed it equally along the length of their model wing. They didn't model it like real a wing is constructed, they made a big, thick hollow machete for the sake of modeling ease. They then neglected to do the same favor for the exterior walls, once again modeling them as square boxes. They then say they can't calculate the truss system so they calculated it as a steel plate. Seriously, this passes as science? They began with a predetirmined destination and built a math problem as the vehicle to take them there.

They are lying.

Last edited by yankee451; 16th February 2013 at 02:28 AM.
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 02:16 AM   #471
threadworm
Graduate Poster
 
threadworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,830
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
The trusses went wall to core.

The jet's fuselage was about 17 feet wide and after the cockpit was creamed against the steel the hollow tube of the fuselage and it's contents was hardly a battering ram, and even if it was it was only 17 feet wide. And hollow.
And 175 tonnes.

Quote:

So not only does the hollow fuselage damage the dense steel (is it the air pressure inside the cabin that gives it density?), it also damages an area twice its diameter and wipes out three acres of concrete, even thought it woudn't have touched most of the trusses.
175 tonnes

Quote:
There are no bodies hanging in the hole, no desks piled up, no filing cabinets or cubicles, no doors or office partitions, or any window coverings visible in the hole. Nothing but building and nothing that could be identified as a truss or a concrete floor slab.
It's dark in there. You can't see what's present any more than we can. Does everything disappear when you close your eyes? Does 175 tonnes of jet airliner travelling at high speed not suggest material might have been shoved a little inwards? Some of that building is floor - you've drawn lines using it.

Quote:
It's remarkable how powerful your jet is, truly. It's amazing we spend a million dollars a pop on missiles when just a few 767s could have wiped out Tripoli.
175 tonnes.

Also, your claim about a lack of intense fire is pretty feeble when you look at the bigger picture. I was altering the levels on a higher res image to see if you could make out anything in the interior. The image I used contains slightly more than yours. I've deliberately left it level adjusted.

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4082/adjustedpo.jpg

Edited by LashL:  Changed oversized image to link, as overly large images mess with the fomatting of the thread.




So yes, no evidence of fire, providing you crop out all of the smoke and flames. The red square is not mine, and is picking out what is claimed to be a woman.

Maybe all these people climbed up long ladders on cue, willing victims for the sacrifice. These are the people you are dishonouring with your crackpot nonsense.

__________________
Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to.

**************************

Apollo Hoax Debunked

Last edited by LashL; 16th February 2013 at 12:58 PM.
threadworm 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 16th February 2013, 02:27 AM   #472
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by threadworm View Post
And 175 tonnes.



175 tonnes



It's dark in there. You can't see what's present any more than we can. Does everything disappear when you close your eyes? Does 175 tonnes of jet airliner travelling at high speed not suggest material might have been shoved a little inwards? Some of that building is floor - you've drawn lines using it.



175 tonnes.

Also, your claim about a lack of intense fire is pretty feeble when you look at the bigger picture. I was altering the levels on a higher res image to see if you could make out anything in the interior. The image I used contains slightly more than yours. I've deliberately left it level adjusted.

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4082/adjustedpo.jpg

So yes, no evidence of fire, providing you crop out all of the smoke and flames. The red square is not mine, and is picking out what is claimed to be a woman.

Maybe all these people climbed up long ladders on cue, willing victims for the sacrifice. These are the people you are dishonouring with your crackpot nonsense.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...r_1986818c.jpg
Maybe they pulled the 300 lb glass panes out with chewing gum.
yankee451 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 16th February 2013, 03:37 AM   #473
BangBang
Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 234
Just when you think Truthers couldn't get anymore disgusting. Besides that, you didn't address any of the post. Why not?
BangBang 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 16th February 2013, 04:54 AM   #474
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
They were allegedly a lot of things except 'there'.

I am well-versed with the trusses, the dampers and the alleged concrete. They were more than just weight bearing trusses they, were designed to create a diaphram to withstand lateral wind shear equivalent to the impact of an ocean freighter. They kept the tower walls stiff and square. The trusses and concrete floors not damaged by the impact would have stayed-put. And before the big wall panels could have been pushed in like that, the three floors behind it had to have been removed.
Have you ever seen a picture of the floor trusses? If you had then you'd know they were not very substantial.

Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
The FDNY were among those who gave us the molten steel:
Quote:
You'd get down below and you'd see molten steel, molten steel, running down the channel rails, like you're in a foundry, like lava
Etienne Sauret - Documentary "Collateral Damages" - FDNY Captain Philip Ruvolo
Hmm, that's interesting. Do you think that the FDNY has the experience and equipment necessary to tell if anything molten is, in fact, steel? Because there's a big difference and people often simply substitute "steel" as a colloquialism for "metal."

But, that's not really important. I once created a thread here where I asked for Truthers to explain why molten steel would be important. No one ever did this. Would you care to be the first?

Why would molten steel be important yankee451?
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Zingiber Officinale

Travis 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 16th February 2013, 07:06 AM   #475
Animal
Master Poster
 
Animal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
They were allegedly a lot of things except 'there'.

I am well-versed with the trusses, the dampers and the alleged concrete. They were more than just weight bearing trusses they, were designed to create a diaphram to withstand lateral wind shear equivalent to the impact of an ocean freighter. They kept the tower walls stiff and square. The trusses and concrete floors not damaged by the impact would have stayed-put. And before the big wall panels could have been pushed in like that, the three floors behind it had to have been removed.
If you were so "well versed" you would not post such drivel. (Wind shear = impact of ocean freighter...LMAO)
Towers stiff? LMAO


Quote:
The FDNY were among those who gave us the molten steel:
So identify which member of the FDNY is trained in metallurgy.


Quote:
All BS.
You claims......yes I agree, they are B.S.
Animal 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 16th February 2013, 08:13 AM   #476
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
So not only does the hollow fuselage damage the dense steel (is it the air pressure inside the cabin that gives it density?), it also damages an area twice its diameter and wipes out three acres of concrete, even thought it woudn't have touched most of the trusses.
Setting aside the obvious lie about the concrete. What the hell does this (bold) even mean?

Yes, the air does increase the density because it has mass, so it would also contribute to the momentum (along with everything else on the plane). Is this not obvious?

You ask the oddest things for someone that claims to understand physics.
__________________
"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; 16th February 2013 at 08:16 AM.
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 16th February 2013, 08:41 AM   #477
swright777
Muse
 
swright777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 897
Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
Looks pretty hollow to me.

That 1/3 of a second won't mean much after the cockpit is wiped out on impact and the rest of the fuselage tube walls acting like a long cookie cutter of thin aluminum. You guys make it sound like the air in the cabin makes the jet a battering ram.


Hollow Inside

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uplo...-jet-crash.png

http://www.airliners.net/photo/South...8H4/2137913/L/

It should have been going the speed of sound, that would have obliterated that blast barrier, eh?

Hollow and No Match Concrete.
Either your eyes are broken or your definition of hollow and mine are different. The pictures you posted did not show a hollow fuselage. Don't you see all that stuff inside of it? Do you not know what hollow means?
swright777 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 16th February 2013, 09:00 AM   #478
Ape of Good Hope
Graduate Poster
 
Ape of Good Hope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,502
Originally Posted by swright777 View Post
Either your eyes are broken or your definition of hollow and mine are different. The pictures you posted did not show a hollow fuselage. Don't you see all that stuff inside of it? Do you not know what hollow means?


Steve won't see this as he has me on ignore, but I'll take a stab at it...


Hollow - empty; without contents; hence, without pith or substance; fruitless; worthless: as, a hollow victory; a hollow argument.

Example:

Steve's argument that missiles were used on 9/11 is a hollow argument.

Last edited by Ape of Good Hope; 16th February 2013 at 09:02 AM. Reason: Sspellling
Ape of Good Hope 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 16th February 2013, 09:40 AM   #479
swright777
Muse
 
swright777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 897
Originally Posted by Ape of Good Hope View Post
Steve won't see this as he has me on ignore, but I'll take a stab at it...


Hollow - empty; without contents; hence, without pith or substance; fruitless; worthless: as, a hollow victory; a hollow argument.

Example:

Steve's argument that missiles were used on 9/11 is a hollow argument.
So that's why Steve keeps using that word. The fuselage and wings weren't hollow, his arguments were. I hope nobody ever mistakes me for him just because we share the same first name.
swright777 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 16th February 2013, 10:05 AM   #480
yankee451
Master Poster
 
yankee451's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,794
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
Have you ever seen a picture of the floor trusses? If you had then you'd know they were not very substantial.



Hmm, that's interesting. Do you think that the FDNY has the experience and equipment necessary to tell if anything molten is, in fact, steel? Because there's a big difference and people often simply substitute "steel" as a colloquialism for "metal."

But, that's not really important. I once created a thread here where I asked for Truthers to explain why molten steel would be important. No one ever did this. Would you care to be the first?

Why would molten steel be important yankee451?
You are very willing to forgive people who began rumors that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

The reason the molten steel lie is significant is because it isn't just an isolated indiscretion. When FEMA, NASA, the USGS, the FDNY and the NYPD as well as dozens of media outlets AND the ironically-named 9/11 Truth Movement ALL sing the same tune and that tune is a blatant lie, it takes a gigantic leap of faith to keep telling yourself it was all an accident.

Talk about a preponderence of evidence!
yankee451 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

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 04:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.