psikeyhackr - 26 April 2008 07:27 PM

I can’t believe you allow this discussion to go on here. It really shows a lack of professionalism by the admins, and a lack of direction by the powers at be.

Is this a serious forum?

So you think it is possible to design and construct a 110 story skyscraper without figuring out the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE to put on every level of the buildings?  And that it makes sense not to have that information for the last SIX YEARS?

psik

What?

is that sarcasm or just a parody of troofers?

Oh, no, Jeff, this person is for real.  Apparently (and you have to go back several pages), psik calculated a four second discrepancy in the projected vs. actual time it took for the towers to fall.  This is enough to have him go on and on about needing the exact amount of steel and concrete on each floor to verify that the towers did actually fall (collapse) instead of toppling by some unstated (by him) nefarious act--one assumes a controlled demolition.

My advice? Ignore him.  I’ve stopped replying to his posts.  However, let me make another prediction (I’ve made several, all of which came to pass.  I think I should open a psychic office!!).  I predict that psik will ask you to explain why, oh why, the NIST report can’t give him the exact amount of steel and concrete.  And that they don’t is suspicious of something bordering on incompetence or something (cue the woo-woo music).

Walk away.  Trust me.

Linda

HappyHumanist - 27 April 2008 11:36 AM

Oh, no, Jeff, this person is for real.  Apparently (and you have to go back several pages), psik calculated a four second discrepancy in the projected vs. actual time it took for the towers to fall.  This is enough to have him go on and on about needing the exact amount of steel and concrete on each floor to verify that the towers did actually fall (collapse) instead of toppling by some unstated (by him) nefarious act--one assumes a controlled demolition.

Linda

Are you talking about this?

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewreply/34969/

If so about all you are saying is that you didn’t understand it if you read it.

I don’t know what you are accomplishing by emphasizing exact but you don’t think there is a problem with the nation that put men on the moon 38 years ago not being able to tell everyone in the world the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of a building designed before the moon landing?  The NIST report can’t even tell us the total amount of concrete.

psik

psikeyhackr - 27 April 2008 04:42 PM

The NIST report can’t even tell us the total amount of concrete.

The blueprints are available on the internet for the North Tower. Although NIST refused to provide them, someone with access to the blueprints did provide them.

Go to http://www.ae911truth.org/ and click on “blueprints.”

From these, an estimate of concrete and steel for each floor could be made.

But, the real question--would people not interested in hearing the answer be willing to accept the estimate?

Probably not.

THIS should pretty definitively answer the question once and for all.

If I’m not mistaken, Psik posted this first.  Just as funny the second time:

“How would you like it if you spent months in a mountain cave sleeping on rocks planning something really special only to have someone take the credit away from you?”

JRM5001 - 29 April 2008 11:23 AM

If I’m not mistaken, Psik posted this first.  Just as funny the second time:


“How would you like it if you spent months in a mountain cave sleeping on rocks planning something really special only to have someone take the credit away from you?”

It’s funny, but I didn’t do it.

I almost never talk about who might have done it or why.  I don’t care.

psik

mckenzievmd - 29 April 2008 09:21 AM

THIS should pretty definitively answer the question once and for all.

That was funny. Did you notice how the al queda representative almost disclosed where bin laden is? I loved it when he said, “Talking to you is like talking to a goat.” We have a couple of goats in this forum. Stupidity loves attention. A sense of humor is a necessity.

dadeets - 27 April 2008 05:29 PM

psikeyhackr - 27 April 2008 04:42 PM

The NIST report can’t even tell us the total amount of concrete.

The blueprints are available on the internet for the North Tower. Although NIST refused to provide them, someone with access to the blueprints did provide them.

Go to http://www.ae911truth.org/ and click on “blueprints.”

From these, an estimate of concrete and steel for each floor could be made.

But, the real question--would people not interested in hearing the answer be willing to accept the estimate?

Probably not.

The amazing thing to me is all of the Americans that don’t expect to have gotten that from the NIST already with 3 years of work costing $20,000,000 though more was spent on Clinton’s blowjob.  I would expect people to be upset regardless of what they thought brought the buildings down.  It is certainly a curious performance from the nation that put men on the moon.

