Why don't the conspiracy theorists have their OWN investigation?

Originally posted by -PLB-
I can point you to a physical scale model of the 96th floor of the WTC tower which confirmed that collapse would initiate.

I would like to see this if you don't mind. Thanks.

reply to post by Nutter


A short summery can be found here. The paper itself can be found here. The paper itself has to be purchased.

Interesting is that the authors disagree with the NIST report. Which proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that you do not need any special authority, nor do you need to support the "OS" to do an investigation. The cost of their model was just $2000.

Originally posted by Nutter


So, you guys aren't proponents of the "how could they rig 110-story buildings without beeing seen" crowd?

I guess not if you believe that fire failing one story can cause global collapse of the towers.

So, the next time I see the logical fallacy of "how could they rig 110 storys whithout being seen" I will direct them to this thread where the debunkers themselves have proven without a shadow of a doubt that only one story need be compromised.

Thanks guys. (Joey...et al)

So you're not one of the 8.4 kilotons of explosives snuck in to each building guys then ? Good to know.

The math is easy. You are capable of doing it. Why not do it ? You could be the first truther to show us that you actually under stand what F=ma means. The numbers I chose for the equation were simple in the ball park numbers to make the math easy, If you don't like the numbers chose some of your own. Just show us there is one truther who understands what F=ma means and can solve a simple problem.

Pilots for 911 truth tried solving a F=ma problem once, they got 11.2 Gs. They were only off by 9.8 Gs but at least they gave it a try.

reply to post by TheMatrixusesYou


If that's the truth movement's plan, you've failed, sorry. "Gathering power" I have learned is an excuse for not doing anything. If you think "spreading the truth" and informing people is somehow activism, you got alot to learn. The few people that might believe you still won't do anything. I do not know how the movement thinks it is going to "build power" when it keeps dying off and is still small.

The UFO investigators I refered to in my last post had even less "power", few numbers, and were up against a stonewall of govornment secrecy, denials, and refusals. Yet they did get some of the documents they wanted released. They also lobbied their congress people to push for more openess and investigation. They didn't get everything they wanted, no. But what they did get were some documents released, documents that made alot of people normally not interested in UFOs take a second look. They at least attempted something, and with only limited success. Still, the fact is, they did something.

You don't need "power" or "awareness" to get your investigation, or to dig deeper for harder, damning evidence. What you do need is dedication, money, and intelligent, rational investigation and prosecution. Something that the truth movement should have. Aside from the money people donate to conspiracy websites or from books/merchandise purchased, you have wealthy supporters and patrons like Rosie O'Donnel and Charlie Sheen. Why don't you guys get them to help raise funds to hire a legal/investigative team?

"Social suicide" is the lamest of all excuses for "silence". There is no great stigma against people who question the official story. In fact, I know a number of people who openly think the govornment was hiding more than they let on, and they have not suffered. They do not believe the wilder theories, however, because no one has ever given them pretty good, solid, tried and tested proof of them.

I'm interested in action, not talk. Not confrences or conspiracy talk circuits, or standing around shouting "9/11 was a coverup", or looking at the same damned You Tube videos put together by people with no clue what they are talking about. When the truth movement actually starts doing something productive and useful, then maybe I will pay attention to it once again.

Until then, however, the 9/11 truth movement has so far, shown me its made up of mostly bored pothead teenagers or tinfoil-hat wearing nuts living in bunkers, who are more interested in ranting like loonies than actually forwarding their cause with positive action. No thanks.

Originally posted by waypastvne

So you're not one of the 8.4 kilotons of explosives snuck in to each building guys then ?

Nope. Look into the verinage technique. It doesn't use any explosives and gets the job done. But beyond that it shows that every floor does indeed not be wired.

You could be the first truther to show us that you actually under stand what F=ma means.

Force equals mass times acceleration. Isn't too hard to understand.

The problem is getting the acceleration.

