Page 6 of 34 FirstFirst 1234567891011121316 ... LastLast
Results 66 to 78 of 433
  1. #66
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Winter Haven, FL
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by o-ring View Post
    Printer, If you are comparing 2010 construction, the high priced materials, a profit driven ideology and a race to the bottom in quality to an era where materials were cheaper (at least stably priced) and quality was more important then you disappoint me for someone who has worked in aerospace.
    If you could provide me with your calculations on burn time and temp for a plane load of av gas and the time expected to weaken these oversized RSJ's I would appreciate it. A plane load of this fluid goes up quickly and the temp does not hang around, it goes up into the atmostphere.
    Comparing the aerospace industry to a never done before construction project is flawed as one bears weight and one doesn't, a plane must be light to fly and is not designed to hit anything.
    A fire supression system is designed to put out building 7 and should put out the towers if the jockey pumps have maintained thier pressure and the pipes not severed. This was not an oil well fire it was a fire, plain and simple and should have been extinguished at some point. Any fire would energise the control relays to de energise the fans and dampers if not thermally activated (it's still a fire).
    A drink straw? Take a 1337ft straw and bend it, see if it falls in a footprint!
    A boeing 767-223ER only weighs 300,000 lbs. With passengers and full of fuel it weighs 340,000 lbs. Im sure the building was designed to withstand that kind of impact. Concrete shatters when excessive force is applied to it. So take the heat of the impact, the shock to the steel and concrete of the structure, and the subsequent fire, you have building collapse. Im sure if the plane had hit the bottom it would have fallen in a very short time.

    Building seven- You are assuming that the sprinkler system worked. With no power the pumps would not of worked. The damage to the foundations of the buildings caould of easily disrupted the water flow. Essentially the buildings foundations were connected. It is easily possible that the shock wave from tower one affected the foundation of seven.

  2. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Tool-Slinger View Post
    The twin towers were brought down by airliners crashing into them.

    There is no need to run around like hot ants looking for another explanation. Planes fly in, buildings go down. This is a fairly simple concept.

    No explosives, no MOSSAD, no CIA, no UFOs. Planes in, buildings down. Any other concept is really nutty. X10. I mean really nutty.

    I love conspiracy theories, but I do have some grip on reality. Planes in, buildings down. Simple.
    And since we have plenty of photos of the airliners flying into the buildings, and we have manifests full of persons on those planes who no longer exist, and the buildings did not fall in a manner conducive to implosion, there is really nothing to show any type of conspiracy.

    Lastely; what would the purpose of any conspiracy even be? Certainly not to make Islam look bad when all the government has done is to make excuses for the way Muslims act.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  3. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    126
    Regarding the blast wire. In this day and age, wireless detonators would be easy to install.

    No preparation at all really, Walk in, "here to inspect elevators/strucutre, etc" Place detonators in all required areas, no running wires or suspicion at all. Use a wireless router every couple floors for initiation/ timing commands to the charge detonators.

    There is a lot of evidence charges were used. The more I have learned of the wtc the more likely is seems it is a set up of some sort.

  4. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    10,433
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    And since we have plenty of photos of the airliners flying into the buildings, and we have manifests full of persons on those planes who no longer exist, and the buildings did not fall in a manner conducive to implosion, there is really nothing to show any type of conspiracy.

    Lastely; what would the purpose of any conspiracy even be? Certainly not to make Islam look bad when all the government has done is to make excuses for the way Muslims act.
    Exactly.

    Moderate muslims and infidel dupes are fed this type of tripe to cast a shadow of doubt upon the evil workings of Islam. I don't know how successful it is, maybe 10% Americans or something like that. Moderate muslims it is more like 40%. Muslims slaughter Americans, and some do not even believe it ever happened. They are brain-dead.
    "You boys are really making this thing harder than it has to be". Me

    "Who ARE you people? And WHAT are you doing in my SWAMP!?" Shrek

    Service calls submitted after 3PM will be posted the next business day.

