72 of 91
72
Any scientific evidence to support official WTC 7 fall theory?
Posted: 20 December 2013 11:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1066 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  469
Joined  2012-07-02

Just for the record everyone, gremlins weren’t investigated or tested for either in the WTC 7 NIST report. wink

 Signature 

“When your arguments are…ashes. Then you have my permission to cry.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 December 2013 12:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1067 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  428
Joined  2013-02-16
Robert Walper - 20 December 2013 11:59 AM

Just for the record everyone, gremlins weren’t investigated or tested for either in the WTC 7 NIST report. wink

I heard yo’ momma crushed it with her ass coz she’s so fat.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 December 2013 08:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1068 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4350
Joined  2010-08-15
jomper - 20 December 2013 12:12 PM
Robert Walper - 20 December 2013 11:59 AM

Just for the record everyone, gremlins weren’t investigated or tested for either in the WTC 7 NIST report. wink

I heard yo’ momma crushed it with her ass coz she’s so fat.

Wait a minute! 
Is that the solution and I missed it?

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 December 2013 11:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1069 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  469
Joined  2012-07-02
jomper - 20 December 2013 12:12 PM
Robert Walper - 20 December 2013 11:59 AM

Just for the record everyone, gremlins weren’t investigated or tested for either in the WTC 7 NIST report. wink

I heard yo’ momma crushed it with her ass coz she’s so fat.

I’m curious, jumper. Do you routinely make attacks against the recently deceased family members of others, or do you only do so against strangers online?

 Signature 

“When your arguments are…ashes. Then you have my permission to cry.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2013 12:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1070 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  428
Joined  2013-02-16
Robert Walper - 20 December 2013 11:17 PM
jomper - 20 December 2013 12:12 PM
Robert Walper - 20 December 2013 11:59 AM

Just for the record everyone, gremlins weren’t investigated or tested for either in the WTC 7 NIST report. wink

I heard yo’ momma crushed it with her ass coz she’s so fat.

I’m curious, jumper. Do you routinely make attacks against the recently deceased family members of others, or do you only do so against strangers online?

I am sorry for your loss, Robert. Obviously I could not have known that since, as you note, you are a “stranger online” to me.

If you had been able to recognise a generic “yo momma” joke you would perhaps not have felt compelled to expose your bereavement to the thread in this desperately unfortunate way.

More importantly if you had not felt compelled to make a facetious post about “gremlins” you would not have have received a facetious response from me although, in fairness, almost all your posts on this thread have been facetious.

Again, I am sorry for your loss.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2013 07:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1071 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1765
Joined  2007-10-22

Aren’t you guys tired of this yet?

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2013 01:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1072 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  428
Joined  2013-02-16
garythehuman - 21 December 2013 07:29 AM

Aren’t you guys tired of this yet?

Yes, deeply. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to allow weak-minded bullies misrepresent my position and arguments and then award themselves victories through obfuscation and distraction from the facts: not that I see online discussions like this one as adversarial in any genuine sense, of course.

[ Edited: 21 December 2013 04:31 PM by jomper ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2013 06:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1073 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05
jomper - 21 December 2013 01:30 PM
garythehuman - 21 December 2013 07:29 AM

Aren’t you guys tired of this yet?

Yes, deeply. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to allow weak-minded bullies misrepresent my position and arguments and then award themselves victories through obfuscation and distraction from the facts: not that I see online discussions like this one as adversarial in any genuine sense, of course.

It is so shocking that the nation that put men on the Moon has so many citizens who can’t think to ask about the steel distributions down skyscrapers.  And WTC7 is so obviously a demolition it is not even interesting.  At least WTC1 and 2 offer some challenge.

But how do people admit how shallow the problem is after TWELVE YEARS?

Engineers could do a physical model of the Tacoma Bridge in 1940 to model the physics of the real bridge.  But then they did not have electronic computers to confuse themselves with.

at 2 min 45 sec

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB008RAluyg

But when do structural engineers even discuss modelling WTC 1 or 2 to settle this business?

[24917]
psik

[ Edited: 21 December 2013 09:34 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 December 2013 02:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1074 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4350
Joined  2010-08-15
psikeyhackr - 21 December 2013 06:25 PM

But when do structural engineers even discuss modelling WTC 1 or 2 to settle this business?

psik

You keep saying that but why is stuff like these youtube videos available with a quick google search?
And this is just the start of it.

WTC Structural Design
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB_XRXCt6nU

Discovery HD Accurate 3D Model Of WTC Twin Towers Structure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gQtox9ukYw

I still don’t understand what part of this structure presents a mystery to you?
Or why catastrophic weakening of major support elements should be viewed as an illogical cause of the entire building collapsing.

There was severing of major structural elements, there was intense heat and stupendous weight and irresistible gravity and then momentum…

Why the mystery?

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 December 2013 07:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1075 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05
citizenschallenge.pm - 24 December 2013 02:59 PM

I still don’t understand what part of this structure presents a mystery to you?
Or why catastrophic weakening of major support elements should be viewed as an illogical cause of the entire building collapsing.

