9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-04-2016, 07:19 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Hey gang! Wanna know what we've been learning from our structures professors (otherwise known as why I'm about to collapse from exhaustion)? We've been learning about the bahaviour of slender columns. I thought it might be interesting.

A slender column is one with a slenderness ratio above let's say 2. That's for a sway column, I don't have my notes with me so I can't tell what a non-sway ratio is but it isn't relevant. And these columns certainly have a ratio of greater than 2. When loading occurs in a slender column deformation occurs. And as deformation occurs internal moment increases. Guess what happens when moment gets too high.

Now let's just say, hypothetically, that something happened to increase deformation. Like say, increased steel temperature decreasing compressive strength. Just to throw something out there. Moment in that section would increase as well, and results are predictable.

But moment isn't localized to one spot. No, columns are continuous. Meaning that the moment along the entire thing goes up. And local failures lead to cascading failures. Like an accordion. I'm going to bet a motivated person could show exactly how it pancaked.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like natachan's post
18-04-2016, 08:53 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(18-04-2016 06:04 PM)SYZ Wrote:  
(18-04-2016 05:40 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  That is not what I said. The point of the test is to simulate more damage than aircraft impact and fires could possibly accomplish. Completely remove 5 levels. If the north tower still could not collapse then how could fires have done it?

It's impossible to construct any scaled physical simulation and/or a computer-generated model to unequivocally and accurately demonstrate what happened to the towers. Both scenarios can do no more than predicate what could have happened, but with no 100% degree of certainty.

Until people understand this, the debate will only get even more bogged down in "what ifs".

Is anything ever unequivocal? You are saying you don't have to even demonstrate the probability that fires COULD bring down the north tower.

Allyou are saying is,"Think what you are told!" You should not even ask for accurate data on the towers.

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
18-04-2016, 09:16 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(18-04-2016 08:53 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  Allyou are saying is,"Think what you are told!" You should not even ask for accurate data on the towers.

psik

WRITE THE FUCKING PAPER if you're so clear that "just believing" an enquiry headed up by experts is a terrible idea. Either write it yourself or reference someone who has written it. It's all very well to say "Question everything" but all you're doing is trying to spread your paranoia. You have no alternative to offer, all you can do is sneer at people who reasonably accept a reasonable explanation. Unless you offer a better reasonable explanation, you're just masturbating.

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
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
18-04-2016, 09:19 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(18-04-2016 05:40 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  That is not what I said. The point of the test is to simulate more damge than aircraft impact and fires could possilbly accomplish. Completely rem ove 5 levels. If the north tower still could not collapse then how could fires have done it?

Psikey, you have the cart quite entirely before the horse here. The WTC towers weren't destroyed by controlled demolition. They were brought down by slap-dash barely in the nick of time demolition in an attempt to cover for a contingency that hadn't been anticipated and never should have occurred. The rush job using whatever resources they had to hand is the reason an amateur like yourself can spot it at all. With a team of professionals and time to prepare you'd never have known the difference.

The four planes that were hijacked on the morning of 11/9/2001 were carrying full loads of psycho-actives meant for broadbrush transcontinental dispersal. The planes never reached cruising altitude so the automatic systems never began dispersal and the hijackers were likely unaware of them and certainly untrained in initiating dispersal manually. So when the two planes struck the WTC towers they were still carrying a full load of BMA cocktail. The ensuing fire wouldn't have even put a dent in it. The stuff's designed for deployment through a running jet engine into the stratosphere.

You can imagine the havoc that might have ensued had the nature and formulation of the behavior modifying agents been determined by the crash investigators. The residues would have looked suspiciously like somebody had put a meth lab aboard a plane. Given even a modicum of brain power they might have reverse engineered the composition of BMA-164.

That was obviously unacceptable so the powers that be used the one option available to them and demolished the WTC towers to conceal the evidence. It was a rushed job carried out amidst the chaos of the attacks, which is why it's so obvious. Like I said though, this isn't a contingency that they'd planned for. This sort of attack shouldn't have been possible in a pacified population.

They've done an admirable job of damage control since then though. You seem like a decent sort so I hate to have to tell you that the whole "controlled demolition" conspiracy theory is just one more smoke screen orchestrated to hide the truth. You've done well to see past the official lies only to be caught in a stickier and more insidious web.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
18-04-2016, 10:44 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(18-04-2016 09:19 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(18-04-2016 05:40 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  That is not what I said. The point of the test is to simulate more damge than aircraft impact and fires could possilbly accomplish. Completely rem ove 5 levels. If the north tower still could not collapse then how could fires have done it?

Psikey, you have the cart quite entirely before the horse here. The WTC towers weren't destroyed by controlled demolition. They were brought down by slap-dash barely in the nick of time demolition in an attempt to cover for a contingency that hadn't been anticipated and never should have occurred. The rush job using whatever resources they had to hand is the reason an amateur like yourself can spot it at all. With a team of professionals and time to prepare you'd never have known the difference.