    I give free estimates [Wild Ass Guesses] over the phone.

    "I am sorry for interrupting, please continue with your quarreling" Some chick on TV

  5. #70
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,964
    Quote Originally Posted by royc View Post
    As I said before, lets say that the two buildings hit by airliners came down the way its explained, but lets focus on the NOT so obvious.

    I want someone explain how building seven came down the same way, when not hit by any airliner, and fires that were minimal in the context that those fires where not enough to do what happend to the other two.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0


    Roy
    Just because something looks the same as something else does not mean it is the result of the same action. Yes, #7 fell, to the untrained and maybe even trained eye, the same as would a building that was deliberately brought down by explosives. That is not at all proof that it did happen.

    As for the claims of what different people said relating to "pulling" and other terms, this site seems to dispell all of the conspiracy theory claims pertaining to such things; http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

    Motive? There must be a viable motive for things to have been done conspiratorally. Conspiracy requires many people following an elaborate plan with coordinated actions. What is the motive for destroying any of these buildings and who would benefit, how?
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  6. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    10,433
    Quote Originally Posted by thefonz1 View Post
    Regarding the blast wire. In this day and age, wireless detonators would be easy to install.

    No preparation at all really, Walk in, "here to inspect elevators/strucutre, etc" Place detonators in all required areas, no running wires or suspicion at all. Use a wireless router every couple floors for initiation/ timing commands to the charge detonators.

    There is a lot of evidence charges were used. The more I have learned of the wtc the more likely is seems it is a set up of some sort.
    There is a lot of evidence charges were used.

    Ya, there is also a little evidence planes were used. Sheesh! Are your guys heads really buried that deeply up your ass? Muslims hijacked our planes and flew them into our buildings. That is what really happened. We saw it on TV. This is not a parlor trick, it really happened.

    There is no rational explanation otherwise.
    "You boys are really making this thing harder than it has to be". Me

    "Who ARE you people? And WHAT are you doing in my SWAMP!?" Shrek

    Service calls submitted after 3PM will be posted the next business day.

    I give free estimates [Wild Ass Guesses] over the phone.

    "I am sorry for interrupting, please continue with your quarreling" Some chick on TV

  7. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,964
    Quote Originally Posted by cactusjack View Post
    Psst....on the left hand side..there are several

    http://911review.com/motive/index.html
    Did you actually read those alleged motives? Come on now! For personal gain, you really think that the Muslims who are claimed to have been the perpetrators of the attacks were fabricated? You think that our airline securities who have tickets for these men were in on it? And that the jets were allowed....by who!....to fly into buildings?

    Tool is correct; there are no motives there.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  8. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,964
    Quote Originally Posted by thefonz1 View Post
    Regarding the blast wire. In this day and age, wireless detonators would be easy to install.

    No preparation at all really, Walk in, "here to inspect elevators/strucutre, etc" Place detonators in all required areas, no running wires or suspicion at all. Use a wireless router every couple floors for initiation/ timing commands to the charge detonators.

    There is a lot of evidence charges were used. The more I have learned of the wtc the more likely is seems it is a set up of some sort.
    What about all of the missing people and the accounted for missing airliners? Were they all murdered and the planes buried somewhere?
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  9. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by o-ring View Post
    Printer, If you are comparing 2010 construction, the high priced materials, a profit driven ideology and a race to the bottom in quality to an era where materials were cheaper (at least stably priced) and quality was more important then you disappoint me for someone who has worked in aerospace.
    If you could provide me with your calculations on burn time and temp for a plane load of av gas and the time expected to weaken these oversized RSJ's I would appreciate it. A plane load of this fluid goes up quickly and the temp does not hang around, it goes up into the atmostphere.
    Comparing the aerospace industry to a never done before construction project is flawed as one bears weight and one doesn't, a plane must be light to fly and is not designed to hit anything.
    A fire supression system is designed to put out building 7 and should put out the towers if the jockey pumps have maintained thier pressure and the pipes not severed. This was not an oil well fire it was a fire, plain and simple and should have been extinguished at some point. Any fire would energise the control relays to de energise the fans and dampers if not thermally activated (it's still a fire).
    A drink straw? Take a 1337ft straw and bend it, see if it falls in a footprint!
    Sorry to disappoint you, not sure how shaving a buck by using engineering to be the lowest bidder to get the job does that or the relationship to aerospace. Now if I only had current construction to go by I can see your point but I have worked in buildings built over a range of time (funny how this building controls job gets you crawling in all kinds of places) and the current complex I am has construction spanning over 100 years. Cost is always an issue even back then.

    Engineering is engineering whether it is a building or an airplane. In fact they do have much in common as they use moment of inertia calculations for beams and distributed loads as in stressed skins, think of a wing truss or a floor truss, not much different. Both have static and dynamic loads that have to be designed for.

    Back to the main towers, section 2. gives a simple enough explanation that even I might understand.

    http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ace/2009/429169.html

    Now in terms of fire and suppression I was talking about the main buildings. Kind of a stretch if I were relating a fire in two other buildings many floors up to building seven. No I was talking about the towers. I have not looked into building seven at all and can not comment much about it other than the explosions heard could have been the electrical transformers blowing up.

    Sorry about the simple straw example of beam deflection. When you do not know your audience you try to use examples that can get your point across when you do not know their level of knowledge. Then you do know that when you bend a beam the load carrying capacity is reduced. Good. Now being the buildings were not beams why would they buckle and collapse like a beam rather than in the manner that they did? Namely gravity pulled them down, and last I heard of, gravity still pulls straight down.

  10. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    Did you actually read those alleged motives? Come on now! For personal gain, you really think that the Muslims who are claimed to have been the perpetrators of the attacks were fabricated? You think that our airline securities who have tickets for these men were in on it? And that the jets were allowed....by who!....to fly into buildings?

    Tool is correct; there are no motives there.
    (Just expanding on an idea.)

    Lets see, some guys on a far away dusty outback thinks up an idea to hijack a couple of planes and do a bonanza run verses a plot involving getting explosives in the right places without anyone noticing and timing it all with, surprise surprise, a hijacking that just happens to be taking place at the time.

    Yup, those Saudi's sure know how to organize things.

  11. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Harper View Post
    A boeing 767-223ER only weighs 300,000 lbs. With passengers and full of fuel it weighs 340,000 lbs. Im sure the building was designed to withstand that kind of impact. Concrete shatters when excessive force is applied to it. So take the heat of the impact, the shock to the steel and concrete of the structure, and the subsequent fire, you have building collapse. Im sure if the plane had hit the bottom it would have fallen in a very short time.

    Building seven- You are assuming that the sprinkler system worked. With no power the pumps would not of worked. The damage to the foundations of the buildings caould of easily disrupted the water flow. Essentially the buildings foundations were connected. It is easily possible that the shock wave from tower one affected the foundation of seven.
    Sure the building was designed for that kind of impact. But they did not take into account what the resulting fire would do to the building.

  12. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by cactusjack View Post
    As said on the comment section of the video.

    Silverstein was clearly talking about 'pulling' the fire fighters. The decision was made to pull the firefighters and not to save WTC 7, that does not at all mean it was a controlled demolition.
    He was talking about all the loss of life already and not wanting more. But when you want to believe things words have different meanings.

  13. #78
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NW Arkansas
    Posts
    1,288
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    Sure the building was designed for that kind of impact. But they did not take into account what the resulting fire would do to the building.
    The buildings were designed to take a direct hit from a Boeing 707.

    Another interesting fact. There were two Mosques in the Towers. One Mosque was 100% with the cleansing station Muslims use before prayers.
    I guess there was already a "victory" Mosque at ground zero before 9/11.
    Signature on hold. Trying to find a real Jefferson quote I like. Others here have bogus Jefferson quotes too.

Page 6 of 34 FirstFirst 1234567891011121316 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event