There was severing of major structural elements, there was intense heat and stupendous weight and irresistible gravity and then momentum…

Why the mystery?

So you are impressed by the words “stupendous” and “irresistible”.

There was another famous collapse in this country.  The Tacoma Narrows Bridge.

They built a physical model.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB008RAluyg

The model is shown at 2:45

Interestingly this model was built before the collapse.  They knew there was a problem with the bridge caused by the wind but they did not know how bad it could get and that it could completely destroy the bridge.  But the model is 54 feet long and built to 1:200th scale.

Now the north tower problem is different and the issue is not just collapse or not collapse.  It is TIME TO COLLAPSE.  The north tower came down in less than 30 seconds and some estimates say 10 or 11 seconds for the majority of the mass.  But if you dropped a bowling ball from the top of the north tower it would take 9.22 seconds to reach the ground assuming NO AIR RESISTANCE.  So how could 14 stories at the top destroy more than 90 stories below that were supposedly intact and do it in less than 26 seconds which is the maximum possible time shown in the videos.

Ever heard of the Conservation of Momentum?

But on the modelling business, they did not have electronic computers in 1940.  So how is it that a collapse of a major engineering project could be resolved with a physical model decades ago but we can’t get a model of something that we apparently have sent Americans to go off and kill and die over?

Now we have 3-D printers to help make the model.  The Tacoma model had to be built by hand, though it was not tested to destruction.  If the printer can make parts 2 ft by 2 ft then each level would only be 1.5 inches tall.  110 of them stacked would be 13.7 feet, significantly smaller then the Tacoma Bridge model.  3-D printing would allow for lots of repeatable tests with parts made to computer precision.  But we would still need accurate distribution of mass to test the collapse and determine how strong the levels had to be.

But then I haven’t seen that information much less heard serious discussion of modelling the collapse.

Of course after 12 years there would be a serious issue if a model will not completely collapse in a short enough time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT4BXIpdIdo

[25097]
psik

[ Edited: 24 December 2013 09:21 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 01:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1076 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  428
Joined  2013-02-16
citizenschallenge.pm - 24 December 2013 02:59 PM
psikeyhackr - 21 December 2013 06:25 PM

But when do structural engineers even discuss modelling WTC 1 or 2 to settle this business?

psik

You keep saying that but why is stuff like these youtube videos available with a quick google search?
And this is just the start of it.

WTC Structural Design
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB_XRXCt6nU

Discovery HD Accurate 3D Model Of WTC Twin Towers Structure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gQtox9ukYw

I still don’t understand what part of this structure presents a mystery to you?
Or why catastrophic weakening of major support elements should be viewed as an illogical cause of the entire building collapsing.

There was severing of major structural elements, there was intense heat and stupendous weight and irresistible gravity and then momentum…

Why the mystery?

How is this even supposed to be on topic?

Happy Christmas, everyone!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 11:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1077 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4350
Joined  2010-08-15
jomper - 25 December 2013 01:56 AM

How is this even supposed to be on topic?


No more Off Topic than trying to compare the Tacoma Narrows Bridge incident with WTC 1,2 or 7 for that matter.

Besides the same sort of information can be found regarding WTC7.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874


wtc-7-lede-0808.jpg
World Trade Center 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. (Photograph by New York Office of Emergency Management)

wtc-nist-lg.jpg

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 12:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1078 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  428
Joined  2013-02-16
citizenschallenge.pm - 25 December 2013 11:32 AM

No more Off Topic than trying to compare the Tacoma Narrows Bridge incident with WTC 1,2 or 7 for that matter.

But Tacoma Bridge wasn’t mentioned in comparison with those buildings. Surely that’s clear? The fundamental point psikey was clearly making has to do with modelling.

[ Edited: 25 December 2013 01:33 PM by jomper ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 December 2013 04:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1079 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2423
Joined  2007-07-05
jomper - 25 December 2013 12:59 PM
citizenschallenge.pm - 25 December 2013 11:32 AM

No more Off Topic than trying to compare the Tacoma Narrows Bridge incident with WTC 1,2 or 7 for that matter.

But Tacoma Bridge wasn’t mentioned in comparison with those buildings. Surely that’s clear? The fundamental point psikey was clearly making has to do with modelling.

Holy Shit!  I am actually capable of communicating!  LOL

psik

PS - With some people.

[ Edited: 25 December 2013 04:40 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 December 2013 03:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1080 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  428
Joined  2013-02-16

With festive apologies to citizenschallenge.pm if I am now myself driving the thread off-topic, but on the question of modelling the mechanic of exactly how the collapses occurred in the way that was witnessed, apparently:

Robert Walper - 23 May 2013 11:38 AM

It has been done, countless times and there are several sources on how to verify this independently

and there are

Robert Walper - 23 May 2013 11:44 AM

six… Youtube links and additional sources

of these

Robert Walper - 23 May 2013 12:39 PM

scientific models… three of them being real world models. All of which can be replicated at home with basic materials

but the problem with this evidence is

Robert Walper - 23 May 2013 05:15 PM

I just refuse to submit it

Profile
 
 
   
72 of 91
72