9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-06-2015, 01:22 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 01:17 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  But after almost 14 years how can people who haven't even asked for correct data admit their conclusions were wrong. So they insist they are correct without data and need to pretend it is irrelevant.

psik
So you're saying it wasn't just planes? I have the feeling your link isn't brief, so I didn't click it. I'm not being antagonistic. I just don't know what's going on.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:12 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 01:17 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  But these people don't seem to have questioned the distribution of mass in skyscrapers to compute the Potential Energy.

What potential energy? The sum of all the mass of the building? Each floor? The contents? What? And what is it going to show?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:16 PM
9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 08:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-06-2015 01:17 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  But these people don't seem to have questioned the distribution of mass in skyscrapers to compute the Potential Energy.

What potential energy? The sum of all the mass of the building? Each floor? The contents? What? And what is it going to show?

-9.8m/s^2?

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:17 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 08:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  The contents? What? And what is it going to show?

Gravity sucks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:35 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
-12, the dirty dozen!

Yippee, LOL

Post pictures of a pencil thin core nothing like the real building and think I give a damn about my "reputation" here.

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:46 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 01:22 PM)Clockwork Wrote:  So you're saying it wasn't just planes? I have the feeling your link isn't brief, so I didn't click it. I'm not being antagonistic. I just don't know what's going on.

I have already described how to model the incident.

Make an accurate computer model of the north tower and then remove 5 levels, 91 through 95. That is more damage than aircraft impact and fires could possible do.

15 storeys would fall 60 feet onto 90 storeys. Simulate what will happen. Even with 3 to 1 destruction that would leave 45 storeys standing but that is nowhere near what happened. So if the model doesn't completely self destruct then some people would have to explain why.

But if it doesn't destruct some people would also have to explain why they didn't figure out collapse wasn't possible. I suppose they don't want to go through that after 14 years.

The funny thing is Richard Gage and his buddies don't bring that up either. I asked him about mass distribution in May of 2008 when he did his dog and pony show at Chicago Circle Campus.

He carries boxes around but doesn't try to make a model either. Why not if he claims planes couldn't do it.

The Chris Moron vs. Retard Gage debate is pretty dumb from both sides.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2dEVikWEbU

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:58 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 01:21 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Skyscraper physics is not some great mystery."

Confused Skyscraper "physics" is not a great mystery and is apparently simple, but the conspiracy is?

Hobo Truthers hurt my brain. JFK's head would explode if he read this shit. Gasp

And I have said what about conspiracies? How much mass was involved in the Kennedy assassination?

People too dumb to analyse the physics think conspiracies are more important.

I don't give a shit who did it or why but nobody can change how physics works. Or doesn't work.

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 09:01 PM
9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 08:58 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(23-06-2015 01:21 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Skyscraper physics is not some great mystery."

Confused Skyscraper "physics" is not a great mystery and is apparently simple, but the conspiracy is?

Hobo Truthers hurt my brain. JFK's head would explode if he read this shit. Gasp

And I have said what about conspiracies? How much mass was involved in the Kennedy assassination?

People too dumb to analyse the physics think conspiracies are more important.

I don't give a shit who did it or why but nobody can change how physics works. Or doesn't work.

psik

If you're not a troll, you're a real fucking moron. I'll hope you're a troll. Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 09:10 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 08:46 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(23-06-2015 01:22 PM)Clockwork Wrote:  So you're saying it wasn't just planes? I have the feeling your link isn't brief, so I didn't click it. I'm not being antagonistic. I just don't know what's going on.

I have already described how to model the incident.

Make an accurate computer model of the north tower and then remove 5 levels, 91 through 95. That is more damage than aircraft impact and fires could possible do.

15 storeys would fall 60 feet onto 90 storeys. Simulate what will happen. Even with 3 to 1 destruction that would leave 45 storeys standing but that is nowhere near what happened. So if the model doesn't completely self destruct then some people would have to explain why.

But if it doesn't destruct some people would also have to explain why they didn't figure out collapse wasn't possible. I suppose they don't want to go through that after 14 years.

The funny thing is Richard Gage and his buddies don't bring that up either. I asked him about mass distribution in May of 2008 when he did his dog and pony show at Chicago Circle Campus.

He carries boxes around but doesn't try to make a model either. Why not if he claims planes couldn't do it.

The Chris Moron vs. Retard Gage debate is pretty dumb from both sides.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2dEVikWEbU

psik

You have the NIST report for that; it contains people who are well qualified to speak about the collapse who ran computer simulations of it. Not fucking inaccurate physical representations of what a skyscraper is,like yours with stacked washers.

Additionally, you can't seem to grasp this bit: *each floor does not support the one higher up*. Each floor is suspended/supported by a series of columns running through the building.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Kaepora Gaebora's post
23-06-2015, 10:46 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-06-2015 08:46 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  I have already described how to model the incident.

Make an accurate computer model of the north tower and then remove 5 levels, 91 through 95. That is more damage than aircraft impact and fires could possible do.

Except that we have footage showing that five floors were not magically removed. They were severely damaged, but there was still the actual material in place which is not quite the scenario you wish to paint with your "simulation" removing five levels.

Hey, I can program a computer to do that ... but do you think it'd look like WTC 1 or 2?

If you do, you're dumber than I thought.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: