Y’know, depsite having read a fairly large number of accounts of various murders over the years, I don’t recall any of them producing the EXACT WEIGHT of the rib cage, lungs, heart, thoracic vertebrae, and thoracic muscle when struck by a bullet weighing between 2.5 and 7 grams. Clearly, every one of those people were actually murdered by some other means and the bullets were placed in or near the hearts, later, to cover up the truth.
(Although, I think Bryan Ekers wins this round.)
Well, it’s the pointless capitalization that does it.
You forgot the bolding.
Well, shall I ROFL now or ROFL later?
Here we go, another genius that wants to compare animate and inanimate objects.
If the ribcages were made of steel then it would be relevant.
psik
But buildings are living things, shifting, flexing, slowly decaying…
I read that somewhere.
Actually, it would still not be relevant as the perforation and shock to a heart has absolutely nothing to do with the ability of the ribs to support a body and its internal organs when the muscles are active. Just as the happenstance of the number of ounces of steel or concrete in a structure is really not relevant when the concrete is not wrapped around the steel and the steel (of varying dimensions) is being weakened by the flames of burning offices.
If you still have not found out how much steel was on each floor of the WTC on your deathbed, the towers will still have fallen due to a combination of events resulting in a variety of structural failures.
The problem with the entire brain salad that you’re trying to toss is that it doesn’t explain anything. It only speciously tries to poke holes in something we already know, much like the townspeople in Monty Python used “logic” to prove witchery. If you want to be taken seriously, step up to the challenge that ivanastikov and EasyPhil and every other truther on every messageboard and smokey bar ever have failed to step up to: provide a comprehensive alternative theory of what happened on 9/11/01 using facts, evidence, and logic.
Tell us what you think happened, psik.
I can sit here all day and insist that Oswald didn’t shoot Kennedy, but when presented the choice between tons of evidence that he did, and a blank stare, rational people are going to side with the evidence and comprehensive theory. The blank stare loses 100 times out of 100 in the minds of critical thinkers.
I mostly lurk the discussion of the demolition CTs, being more interested in the aftermath. But, concerning the weight of the concrete and steel- I don’t understand why this is a secret. Can’t the numbers be estimated from the blueprints and other data? There were plenty of floor plans in the debunking videos I watched, with support columns &etc highlighted. It seems a sharp eye could define some parameters for a workable estimate.
Getting back to Afghanistan.
I repeated the same question, and eventually the board coughed up some links between AQ and the Taliban. sigh that was great 
However, it doesn’t look like I got quite the answer I was hunting. Tomndebb cited a communication between Omar and OBL a few years before 911. Gig0buster quoted an ATG telling a Pakistani official that they knew where OBL was and how to get him. Xtisme posted a CNN report with similar information, plus complaints from the ATG that there was no negotiation going on between them and the US.
Great submissions all. But it raises my new question: Was the declaration of war carried out through the media? I can’t find the official US government communique to the Taliban telegraphing their demands, nor can I find the reciprocal Taliban response.
My Google-fu stinks. Help me out- how do I find these?
And- this will be the third time I characterize OBL as ‘Rambo on crack’ when it comes to hiding out in the mountains. If no one disputes that, by thread logic we might as well take it as true- at least until it is disputed.
Even considering the above cites, isn’t it still possible OBL didn’t want to be caught and so, wasn’t?
It isn’t. The drawings are public domain by definition, though the clerks may make it hard. (Feh–it’s their job to make it hard for eveybody, not just 9/11 types.) The math is sliderule simple, which means that the accuracy may not be close enough to run through a computer (quote-ish of some guy at Lockheed regarding the (highly successful) cross section of the fuselage of the SR-71 Blackbird, “If we had to model it on the computers of the day we’d still be waiting for results.”) If particular dimensions are not noted, a little effort can find them or describe the objects closely enough. Honest to God, everything that it takes to keep a building from falling in the middle of a city is recorded and signed off on. YOU can do it, and you can be sure the guys who designed the towers could, too. If they didn’t show their work on the NIST report, so what? The towers held up successfully to all that were thrung at them fer the decades before. 
Overall, been there, done that, successfully ignored the stuff at the right of the decimal place. 
You are absolutely correct, it is not a secret. Anyone who wants to dig up the basic plans, knows the weight of reinforced concrete (150pcf) and gets a copy of a steel design manual (they have tables with weights of all standard steel sections) can spend a little time with Excel and total up the numbers.
psikeyhackr, you have never taken any structural engineering courses or done any actual structural analysis. I did plenty of both and I know what I’m talking about.
When you analyze a structure you need to know loads and a big part of that, obviously, is the dead load meaning the weight of the structure itself. So in that regard someone, sometime, certainly totaled up all those numbers - namely the engineers who designed the towers.
There’s an iterative process where you lay out the basic structural scheme, figure out how much it weighs, check that it can support the necessary loads and redesign as needed. Process converges on a final design.
Now here’s the thing, when you want to figure out how the structure will behave under certain circumstances, like the failure of a beam or some kind of externally applied force (wind, earthquake or a jet crashing into it) you don’t need a lot of those original calculations, you just need the end result. You need to know exactly how the structure is laid out and you need to know what loads exist, because that lets you calculate what forces will exist in which members. I’ve done this stuff before; you’ll have a bunch of diagrams showing that under normal circumstances Column #104 carries a load of 20k (or whatever) and Beam #87F has a bending moment of (number) at this end, etc. And if I need to check what happens if Column #104 is removed then I take all those loads and go through the math to see how they get redistributed. It’s very similar to those basic free-body diagrams you did in physics although generally more complex due to the large number of structural members.