The only way to get a full on acceleration due to gravity is to sever (either fire induced or other) the entire floor's column structure. If they aren't fully severed then they will still have some resistance and the acceleration becomes less than g (acceleration due to gravity).

A better way to calculate the force would be to actually use the time it took the first top floor to hit the next floor. And derive the velocity from the time and distance integrals and then derive the acceleration with the velocity integral.

That would be much more precise than just using g as the acceleration.

Originally posted by Nutter
Force equals mass times acceleration. Isn't too hard to understand.

The problem is getting the acceleration.

The only way to get a full on acceleration due to gravity is to sever (either fire induced or other) the entire floor's column structure. If they aren't fully severed then they will still have some resistance and the acceleration becomes less than g (acceleration due to gravity).

A better way to calculate the force would be to actually use the time it took the first top floor to hit the next floor. And derive the velocity from the time and distance integrals and then derive the acceleration with the velocity integral.

That would be much more precise than just using g as the acceleration.

Yet another Truther that doesn't understand Impact acceleration. Who'd of guessed ?

You think acceleration is the amount of time it had to pick up speed before it hit. You are very wrong.

Acceleration is the amount of time it would take to stop the falling mass when it hit the lower part of the building (you can call it deceleration if that makes mind grasp the concept). That is how you calculate how much force would be applied .

To find a you need three things speed at impact, speed after impact, time or distance it took to go from one speed to the other.

I even gave you some simple numbers play with and you still couldn't do it,

Originally posted by waypastvne
To find a you need three things speed at impact, speed after impact, time or distance it took to go from one speed to the other.

Look at my post and actually read it this time.

The above that you posted is exactly what I said only differently.

reply to post by Nutter

You do know that load calculations incorporate a factor of safety correct?

No, they do not. Engineers calculate the real world loads as close as possible. The safety factor is then incorporated into the proposed structural design.

Thus not giving us an exact figure.

Exact? That's a slippery term. They are accurate.

What's wrong with giving us the structural steel schedule?

The schedule? You mean the shop drawings? The framing plans? The "as-builts" or as they are now more often called the record drawings?

Originally posted by waypastvne
Let's fill in all the blank for them so they don't have to guess at the variables, They just have to give us the total for force (F)

F=ma

Mass (M) = 700 tons

Initial Speed (v0) = 8 meters per second

Final Speed (v1) = 0 meters per second

Time (t) = .1 second

(If you prefer using distance rather than time):

Distance (d) = 1 meter


Don't forget to add in the force of potential energy pushing up:-)

Vf=Vi + 2at
8 = 2a(.1)
A=40 m/s^2
F=ma = 700 kg * 40m/s^2
F=28000 N = 28 KN


What's the point of this exercise again?

BTW, the "force of potential energy pushing up"?

Originally posted by earth2mayavision

 

Actually, there has been an official hearing of evidence in Toronto, Canada, which was heard by four judges (one an honary Italian Supreme Court Judge). This took place over four-day period (Sep 8-11). An excerpt of the objectives of this hearing/inquest is as follows:

How exactly is this a hearing when the findings of the hearing is to request a hearing? That's what everyone here has been doing, including me.

The point is, why are you sitting around moaning "big bad government" when a day doesn't go by here where some truther or another is posting sufficient evidence to hold your own investigation? Did Jones or didn't Jones find thermite? Does Gage or Doesn't Gage have the blueprints of the towers? Does AE911truth or doesn't AE911truth have a thousand engineers and experts with the professional experience in these very fields? Are these web sites or aren't these web sites selling trinkets and asking for donations to get another investigation going? Did the or didn't they sell tickets for this very hearing in Canada you're talking about?

It seems to me that unless you truthers are simply lying through your teeth and are just making claims up out of thin air, your petition signing engineers should easily be able to take the known properties of Thermite, take the blueprints of the buildings, and calculate out how the buildings were demolished in the way everyone saw. You wouldn't even need any money; all you'd need is a few reference manuals and calculator.

