9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-02-2016, 10:01 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 09:59 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(17-02-2016 09:43 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Psik have models been done for the south tower ? I'm interested to know if there is any special reason why you would specify the north tower over the south.

The top of the south tower tilted. Richard Gage says 22 degrees and the NIST report says 20 to 25 degrees. So the south tower has the additional issue of why the top did not fall down the side but people like you will not even discuss the center of mass of the top. So just dealing with the north tower is simpler.

psik
I only asked mate Sad
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 10:18 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 10:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  
(17-02-2016 09:59 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  The top of the south tower tilted. Richard Gage says 22 degrees and the NIST report says 20 to 25 degrees. So the south tower has the additional issue of why the top did not fall down the side but people like you will not even discuss the center of mass of the top. So just dealing with the north tower is simpler.

psik
I only asked mate Sad

If we don't know the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level then how could we locate the center of gravity of the tilted top of the south tower?

After 14 years shouldn't all of the people willing to read and post to threads like this have seen videos of the twin tower collapses multiple times?

So personally I do not understand why everyone hasn't wondered about the center of gravity of the top of the south tower. If you search the NIST report you will find the terms "center of gravity" and "center of mass" around 15 times each. When they use "center of mass" they are talking about the aircraft. When they say "center of gravity" they are talking about computer simulated components of the building. But they never apply the terms to the entire building or the top of the south tower.

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 10:26 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 10:18 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  After 14 years shouldn't all of the people willing to read and post to threads like this have seen videos of the twin tower collapses multiple times?

Not necessarily, Why?

You make so many should claims it's hilarious. According to who or what? Who is the grand orator of what people SHOULD or shouldn't do? Where does this power of demanding people should or shouldn't do one thing or another come from? Are you this magnificent being? You mindset keeps deferring to this so you act like there is some grand uniting view people should have that agrees with you, why is that?

Every time you always back away or don't respond, I guess that question isn't entertaining to you as you stated that's what matters.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 10:45 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 10:18 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(17-02-2016 10:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  I only asked mate Sad

If we don't know the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level then how could we locate the center of gravity of the tilted top of the south tower?

After 14 years shouldn't all of the people willing to read and post to threads like this have seen videos of the twin tower collapses multiple times?

So personally I do not understand why everyone hasn't wondered about the center of gravity of the top of the south tower. If you search the NIST report you will find the terms "center of gravity" and "center of mass" around 15 times each. When they use "center of mass" they are talking about the aircraft. When they say "center of gravity" they are talking about computer simulated components of the building. But they never apply the terms to the entire building or the top of the south tower.

psik

Well to be honest mate some of us struggle with physics and maths I sadly suffer from dyscalculia.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 11:01 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 10:26 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(17-02-2016 10:18 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  After 14 years shouldn't all of the people willing to read and post to threads like this have seen videos of the twin tower collapses multiple times?

Not necessarily, Why?

You make so many should claims it's hilarious.

Some years ago I met a man who told me he "Loved Cars".

I asked him what a cam shaft was. He didn't know. He had an "Automobile" magazine that he as reading, or maybe just looking at the pictures. I pointed at a part in one of the ads and asked him what it was. He didn't know. I was pointing at a crank shaft.

This 9/11 business is like that. Lots of people certain of their opinions but don't really know or investigate anything. Where was the center of rotation of the top of the south tower in relation to the center of mass? Wouldn't analysing the motion say something about the force that had to produce that effect?

This is why insults from people here don't phase me. They are only laughable.

The Marching Morons, by C.M. Kornbluth
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/51233/512...1233-h.htm

That just turned up in PG. I read it decades ago.

The amount of concrete is irrelevant. Yeah right!

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 11:30 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 11:01 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(17-02-2016 10:26 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Not necessarily, Why?

You make so many should claims it's hilarious.

Some years ago I met a man who told me he "Loved Cars".

I asked him what a cam shaft was. He didn't know. He had an "Automobile" magazine that he as reading, or maybe just looking at the pictures. I pointed at a part in one of the ads and asked him what it was. He didn't know. I was pointing at a crank shaft.

This 9/11 business is like that. Lots of people certain of their opinions but don't really know or investigate anything. Where was the center of rotation of the top of the south tower in relation to the center of mass? Wouldn't analysing the motion say something about the force that had to produce that effect?

This is why insults from people here don't phase me. They are only laughable.

The Marching Morons, by C.M. Kornbluth
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/51233/512...1233-h.htm

That just turned up in PG. I read it decades ago.

The amount of concrete is irrelevant. Yeah right!

psik

Is this supposed to reflect something of people proclaiming to know what it is they don't know in this anecdote?

All that comes of it, is you seem to be projecting onto people. One can "love cars" in dozens of different ways. Because one doesn't actually know mechanics or even simple parts in a car, doesn't disconnect hte potential for one to lvoe cars. One could love cars largely from a visual angle and be a big auto-body geek opposed to a mechanical viewed man.

One can post a question and have an idea in dozens of ways. You are one of the few people I do see posting claims of certainty here. That's not even an intended "insult" like you find amusing, it's just a reflection. You stop answering questions when Already as you stated, you don't see the posts to be entertaining. You just continue to ignore things while others somewhat appear to be skeptical in some posts. Not all, some, because plenty are just mocking jokes not undeservingly. Your idea of not being certain seems to start and end with being skeptical of the "official report" concept without extra query. The problem is your attitude seems to stop being skeptical of your own conclusions or why you think computer models are lesser than physical models. These are just ideas you assert instead of question as well, just like your assertion of shoulds.

None of that is relevant to you being able to single out why you think people SHOULD do anything according to your frequent statements. Hell, you're on a random forum with a thread constantly coming up with new posts. People may post here not having ever seen the videos of the towers because it's a thread. it's not like this is an American only thread anyway or that there isn't people who view this forum born after the event happened. Why are they under some "should" obligation of nonsense?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 12:07 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 11:30 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Is this supposed to reflect something of people proclaiming to know what it is they don't know in this anecdote?

NO! It is about BELIEVING while Knowing almost nothing.

In the case of 9/11, on this site and many others, it is not even checking but doing a lot of talking.

Who here could say whether or not the NIST contained anything regarding "center of gravity"? Try searching the Internet to find center of gravity information on any skyscraper. The results are curious.

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 12:36 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Now Psikey is castigating us, when he doesn't want to do the work to prove his pet non-theory Dodgy

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 12:47 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 12:36 PM)morondog Wrote:  Now Psikey is castigating us, when he doesn't want to do the work to prove his pet non-theory Dodgy

Yeah, It is all the fault of my LAZINESS that the NIST could not specify the amount of concrete in the towers in 10,000 pages in 4 years at the cost of $20,000,000. Sadcryface2

Whose fault is it that you can't figure out what information is important in FOURTEEN YEARS? Huh

Oh yeah, it's not important because you say so.

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 01:19 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2016 12:07 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(17-02-2016 11:30 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Is this supposed to reflect something of people proclaiming to know what it is they don't know in this anecdote?

NO! It is about BELIEVING while Knowing almost nothing.

In the case of 9/11, on this site and many others, it is not even checking but doing a lot of talking.

Who here could say whether or not the NIST contained anything regarding "center of gravity"? Try searching the Internet to find center of gravity information on any skyscraper. The results are curious.

psik

Yes I get your view is that. But it's flawed because it presumes your ideals of the concept are the ones that matter while ignoring the others.

You're essentially proposing If you don't care about these particulars YOU are indicating are important. then the person doesn't actually know or actually love the concept in discussion.

Why would I or anyone here look up this details of NIST?? Why? Exactly any reason why? Because YOU said to question or think it's important. It's not a person saying it's not important to not search it, that's not how logical cases work. It's a claim proposed by you, therefore, for anyone to take this claim of yours with any care, they might need a lot of justification and reasons to do so.

Why should of that guy known what a crankshank was? Apparently to you that's a false level of believing without knowing or running his mouth. One can "love cars" and not give a fucking single damn about the details you think about cars and what the significant concepts of cars are, are important at all.

If you had an idea or desire of seeing other people learn or think about the questions in ways you do, you should try viewing the perspectives of others more. Because instead, you don't focus on what would motivate another to question; you just bombard people with your thoughts on what you think is important/significant. You never seem to get how to continue to the point of explaining why one "should" anything you proclaim. You just assert it.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: