The Heiwa Challenge

Heiwa · 28th March 2009, 01:16 PM

The Heiwa Challenge

It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it!

Conditions:

1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size!
2. The structure should be more or less identical from h = 0 to h = h, e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements may be reinforced or made a little stronger, if required. Connections between elements should be similar throughout.
3. It is recognized that the structure may be a little higher stressed at h=0 than h=h due to uniform density, elements, etc.
4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections between elements cannot rely solely on friction.
5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure.
6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C.
7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A.
8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test).
9. In order to easily repeat the test/challenge drop height should be <1.1 h, i.e. C can only be dropped from 2h above ground on A that is 0.9 h high.
10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other after test, i.e. drop by part C on A.

Have a try! I look forward to your structures!

Heiwa

240-185 · 28th March 2009, 01:19 PM

And you think we should bother to prove you're a fallacious engineer?

A W Smith · 28th March 2009, 01:25 PM

Odd that none of his previous modeling examples, lemons, sponges, pizza boxes, met any of those conditions.

Quote:

Björkman claims that no planes hit the Twin Towers or the Pentagon or crashed near Shanksville, which makes him a rarity even among the most delusional "truthers": a quadruple no-planer.
Björkman claims that all evidence of the aircraft impacts is fake and all witness accounts are invalid. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again.
Björkman claims that if 30 stories of one of the Twin Towers was dropped on the lower 80 stories from a height of two miles, it would bounce off without damaging the lower portion. And again.
Björkman says a Tower wouldn't be destroyed if a 60-million-pound block of ice was dropped on it, then denies making that claim.
Björkman claims that all photo and video evidence showing severe fires and structural failure in the WTC buildings is fake. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again.
Björkman claims that WTC 7 was demolished by a vacuum.
Björkman believes that the authors of the NIST WTC reports don't exist.
Björkman believes that steel structures are indestructible, even by nuclear weapons. And again. And again. However, Björkman also believes that 16,500-22,000 lbs of high explosives may have been used to demolish each Twin Tower...with no detectable detonations.
Björkman is an engineer who believes that weight = mass. No, really.
Björkman believes his house would survive an asteroid impact.
Björkman again attempts to revise the laws of physics.
Björkman says a bathroom scale will register the same weight whether you stand on it or jump on it.
Björkman says the Twin Tower fires were "minor office fires."
Björkman makes the egregiously false claim that the FDNY said it could handle the fires in the Towers.
Björkman believes that columns become stronger when their supports are removed.
Björkman believes that the structures of the Twin Towers were comparable to cheese, pizza boxes, match boxes, rubber balls, sponges, a bicycle running into a wall, a child jumping on a bed, a tower of sushi, and a tower of lemons.

Lennart Hyland · 28th March 2009, 01:40 PM

Heiwa: The chief structural engineer of WTC, Leslie Robertson, doesnt agree with you. What do you think of him? Is the thousands of engineers agree with the NIST report just completly wrong?

And how come you still cant find a single engineer agreeing with you?

Mr.Herbert · 28th March 2009, 01:45 PM

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Notice after the subject starts to lean, it does not "topple over the side?"

What do i win?

Baylor · 28th March 2009, 01:45 PM

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Bobert · 28th March 2009, 01:55 PM

Heiwa,
Do you have any good Sushi restaurants you could recommend?
Thanks for your assistance!

tsig · 28th March 2009, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

The Heiwa Challenge

It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it!

Conditions:

1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size!
2. The structure should be more or less identical from h = 0 to h = h, e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements may be reinforced or made a little stronger, if required. Connections between elements should be similar throughout.
3. It is recognized that the structure may be a little higher stressed at h=0 than h=h due to uniform density, elements, etc.
4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections between elements cannot rely solely on friction.
5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure.
6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C.
7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A.
8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test).
9. In order to easily repeat the test/challenge drop height should be <1.1 h, i.e. C can only be dropped from 2h above ground on A that is 0.9 h high.
10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other after test, i.e. drop by part C on A.