I don’t need to go back and say “Well this part of the load was due to the weight of concrete here and this part was due to the weight of steel there”. It just has nothing to do with the analysis.
So I understand that you believe that information is somehow critical but why do you think it is? What is the basis for your belief if it’s not education or experience in the subject?
FWIW, most of the concrete in the towers was not reinforced, it was the concrete floors that gave the office workers something solid to walk on, but didn’t help keep the building together. Someone mentioned a 100 pcf number (that’s pounds per cubic foot for you not conversant in US measurements), and I believe the floors were this lighter material.
Each floor was 40,000 square feet; here’s the charred remains of a single-story 42,000 square foot steel framed structure.
I can certainly see them using lightweight concrete for the floor slabs (the presence of rebar in concrete doesn’t make a huge difference in density by itself - for “regular” concrete it’s about 145pcf vs 150pcf IIRC). My point was more that totaling up those numbers is about as “secret” as totaling up the price of all the food in a grocery store - anyone can walk around, take inventory and break out their calculator, nothing mysterious about it. Using that as an awful analogy, if the grocery store burns to the ground you need to know that you had $1.387 million worth of food inside when you claim insurance, but it’s not important that precisely 0.3% of that loss was Campbells Creamy Chunks-O-Squirrel Soup.
The single most conclusive proof that the government had nothing to do with the destruction of the towers is that it actually worked. I say this only half in jest.
Well, if you want some numbers and estimates, here goes:
This site says 1.8 million tons of debris was removed from the WTC area. To keep things simple, we’ll assume that:
a. The debris removed was solely that of the WTC buildings and the materials within,
b. Both buildings were equal in weight, and
c. That every floor was equal in weight to the others.
So… 900,000 tons (1.8 billion pounds) per building.
110 stories gives you 16.36 million pounds per floor.
According to Wiki, the north tower was hit between the 93rd and 99th floor. We’ll say the 99th, as to keep the math honest. This means that 162 million pounds of building was sitting above the impact site. (10 * 16.36 million)
Also according to Wiki, the South Tower was impacted between the 77th and 85th floor. Again, we’ll use the topmost (85th) floor for our calculations, meaning that 409 million pounds of building was above the impact site. (25*16.36 million)
So you had 400 million pounds of South Tower on top of support beams which, while not “melting” are growing softer the longer the fire rages. You had 162 million pounds of North Tower on top of equally-weakening support beams.
Note that the steel doesn’t have to melt, nowhere near close: it just has to get soft enough to lose the structual integrity needed to SUPPORT 160-400 MILLION POUNDS!!!*
I’ve never been able to understand why this concept is difficult for people to grasp. You have 400 million pounds. The support is weakening. You don’t need anything to melt, you just need it to weaken enough so that it can’t hold 400 million pounds.
*(Caps, bold, exclamation points, and italics. My argument is now solid.)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090624/pl_bloomberg/agu5lx16vtk8
Can’t wait until this gets raised as a cover up.
Plenty of people calim all sorts of idiotic drivel is LOGIC.
Did the laws of physics work before human beings invented language? I think mosts physicists will tell you that they had to.
I don’t care if what you claim is LOGIC damands what you regard as an explanation. All I am saying is that I doubt EXTREMELY MUCH that a normal airliner could destroy those buildings in less than 2 hours. I also say that in order to analyze the LOGIC of the PHYSICS of the event we need to know the distribution of mass of the towers and the people who designed them had to figure all of that out anyway for the buildings to stand for 28 years.
The building had to hold up their own weight. The buildings had to withstand the wind. Various sources say the buildings were designed to sway 3 feet off center at the top in a 150 mph wind.
So all of you people who CLAIM TO KNOW but actually BELIEVE that normal airliners could destroy the buildings are admitting you believe that even though you do not have the information on the distribution of steel and concrete. So your LOGIC is based on what? Trusting experts that don’t tell you the obviously necessary information.
So your comment about “brain salad” is totally irrelevant to me.
Once the nose of the aircraft was within 10 feet of the tower it was just so much physics. Who or what was flying the plane and why are all totally irrelevant to the physics. I do not even care. I do not pay attention to most of the stuff from the Truth Embellishment and Specualtion Movement.
There was no visible movement in the south tower on impact but it should have been about 14 inches. The oscillation damped out after 4 minutes however. So how did this happen 52 minutes later?
The vertical lines on the side of the building are the perimeter columns which were 3’4" center to center. So it looks like bottom of the portion that broke loose moved to the right at least TWENTY FEET. Now how could fire and gravity pulling downward cause that when the lateral impact of the plane caused the building to move only FOURTEEN INCHES?
Another “brain salad” question.
psik
Obviously the buildings didn’t crumble when hit by the planes. Then how did it happen later?
Did you miss the part where we said “the fires”?
What is so illogical about the idea that fire-weakened support beams couldn’t support 400 million pounds? Or 160 million? Or 200 and 80 million, if you cut my numbers in half?