Now here is data from Urich’s spreadsheet.  It is from the column “core column steel tons”.  These are the six basement levels.  As far as I know the columns were 36 feet long and and each level was 12 feet high.  But not only is every level different but they get lighter as you go down.  Now how is that possible? 

B1 469,32
B2 461,57
B3 453,81
B4 446,06
B5 438,31
B6 430,56

http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/urich/calcMassAndPeWtc1.htm

Now if you check you will notice that each level is different by 7,75.  That looks like some kind of interpolation with the lightest on the bottom.  ROFL

But on floors 1 thru 6 are all an identical 477,07.

That makes absolutely no sense to me.  So though I admire Urich’s effort I am inclined to be suspicious of the details and wonder how he got such weird numbers.  So as far as I am concerned there is no reliable data to base a DEBATE on.  We can’t tell with any precision what the plane hit.

That is reason to criticize every architectural and engineering schools in the United States.  Why isn’t every engineering school in the country demanding a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of the WTC.

MIT Model

psik

New unreleased video proves the 9/11 truth movement was right.

sorry I guess I was wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1nA4SdMus

I have noticed something curious about this thread.

It gets almost 100 views every day.  On 5/23 it was 12660.

But they don’t make responses.

psik

I recently but somewhat accidentally ran across something interesting in the NCSTAR report.

On the matter of mass distribution of the towers the NIST says this:

2.4.3 Single Impulse Excitations

Accurate estimation of the tower’s motion during the airplane impact required detailed knowledge of the geometry, weight distribution, and impact velocity of the aircraft, as well as detailed knowledge of the geometry, weight distribution, and structural strength of the tower. At the time of this test series (fall 2003), much of this information was unknown, and the impact motion could only be roughly estimated. To allow this estimate to be made quickly, many simplifying assumptions were made regarding the nature of the impact.

http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5D.pdf page 74

Since people don’t just accidentally decide how much steel and concrete to put on every level of a 1360 foot building that can withstand 100 mph winds the above statement is not surprising.  The peculiar thing is that this was not discussed A LOT in preparing to analyze the event back in 2001.

I don’t understand why they couldn’t have had that info on the building by fall 2003 though and I certainly don’t understand why we don’t have it now. WTF

I love the jargon they have to come with for these kind of reports, “ Single Impulse Excitations”.  You have to stop and think, “What the hell does that mean?” Oh. it was hit real hard one time and started vibrating.  DUH!  500 mph airliners do that, but only once.

The south tower moved 12 inches at the 70th floor which was 130 feet below the impact at the 81st floor.  The tower oscillated to FOUR MINUTES.

These are physical data, showing a characteristic nearly exponential decay (damping) of the oscillation. Observed oscillation of the WTC 2 Tower provides compelling empirical evidence that it was hit by a fast-moving jetliner. Any claim to the contrary must confront these published data or the analysis thereof.
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5.pdf p. 26 It will not do in scientific inquiry to ignore data like this – even if one does not trust the source for some reason. In other words, the argument must be to the DATA, not to the source (ad hominem).

http://stj911.org/jones/Jones_Replyto_Reynolds_Wood.html

So that Single Pulse Excitation was caused by a lot of kinetic energy from the plane and the amount of energy which produced structural damage cannot be computed from the total of the aircraft without calculating what produced this behavior in the building and that requires reasonably accurate distribution of steel and concrete information.  And where does the NIST show that data and do those calculation?  {19391}

psik

I removed my reply after finding it moved to this 15 page waste of time! I can’t believe there are 15 pages of argument about whether or not there was a government conspiracy regarding 9/11 and I REFUSE to participate!

Just to make sure you know my stance.....To believe this inept and incompetent government could pull off something of this magnitude is just mind boggling.

asanta - 02 September 2008 08:07 PM

Just to make sure you know my stance.....To believe this inept and incompetent government could pull off something of this magnitude is just mind boggling.

Does that mean you don’t find an airliner of less than 200 tons causing building of over 400,000 tons to collapse to the ground less than 2 hours after impact and do it in less than 18 seconds mind boggling?

Do you regard Newtonian physics as mind boggling?

psik

I thought this was a forum for skepticism based on science.