Have a try! I look forward to your structures!

Heiwa

Where's the million dollars? There was supposed to be a million dollars.

Jackanory · 28th March 2009, 03:32 PM

Heiwa - Just watch videos of the attacks on 911. Two rather large towers in America collapsed from the top down, no demolitions - just structural damage, weight and gravity.

I also bought 5 eggs. I placed 4 in an upright tube. I hard boiled the fifth and dropped it from 2 miles. Guess what

Shadowdweller · 28th March 2009, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by 240-185

And you think we should bother to prove you're a fallacious engineer?

Originally Posted by Heiwa

1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size!

Forget fallacious engineer. This guy doesn't even grasp high-school level physics.

stateofgrace · 28th March 2009, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

The Heiwa Challenge

It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it!

Since your assumption is completely wrong and in no represents what happened to WTC 1 and 2. Why would anybody bother taking up this challenge?

DUHHHH.

Quad4_72 · 28th March 2009, 04:04 PM

Heiwa this is just silly. Please stop with your nonsense.

TheDaver · 28th March 2009, 04:37 PM

Good to know we can still count on Heiwa for a good laugh once in a while.

RedIbis · 28th March 2009, 04:45 PM

I think this is an interesting challenge. I don't get too involved in the physics discussions because I don't have that background, but I get Heiwa's basic premise, and I've been wondering if a similar example can be produced.

If I could ask a layman's question: Doesn't the 1/10th piece crashing through the other 9/10ths presuppose that the upper block had to simultaneously and instantaneously be separated from the lower structure?

Has NIST or anyone else ever tried to explain how this global separation occurred?

Sunstealer · 28th March 2009, 04:47 PM

Heiwa - you've made a mistake. There isn't any damage to the structure. Which part of the structure is the damaged part in? If there is a damaged part then why is it classed as part of A or C and not seperate?

Bobert · 28th March 2009, 05:27 PM

Heiwa,
I just visited a local Sushi establishment and attempted your experiment.
Needless to say the owner was not all too happy and kicked me out!
I HOPE YOU ARE PROUD OF YOURSELF!!!!

HeyLeroy · 28th March 2009, 06:10 PM

What do I win?

Homeland Insurgency · 28th March 2009, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by HeyLeroy

What do I win?

That's not been proven. That's why you are here.

dtugg · 28th March 2009, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency

That's not been proven. That's why you are here.

Sure it has. But there are plenty of idiots that ignore it because it destroys their fantasy.

funk de fino · 28th March 2009, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by RedIbis

I think this is an interesting challenge. I don't get too involved in the physics discussions because I don't have that background, but I get Heiwa's basic premise, and I've been wondering if a similar example can be produced.

If I could ask a layman's question: Doesn't the 1/10th piece crashing through the other 9/10ths presuppose that the upper block had to simultaneously and instantaneously be separated from the lower structure?

Has NIST or anyone else ever tried to explain how this global separation occurred?

Try reading it.

TJM · 28th March 2009, 10:07 PM

Originally Posted by funk de fino

Try reading it.

Heiwa · 29th March 2009, 12:30 AM

So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong!

funk de fino · 29th March 2009, 12:39 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong!

Everyone is fed up with your pathetic trolling, silly games and lies. You're a no planer, and as such are not worth the time.

Baylor · 29th March 2009, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong!

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...35#post4561435

Heiwa · 29th March 2009, 01:35 AM

Originally Posted by funk de fino

Everyone is fed up with your pathetic trolling, silly games and lies. You're a no planer, and as such are not worth the time.

Silly excuses! Come on, you are challenged

Baylor · 29th March 2009, 01:38 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Silly excuses! Come on, you are challenged

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...35#post4561435

tsig · 29th March 2009, 02:36 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong!