The four planes that were hijacked on the morning of 11/9/2001 were carrying full loads of psycho-actives meant for broadbrush transcontinental dispersal. The planes never reached cruising altitude so the automatic systems never began dispersal and the hijackers were likely unaware of them and certainly untrained in initiating dispersal manually. So when the two planes struck the WTC towers they were still carrying a full load of BMA cocktail. The ensuing fire wouldn't have even put a dent in it. The stuff's designed for deployment through a running jet engine into the stratosphere.

You can imagine the havoc that might have ensued had the nature and formulation of the behavior modifying agents been determined by the crash investigators. The residues would have looked suspiciously like somebody had put a meth lab aboard a plane. Given even a modicum of brain power they might have reverse engineered the composition of BMA-164.

That was obviously unacceptable so the powers that be used the one option available to them and demolished the WTC towers to conceal the evidence. It was a rushed job carried out amidst the chaos of the attacks, which is why it's so obvious. Like I said though, this isn't a contingency that they'd planned for. This sort of attack shouldn't have been possible in a pacified population.

They've done an admirable job of damage control since then though. You seem like a decent sort so I hate to have to tell you that the whole "controlled demolition" conspiracy theory is just one more smoke screen orchestrated to hide the truth. You've done well to see past the official lies only to be caught in a stickier and more insidious web.

Bravo. But I was hoping no one would tell him the “truth”, and I certainly don’t see what good it can do to alert him to BMA-164

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-04-2016, 04:57 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Having studied many ancient texts. I have discerned that Caesar Augustus and Vespasian are the devils who are responsible for the twin towers collapse,

Prove me wrong. Wink

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-04-2016, 05:32 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(18-04-2016 09:19 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(18-04-2016 05:40 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  That is not what I said. The point of the test is to simulate more damge than aircraft impact and fires could possilbly accomplish. Completely rem ove 5 levels. If the north tower still could not collapse then how could fires have done it?

Psikey, you have the cart quite entirely before the horse here. The WTC towers weren't destroyed by controlled demolition. They were brought down by slap-dash barely in the nick of time demolition in an attempt to cover for a contingency that hadn't been anticipated and never should have occurred. The rush job using whatever resources they had to hand is the reason an amateur like yourself can spot it at all. With a team of professionals and time to prepare you'd never have known the difference.

The four planes that were hijacked on the morning of 11/9/2001 were carrying full loads of psycho-actives meant for broadbrush transcontinental dispersal. The planes never reached cruising altitude so the automatic systems never began dispersal and the hijackers were likely unaware of them and certainly untrained in initiating dispersal manually. So when the two planes struck the WTC towers they were still carrying a full load of BMA cocktail. The ensuing fire wouldn't have even put a dent in it. The stuff's designed for deployment through a running jet engine into the stratosphere.

You can imagine the havoc that might have ensued had the nature and formulation of the behavior modifying agents been determined by the crash investigators. The residues would have looked suspiciously like somebody had put a meth lab aboard a plane. Given even a modicum of brain power they might have reverse engineered the composition of BMA-164.

That was obviously unacceptable so the powers that be used the one option available to them and demolished the WTC towers to conceal the evidence. It was a rushed job carried out amidst the chaos of the attacks, which is why it's so obvious. Like I said though, this isn't a contingency that they'd planned for. This sort of attack shouldn't have been possible in a pacified population.

They've done an admirable job of damage control since then though. You seem like a decent sort so I hate to have to tell you that the whole "controlled demolition" conspiracy theory is just one more smoke screen orchestrated to hide the truth. You've done well to see past the official lies only to be caught in a stickier and more insidious web.

I think you've got it, but how exactly did the reptilian overlords factor into this?

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
19-04-2016, 07:49 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(19-04-2016 04:57 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Having studied many ancient texts. I have discerned that Caesar Augustus and Vespasian are the devils who are responsible for the twin towers collapse,

Prove me wrong. Wink

Nah it was Diocletian who did it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-04-2016, 08:17 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(19-04-2016 07:49 AM)adey67 Wrote:  
(19-04-2016 04:57 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Having studied many ancient texts. I have discerned that Caesar Augustus and Vespasian are the devils who are responsible for the twin towers collapse,

Prove me wrong. Wink

Nah it was Diocletian who did it.

It was the primodial cell. If it had never crawled outta the ooze none of this shit woulda happened.

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
19-04-2016, 10:28 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(19-04-2016 08:17 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(19-04-2016 07:49 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Nah it was Diocletian who did it.

It was the primodial cell. If it had never crawled outta the ooze none of this shit woulda happened.

Bad primordial cell, naughty naughty naughty spank it's ass
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: