If he were to remove that one bit of uncertainty, then the entire thread would come collapsing down under its own weight.
There are nano thermite charges in the thread!:eek: Everybody run!
No, see, the reason you didn’t do the full experiment was that you purposefully designed the way you took just one section, to get the result you desire. If you cut it just slightly differently, you’d get a different result…
There is no point.
Everyone has seen news footage of steel frame factory lying flat on the ground after a fire.
Its really not that hard to be convinced that fire does that to structural steel.
But if you carefully lifted the top 30 floors, removed the walls,uprights,etc, , and then carefully sat floor 71 to 100 onto floor 70, it would probably hold up.
The difference is that when the top 30 floors FALL, the mass picks up energy, with the total energy available to break floor 70 being 1/2 m v^2, … v is only due to dropping the height of one floor, but m is the mass of 30 floors.!
It turns out that the energy was simply very much higher than energy required to smash the next floor away and keep dropping like it wasn’t even there.
Well, you got that right.
Right. I mean, after all, those beams WERE each holding up what was above it. But dropping something on something else clearly creates a lot more force than letting it down slowly.
Yep. The original argument was this : While the structural columns in the building can support the weight of the building, if the weight of the building above is concentrated on a single floor, that floor will collapse. In fact, apparently a single floor will fail if about 3 floor’s mass worth of debris are lying on a single floor. That’s all the heating by the fire did, supposedly : it softened the steel, so the concrete floors fell onto lower floors. Enough mass on a single lower floor, and the supports holding that floor up will fail. Obviously the next floor in the sequence is going to fail even faster, because the falling debris will impact with more force, and the next floor is taking the mass needed for it to fail + n more floors of mass.
This process would accelerate, and, apparently, shortly after it starts the floors are collapsing so fast that the process is limited mainly by the rate of acceleration due to gravity.
Another factor here is that the floors may be collapsing, but many of the structural columns in the WTC are in the outer skin. The structural columns can take more stress. So isn’t the actual reason you see debris coming out the windows is that the actual collapse mechanism - those collapsing floors - is faster than the failure for the outer steel columns? It isn’t “air pressure”, it’s 2 separate collapse processes not in sync with each other (the concrete floors collapsing inwards, and the outer columns failing shortly afterwards)
Well I hadn’t read it.
Now that I have I think it is too dumb to respond to.
psik
What you wrote in your own blog is too dumb to respond to?
Question for the Mods: Will I get in trouble if I agree with him? 
The original theory was that pancake type collapse, until they found enough evidence (and really, there’s plenty of pictures and videos showing the perimeter columns bowing inwards at the site of the fires…the recovered steel just proved that the floor trusses actually did remain attached. As the fires moved onward, the floor trusses went into contraction and pulled the perimeter columns hard, until enough snapped. Progressive collapse from there.
The perimeter columns and the collapsing floors were pretty well in-sync. The collapse of both buildings was more akin to “stripping” the building away from its core columns, which, as mentioned, remained standing for several seconds or tens of seconds after the floors and outer columns were on the ground. Initially, the standing inner core was obscured by smoke and the debris cloud, but eventually enough photos and videos from better angles showed up.
The “squib” charges pointed out in photos or videos of the collapse are generally happening way, way lower (on the order of 20 stories or more) than the collapse itself. It really is just air pressure. The majority of the inside of the towers was just empty space, and as the top came down, it was like the plunger being forced into a hypodermic syringe–the air escaped through the path of least resistance–some weaker windows or mechanical openings low in the building.
The thing is, the twoofers got screwed by “the spire.” Initially hidden by the smoke and debris cloud, later discovered photos and videos pointed out, very clearly, that the inner core columns of both buildings remained standing. And they were standing to a level HIGHER than where those puffs of smoke (aka the “squib” charges being detonated by…Bush?..aliens?..spaghetti monster?..) occurred. What this meant was that there were, in fact, no explosive charges that severed the building’s inner core down below.
So, rather than admitting their mea culpa, the CTers simply took the photos/videos of the spire and used them to argue that “look! The inner core is standing! They said it was pulverized into dust, but you can see it just falls down! Where is it?! They said they never found it!” Long story short, they again reverted to the idea that the collapse, with the inner core standing, COULDN’T HAPPEN ANY OTHER WAY than by controlled demolition.
Except now, we know that there weren’t charges on the inner core low in the building.
So the charges/thermite must have been right at the failure zone, at the site of the plane impact. “They” pushed the button that sent the top of the building into the bottom part, using gravity to make the whole thing work.
Problem is…they originally said you’d have to have to sever the inner core or the building wouldn’t fall. IOW, the WTC collapsed exactly the way engineers had always said it had…except there were no planes/remote controlled planes/hologram planes, and there was thermite. But not on the perimeter columns (we’d have seen it) and not in the lower core of the building (the core remained standing.)
TL;DR: CTers don’t give fuck all. It’s an attention getting mechanism or a superiority complex. They’ve been pitted, repeatedly, and I can’t say anything any better than those pit threads did.
What amazes me about the WTC conspiracy theories is that if you watch videos of the collapse, both towers clearly fail at the point where the planes hit. It was a pretty neat trick planting demolitions charges on exactly those floors. :rolleyes:
You know…this does make you wonder. I mean, you could just say “well, obviously, the planes were part of the conspiracy”.
But why go to all the trouble of hijacking the planes loaded with fuel only to use demo-charges to take down the buildings?
Either way you go, you could create reams of evidence to make it look like “Muslims did it”. I mean, to be fair, if you had millions of dollars and a small hardcore group of skilled people who will never, ever betray you…you probably could take a building down and make it look like Muslim terrorists did it.
Or a furniture store with its steel frame collapsed after burning for less than an hour. Or a tower in Madrid with about half of its steel frame hanging off its sides.
They’d also have us believe that the demolition of a very large section of Two’s core was skipped only for that entire section of core to be ejected south, presumably landing on the church across the street.
About the only answer to this sort of crackpot is to reply with even crazier notions until he leaves convinced that you are a crackpot.
(advice stolen from the late Arthur C. Clarke)
I bet that next the CTs will blame the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
This Mr. Atta’s okay. He’s a sailor; in New York. We get this guy laid, we won’t have any trouble.
[sub]too soon?[/sub]
There is no thermite…there is only Zuul.
“Nobody steps on a church in my town!” -Venkman