I wasn't aware that the JREF Forum carried such scientific weight.

240-185 · 29th March 2009, 03:29 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

Silly excuses! Come on, you are challenged

I have a rule for myself: I don't debate with people who deny it is bright day at noon. What you think about 9/11 is as outrageous as Holocaust denying (1).

It's odd that if we refuse to do your nonsense, you consider that we failed. It reminds me a conspiracist's dogma you seem to agree with: "If A can't prove B is wrong, this proves implicitely that A is wrong". Which is an incorrect claim.

As Shadowdweller pointed, you haven't any clue about scale effect. As you don't understand the most basic things of Physics, why should we answer your challenge?

(1) Godwin!

HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP · 29th March 2009, 03:30 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

The Heiwa Challenge

Where is it?

bill smith · 29th March 2009, 05:56 AM

I think it's fair to say that if nobody of all the thousands of jref members, vested interests and concerned citizens yhat are no doubt reading this page accept Heiwa's challenge within, say 20 days that Heiwa can be said to have successfully debunked he government story and that another and independent 9/11 enquiry is urgently and immediately called for.

RedIbis · 29th March 2009, 06:23 AM

Originally Posted by funk de fino

Try reading it.

I've been through quite a lot of it. Please point me to specifically where the complete separation is explained.

twinstead · 29th March 2009, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I think it's fair to say that if nobody of all the thousands of jref members, vested interests and concerned citizens yhat are no doubt reading this page accept Heiwa's challenge within, say 20 days that Heiwa can be said to have successfully debunked he government story and that another and independent 9/11 enquiry is urgently and immediately called for.

Why yes. Of course it does, bill. Of course it does. Frankly, the only thing the thousands of JREF members, vested interests and concerned citizens reading this page are thinking is that there's special place reserved in the Pantheon of Stupid for no planers.

funk de fino · 29th March 2009, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by RedIbis

I've been through quite a lot of it. Please point me to specifically where the complete separation is explained.

Not until you have read it all.

Its quite a simple concept really. Watch the videos, you see it happening.

Heiwa · 29th March 2009, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP

Where is it?

See post #1 above.

BTW I'll pay you $1M if you can produce a structure that can be crushed like that. Suteki desu ne!? Get working!

bill smith · 29th March 2009, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by twinstead

Why yes. Of course it does, bill. Of course it does. Frankly, the only thing the thousands of JREF members, vested interests and concerned citizens reading this page are thinking is that there's special place reserved in the Pantheon of Stupid for no planers.

Well they have 20 days to prove it. Can't say fairer than that.

dtugg · 29th March 2009, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I think it's fair to say that if nobody of all the thousands of jref members, vested interests and concerned citizens yhat are no doubt reading this page accept Heiwa's challenge within, say 20 days that Heiwa can be said to have successfuly debunked he government story and that another and independent 9/11 enquiry is urgently and immediately called for.

Or that nobody feels that they need to go out of their way to do a Heiwa challenge. He is a known liar and is responsible for some of the stupidest crap I have ever heard. Literally, ever. Even if the challenge was satisfied he would pretend like it didn't happen.

The Heiwa Challenge is completely stupid and meaningless anyway. One would need to make sure the structure is properly scaled in regards to strength for the results to mean anything. Heiwa, who is supposedly an engineer does not understand this. Building a model of a structure as large as the towers that are scaled properly to strength would be extremely difficult if not impossible. Nobody is going to attempt to do it to satisfy some loon.

dtugg · 29th March 2009, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Heiwa

See post #1 above.

BTW I'll pay you $1M if you can produce a structure that can be crushed like that. Suteki desu ne!? Get working!

Prove you have a million dollars. I think you are a liar and don't have the money at all.

RedIbis · 29th March 2009, 06:43 AM

Originally Posted by funk de fino

Not until you have read it all.

Its quite a simple concept really. Watch the videos, you see it happening.

You don't have any idea where it's discussed, or if it's discussed at all, do you?

tsig · 29th March 2009, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

Well they have 20 days to prove it. Can't say fairer than that.

How about this timeline Bill. Prove that there is a million dollars within 24 hours or the mods will be notified that you and Heiwa are running a scam on the members and should be banned.

bill smith · 29th March 2009, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by dtugg

Or that nobody feels that they need to go out of their way to do a Heiwa challenge. He is a known liar and is responsible for some of the stupidest crap I have ever heard. Literally, ever. Even if the challenge was satisfied he would pretend like it didn't happen.

The Heiwa Challenge is completely stupid and meaningless anyway. One would need to make sure the structure is properly scaled in regards to strength for the results to mean anything. Heiwa, who is supposedly an engineer does not understand this. Building a model of a structure as large as the towers that are scaled properly to strength would be extremely difficult if not impossible. Nobody is going to attempt to do it to satisfy some loon.

Heiwa has an international reputation in the field of structural damage analysis. He is therefore very well placed to make this Challenge. Furthermore he is offering an extremely attractive incentive for somebody to help the government out by proving him wrong. We are talking a not-so-small fortune here Dtugg. If nobody will accept the Challenge under conditions like these we abslutely know with 100% certainty that nobody can do it.Therefore the official account is not true and a new and independent 9/11 enquiry is an urgent neccessity. An immediate neccessity.

28th March 2009, 01:16 PM	#1
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148	The Heiwa Challenge The Heiwa Challenge It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it! Conditions: 1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size! 2. The structure should be more or less identical from h = 0 to h = h, e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements may be reinforced or made a little stronger, if required. Connections between elements should be similar throughout. 3. It is recognized that the structure may be a little higher stressed at h=0 than h=h due to uniform density, elements, etc. 4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections between elements cannot rely solely on friction. 5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure. 6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C. 7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A. 8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test). 9. In order to easily repeat the test/challenge drop height should be <1.1 h, i.e. C can only be dropped from 2h above ground on A that is 0.9 h high. 10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other after test, i.e. drop by part C on A. Have a try! I look forward to your structures! Heiwa
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148

28th March 2009, 01:19 PM	#2
240-185 Muse Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 510	And you think we should bother to prove you're a fallacious engineer?
240-185 Muse Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 510	__________________ Like a toy, the black dinosaur walked towards a Goomba and asked him: "What do Truthy Chain Chomps say when they bark? Twoof! Twoof! Twoof!" badum pschhh My 9/11 Crackpot Index

28th March 2009, 01:25 PM	#3
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Central New Jersey Posts: 7,032	Odd that none of his previous modeling examples, lemons, sponges, pizza boxes, met any of those conditions. Quote: Björkman claims that no planes hit the Twin Towers or the Pentagon or crashed near Shanksville, which makes him a rarity even among the most delusional "truthers": a quadruple no-planer. Björkman claims that all evidence of the aircraft impacts is fake and all witness accounts are invalid. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. Björkman claims that if 30 stories of one of the Twin Towers was dropped on the lower 80 stories from a height of two miles, it would bounce off without damaging the lower portion. And again. Björkman says a Tower wouldn't be destroyed if a 60-million-pound block of ice was dropped on it, then denies making that claim. Björkman claims that all photo and video evidence showing severe fires and structural failure in the WTC buildings is fake. And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. Björkman claims that WTC 7 was demolished by a vacuum. Björkman believes that the authors of the NIST WTC reports don't exist. Björkman believes that steel structures are indestructible, even by nuclear weapons. And again. And again. However, Björkman also believes that 16,500-22,000 lbs of high explosives may have been used to demolish each Twin Tower...with no detectable detonations. Björkman is an engineer who believes that weight = mass. No, really. Björkman believes his house would survive an asteroid impact. Björkman again attempts to revise the laws of physics. Björkman says a bathroom scale will register the same weight whether you stand on it or jump on it. Björkman says the Twin Tower fires were "minor office fires." Björkman makes the egregiously false claim that the FDNY said it could handle the fires in the Towers. Björkman believes that columns become stronger when their supports are removed. Björkman believes that the structures of the Twin Towers were comparable to cheese, pizza boxes, match boxes, rubber balls, sponges, a bicycle running into a wall, a child jumping on a bed, a tower of sushi, and a tower of lemons.
	__________________ 911 resource site by Mark Roberts http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance. Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane? Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.

28th March 2009, 01:40 PM	#4
Lennart Hyland Muse Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 782	Heiwa: The chief structural engineer of WTC, Leslie Robertson, doesnt agree with you. What do you think of him? Is the thousands of engineers agree with the NIST report just completly wrong? And how come you still cant find a single engineer agreeing with you?
	__________________ L.H 1919 - 1993 R.I.P Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views. David Scott - CTBUH Chairman

28th March 2009, 01:55 PM	#7
Bobert Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,126	Heiwa, Do you have any good Sushi restaurants you could recommend? Thanks for your assistance!
Bobert Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,126

28th March 2009, 02:12 PM	#8
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 39,049	Originally Posted by Heiwa The Heiwa Challenge It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it! Conditions: 1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size! 2. The structure should be more or less identical from h = 0 to h = h, e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements may be reinforced or made a little stronger, if required. Connections between elements should be similar throughout. 3. It is recognized that the structure may be a little higher stressed at h=0 than h=h due to uniform density, elements, etc. 4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections between elements cannot rely solely on friction. 5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure. 6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C. 7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A. 8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test). 9. In order to easily repeat the test/challenge drop height should be <1.1 h, i.e. C can only be dropped from 2h above ground on A that is 0.9 h high. 10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other after test, i.e. drop by part C on A. Have a try! I look forward to your structures! Heiwa Where's the million dollars? There was supposed to be a million dollars.

28th March 2009, 03:32 PM	#9
Jackanory Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,335	Heiwa - Just watch videos of the attacks on 911. Two rather large towers in America collapsed from the top down, no demolitions - just structural damage, weight and gravity. I also bought 5 eggs. I placed 4 in an upright tube. I hard boiled the fifth and dropped it from 2 miles. Guess what

28th March 2009, 03:43 PM	#10
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,400	Originally Posted by 240-185 And you think we should bother to prove you're a fallacious engineer? Originally Posted by Heiwa 1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size! Forget fallacious engineer. This guy doesn't even grasp high-school level physics.
	Last edited by Shadowdweller; 28th March 2009 at 03:49 PM.

28th March 2009, 03:58 PM	#11
stateofgrace Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 3,843	Originally Posted by Heiwa The Heiwa Challenge It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it! Since your assumption is completely wrong and in no represents what happened to WTC 1 and 2. Why would anybody bother taking up this challenge? DUHHHH.
stateofgrace Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 3,843	Last edited by stateofgrace; 28th March 2009 at 04:00 PM.

28th March 2009, 04:04 PM	#12
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 6,354	Heiwa this is just silly. Please stop with your nonsense.
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 6,354	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

28th March 2009, 04:37 PM	#13
TheDaver hairy farting brute Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 970	Good to know we can still count on Heiwa for a good laugh once in a while.

28th March 2009, 04:45 PM	#14
RedIbis Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,899	I think this is an interesting challenge. I don't get too involved in the physics discussions because I don't have that background, but I get Heiwa's basic premise, and I've been wondering if a similar example can be produced. If I could ask a layman's question: Doesn't the 1/10th piece crashing through the other 9/10ths presuppose that the upper block had to simultaneously and instantaneously be separated from the lower structure? Has NIST or anyone else ever tried to explain how this global separation occurred?
RedIbis Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,899	__________________ (RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)

