Constipated?
I was worried that your arrogance and stupidity could be passed along into the future. I am scared for our country. Perhaps your wife will teach him manners. It is not possible for you. They are strange and alien concepts in your life.
How often do you get sucker punched ?
I’d have to agree with you on the arrogance part…I certainly have more than my fair share of that. If you’d have said ‘arrogance and laziness’ then you would have hit the nail right on the head. Though, of course, if you were that perceptive then, well, it wouldn’t be you.
You are right that manners aren’t exactly my strong suit…or, at least I don’t waste them on scummy little lower lifeforms such as yourself anyway. Generally, I’m not an intolerant person, and I make allowances for someone who is genuinely intelligence challenged…someone such as yourself. However, in your case you have that rare combination of stubbornness, willful ignorance AND stupidity that, well, just brings out the worst in me.
While I generally just enjoy making you look like an idiot and skating as close to the thin ice where you are concerned as I can, on THIS subject I’m definitely more passionate. I loath…LOATH…9/11 CTers. In every form and type. That you have joined their ranks, even if in a bizarre and strangely back-assward way, just makes it that much more enjoyable and ultimately fulfilling.
Probably about as often as you have an original thought…hell, as often as you have an unoriginal thought, or a thought at all, which is to say, not very often. As long as we are going to get into bizarre non-sequiturs though, my favorite has to do with modern decaffeinated beverages being just as tasty as the real thing.
-XT
You’ve said this at least twice now. Are you under the impression that WTC 7 was the same design as the twin towers?
Naw…he still has this message board as his outlet for that, since it seems his lot in life to spew shit in every thread we have the misfortune to have him enter. No, I was thinking that if he loses any additional mental capacity (and I use that term VERY loosely), he may stop breathing and just keel over one day. Sadly, he’s so stupid that it might actually take a while for the rest of his body to realize he’s dead, and in the mean time the quality of his posting might actually go up a notch or two…
-XT
I can’t believe it’s not lethal!
Well, except on movie popcorn.
Look: the design of the towers was different from a lot of other buildings and it’s a factor in how they fell. Basically the support columns were on the outside, and the planes damaged them. That wouldn’t have happened if they’d been on the inside. I’m not sure how the fire would have affected them if they had been located in different places in the building. Does that make it a crappy design? No, not really. One that was vulnerable to that kind of attack, maybe. The fact that it wasn’t build to withstand a 767 strike also doesn’t make it a crappy design. 767s were introduced almost 10 years after the towers were completed. And WTC7 had a more standard design. It collapsed because loads of debris fell on it, it caught fire, and the sprinkler system was damaged. That’s not a design failure either. Most buildings will fall down when those things happen. If it had been built later maybe it would have had more points of failure on the sprinkler system or something but I don’t know if it would have survived anyway. They might have just had to demolish it later.
Look ,the design was unique. It maximized the potential rental space with the single area of the elevator shafts being the focal point and the floors hung off that. It did not have a brick face or many of normal building design features. If it had been built with 4 columns or more and the elevator shaft providing support, it would not have fallen down like that. No other bldg has. It was an interesting architectural design that apparently had major design flaws.
Many bldgs have been engulfed in flames for long times without collapsing. These not only dropped, but dropped quickly.
If you are honest, you would admit the shock when the bldgs, fell. Shocked because bldgs. don’t fall like that. They never have. Yet we had three of them do it. That is why the conspiracies were born. They wound up with exotic explanations for what happened. People thought there had to be a reason they dropped and it looked similar to controlled bldg drops.
But the explanation is simple. The design element failed.
No it is not about sprinkler systems. Buildings have burned for days without dropping. And none dropped like these, ever. Normal bldgs leave facades and support beams somewhat in tact. They eschewed the normal vertical support beams and a price was paid.
Maybe. Do you have a cite (preferably one that’s not batshit crazy)?
It was not up to being smashed by a big jet, I agree. I don’t think that makes it a crappy design as you keep saying.
Show me something comparable then. We’re talking about a tower that was hit by a jet full of fuel. That’s not the same thing as an electrical fire.
I’m shocked by your ineptitude with commas. But no, I was not shocked “because buildings don’t fall like that.” The thought never crossed my mind. I was shocked by all of the events and didn’t bother to single out the collapse of the towers, much less the way they collapsed.
Did WTC7 have that same design?
The conspiracies were born because a lot of people are morons with too much time on their hands.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqDTEZIdg7g&feature=related Here is the architect explaining the UNIQUE design. Yes it was unique. It was new. When it burned it failed. You can be damn sure the architects of today wont make another like it.
NO the conspiracies were not because guys had too much time on their hands. That is absurd. It looked like a bldg, being demolished. That is why they ran with it. If it had walls and facades still standing, they would have had nothing to hang their theories on. It would have just been a huge disaster.
gonzomax, we already know what the fucking design was. I just posted about it this morning. I am asking you if WTC7 had the same design. I’ve never heard anyone say that before. And that makes me pretty sure you’re wrong, but I’m willing to listen.
Yes it had the same design. As a matter of fact ,I believe 8 bldgs were hit by flaming rubble from the towers. The Raddison hotel was closer than bldg, 7. None of the others pancaked. None.
Doooo yoouuuuu haaaaaave aaaa ciiiiiittte?
Popular Mechanics - Google Books Let me rephrase, it was not identical since it was trapezoidal. But it carried over the floor truss design component of structural integrity as this article shows. It failed identically to the towers due to a similar construction.
There are several high rises around the world that used the construction. I hope they don’t catch on fire.
The cite does not say they are identical and I am not sure that conclusion can be drawn from that article. Popular Mechanics does say that some of the columns near the point of collapse on WTC7 were carring “unusually large loads,” but that’s not the same as the Twin Towers design where the columns were at the exterior of the building. But I’ll defer to somebody with more engineering experience.
Whatever happened to the good American spirit of compromise ?
AIUI, the attack on the Twin Towers was intended to knock the towers over. Instead, the towers stayed relatively intact for a period of time, then collapsed into their own footprints instead of across the next 1,000 feet of neighboring buildings.
Sounds like the designed failure mode (“it all falls down like THIS”) worked, and the intended failure mode (“tiiiiIIIMBER!”) was foiled.
I don’t think so. In the '93 attack I think they were hoping to knock one tower into the other and make them both fall sideways. After that failed I think they realized they couldn’t do it.
Ah. It seems I conflated the two incidents.
Is the other part of my understanding accurate – that the towers were designed to drop onto their own footprint (albeit in a controlled manner instead of a disastrous one)?