28th March 2009, 04:47 PM	#15
Sunstealer Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 3,128	Heiwa - you've made a mistake. There isn't any damage to the structure. Which part of the structure is the damaged part in? If there is a damaged part then why is it classed as part of A or C and not seperate?
Sunstealer Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 3,128

28th March 2009, 05:27 PM	#16
Bobert Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,126	Heiwa, I just visited a local Sushi establishment and attempted your experiment. Needless to say the owner was not all too happy and kicked me out! I HOPE YOU ARE PROUD OF YOURSELF!!!!
Bobert Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4,126

28th March 2009, 06:10 PM	#17
HeyLeroy Vegan Cannibal Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,567	What do I win?
HeyLeroy Vegan Cannibal Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,567	__________________ Cows are in large numbers, and do not serve any other purpose, other than to eat grass, and moo -- makaya325 I ♥ my kids. I ♠ my dog. I ♣ my baby Harp Seal.

28th March 2009, 07:05 PM	#18
Homeland Insurgency Banned Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,705	Originally Posted by HeyLeroy What do I win? That's not been proven. That's why you are here.

28th March 2009, 09:48 PM	#19
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,885	Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency That's not been proven. That's why you are here. Sure it has. But there are plenty of idiots that ignore it because it destroys their fantasy.
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,885

28th March 2009, 09:51 PM	#20
funk de fino Dreaming of unicorns Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: UAE Posts: 11,938	Originally Posted by RedIbis I think this is an interesting challenge. I don't get too involved in the physics discussions because I don't have that background, but I get Heiwa's basic premise, and I've been wondering if a similar example can be produced. If I could ask a layman's question: Doesn't the 1/10th piece crashing through the other 9/10ths presuppose that the upper block had to simultaneously and instantaneously be separated from the lower structure? Has NIST or anyone else ever tried to explain how this global separation occurred? Try reading it.
	__________________ Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.

28th March 2009, 10:07 PM	#21
TJM Potsing Whiled Runk Tagger Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 21,899	Originally Posted by funk de fino Try reading it.
	__________________

29th March 2009, 12:30 AM	#22
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148	So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong!
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148

29th March 2009, 12:39 AM	#23
funk de fino Dreaming of unicorns Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: UAE Posts: 11,938	Originally Posted by Heiwa So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong! Everyone is fed up with your pathetic trolling, silly games and lies. You're a no planer, and as such are not worth the time.
	__________________ Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.

29th March 2009, 01:16 AM	#24
Baylor Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 8,394	Originally Posted by Heiwa So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong! http://www.internationalskeptics.com...35#post4561435
Baylor Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 8,394

29th March 2009, 01:35 AM	#25
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148	Originally Posted by funk de fino Everyone is fed up with your pathetic trolling, silly games and lies. You're a no planer, and as such are not worth the time. Silly excuses! Come on, you are challenged
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148

29th March 2009, 01:38 AM	#26
Baylor Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 8,394	Originally Posted by Heiwa Silly excuses! Come on, you are challenged http://www.internationalskeptics.com...35#post4561435
Baylor Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 8,394

29th March 2009, 02:36 AM	#27
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 39,049	Originally Posted by Heiwa So far 20 replies and none close to manage the challenge. So it seems crushing a structure with a piece of it, is not possible. NIST is therefore wrong! I wasn't aware that the JREF Forum carried such scientific weight.

29th March 2009, 03:29 AM	#28
240-185 Muse Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 510	Originally Posted by Heiwa Silly excuses! Come on, you are challenged I have a rule for myself: I don't debate with people who deny it is bright day at noon. What you think about 9/11 is as outrageous as Holocaust denying (1). It's odd that if we refuse to do your nonsense, you consider that we failed. It reminds me a conspiracist's dogma you seem to agree with: "If A can't prove B is wrong, this proves implicitely that A is wrong". Which is an incorrect claim. As Shadowdweller pointed, you haven't any clue about scale effect. As you don't understand the most basic things of Physics, why should we answer your challenge? (1) Godwin!
240-185 Muse Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 510	__________________ Like a toy, the black dinosaur walked towards a Goomba and asked him: "What do Truthy Chain Chomps say when they bark? Twoof! Twoof! Twoof!" badum pschhh My 9/11 Crackpot Index Last edited by 240-185; 29th March 2009 at 03:30 AM.

29th March 2009, 03:30 AM	#29
HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 459	Originally Posted by Heiwa The Heiwa Challenge Where is it?

29th March 2009, 05:56 AM	#30
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	I think it's fair to say that if nobody of all the thousands of jref members, vested interests and concerned citizens yhat are no doubt reading this page accept Heiwa's challenge within, say 20 days that Heiwa can be said to have successfully debunked he government story and that another and independent 9/11 enquiry is urgently and immediately called for.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by bill smith; 29th March 2009 at 06:22 AM. Reason: spelling

29th March 2009, 06:23 AM	#31
RedIbis Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,899	Originally Posted by funk de fino Try reading it. I've been through quite a lot of it. Please point me to specifically where the complete separation is explained.
RedIbis Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,899	__________________ (RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)

29th March 2009, 06:26 AM	#32
twinstead Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 12,374	Originally Posted by bill smith I think it's fair to say that if nobody of all the thousands of jref members, vested interests and concerned citizens yhat are no doubt reading this page accept Heiwa's challenge within, say 20 days that Heiwa can be said to have successfully debunked he government story and that another and independent 9/11 enquiry is urgently and immediately called for. Why yes. Of course it does, bill. Of course it does. Frankly, the only thing the thousands of JREF members, vested interests and concerned citizens reading this page are thinking is that there's special place reserved in the Pantheon of Stupid for no planers.
	__________________ You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

29th March 2009, 06:26 AM	#33
funk de fino Dreaming of unicorns Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: UAE Posts: 11,938	Originally Posted by RedIbis I've been through quite a lot of it. Please point me to specifically where the complete separation is explained. Not until you have read it all. Its quite a simple concept really. Watch the videos, you see it happening.
	__________________ Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.

29th March 2009, 06:32 AM	#34
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148	Originally Posted by HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP Where is it? See post #1 above. BTW I'll pay you $1M if you can produce a structure that can be crushed like that. Suteki desu ne!? Get working!
Heiwa Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,148	Last edited by Heiwa; 29th March 2009 at 06:35 AM.

29th March 2009, 06:32 AM	#35
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by twinstead Why yes. Of course it does, bill. Of course it does. Frankly, the only thing the thousands of JREF members, vested interests and concerned citizens reading this page are thinking is that there's special place reserved in the Pantheon of Stupid for no planers. Well they have 20 days to prove it. Can't say fairer than that.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

29th March 2009, 06:38 AM	#36
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,885	Originally Posted by bill smith I think it's fair to say that if nobody of all the thousands of jref members, vested interests and concerned citizens yhat are no doubt reading this page accept Heiwa's challenge within, say 20 days that Heiwa can be said to have successfuly debunked he government story and that another and independent 9/11 enquiry is urgently and immediately called for. Or that nobody feels that they need to go out of their way to do a Heiwa challenge. He is a known liar and is responsible for some of the stupidest crap I have ever heard. Literally, ever. Even if the challenge was satisfied he would pretend like it didn't happen. The Heiwa Challenge is completely stupid and meaningless anyway. One would need to make sure the structure is properly scaled in regards to strength for the results to mean anything. Heiwa, who is supposedly an engineer does not understand this. Building a model of a structure as large as the towers that are scaled properly to strength would be extremely difficult if not impossible. Nobody is going to attempt to do it to satisfy some loon.
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,885

29th March 2009, 06:39 AM	#37
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,885	Originally Posted by Heiwa See post #1 above. BTW I'll pay you $1M if you can produce a structure that can be crushed like that. Suteki desu ne!? Get working! Prove you have a million dollars. I think you are a liar and don't have the money at all.
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,885