Obviously, you aren't. Why not?

Originally posted by Nutter
Vf=Vi + 2at
8 = 2a(.1)
A=40 m/s^2
F=ma = 700 kg * 40m/s^2
F=28000 N = 28 KN


What's the point of this exercise again?

BTW, the "force of potential energy pushing up"?

All right, since you're one of the people who is knowledgable about such things, let me as you-

-What is the FPS explosive velocity of thermite, and how much would it take to completely sever a support column?
-How many support beams in the WTC will need to be compromised before the load bearing capability of the remaining support beams are overloaded?
-How are these demolitions set off without anyone outside the building seeing it?

Originally posted by hooper
No, they do not. Engineers calculate the real world loads as close as possible. The safety factor is then incorporated into the proposed structural design.

Are you talking ASD or LRFD?

Do you know the difference?

The schedule? You mean the shop drawings? The framing plans? The "as-builts" or as they are now more often called the record drawings?

No. I ment schedule. Look it up.

Bill of Material

The bill of material block contains a list of the
parts and/or material needed for the project. The block
identifies parts and materials by stock number or other
appropriate number, and lists the quantities requited.
The bill of material often contains a list of
standard parts, known as a parts list or schedule.

www.hnsa.org...

Originally posted by Perhaps
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

There is this....

Tell me something, in all honesty, why don't you truthers stop chanting "we need more investigations"....

..and then, there is this....

I can't speak for anyone else, but I have always made it plain that I support more investigations because....

??? so what's your point?

reply to post by Nutter


Bill of Materials for the steel????

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Originally posted by Doctor Smith
GoodOlDave Droned.

Tell me something, in all honesty, why don't you truthers stop chanting "we need more investigations" like it was a religious mantra and hold your own investigation?

reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

What do you think we are doing on this site sharing information and ideas? We don't have the legal authority to subpoena.

This is the crime of the century, and they spent way less on the investigation than Clintons diversion sex scandal? The honest investigators all admitted it was a white wash. Ignoring the mountains of evidence, just the fact they spent very little is at least very suspicious.

So how much longer do you intend to keep sharing information until you actually start to do something with the information? I'm not asking you to build a rocket ship. I'm simply asking you to put the information you've gathered together.

For one thing, you've supposedly identified the type of explosive used, and that guy (forgot his name) who used to work at UL and was fired for "being a whistle blower" has intricate details of the metallurgy of the WTC steel because he's the one who supposedly tested it. Researching that avenue alone should answer scores of questions you truthers have right there.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Nutter

 

Bill of Materials for the steel????

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Did you look it up? I've seen structural drawings with a little table called a "schedule" for the amount of steel to be used in a building. How many drawings have you seen and/or studied in your life?

Here's another link.

Schedules (Exhibit 9)

There are usually three different schedules provided by the architect somewhere in the drawings. There is the Schedule of Finishes, which provide a listing of the rooms or spaces in the building, and the various ceiling, wall and floor finishes. Some architects provide very detailed schedules, while others provide only basic information. There are the door and window schedules which provide a listing and description of the various doors and windows to be used in the building.

In each of these schedules, there is no standard format, architects basically use whatever they feel is adequate for any particular project.

Although this article does not specifically address the engineering drawings, the various types of drawings, plans, sections, etc. are similar and applicable to the engineering drawings as well as the architectural.

paintpro.net...

And yes, there usually is a steel "schedule" for estimating purposes.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Nutter

 

Bill of Materials for the steel????

Who does not know what they talk about?

Bill of Materials (BoM):

Typically, a CAD draftsman prepares the bill of materials listing all structural members of the steel framing separately. The bill of materials is displayed on all shop drawings and contain information such as required material quantity, erection marks, shop and field fasteners, size of connecting plates, etc.

ezinearticles.com...

Shall I continue or are we going to admit that we were wrong?

Originally posted by Nutter

No. I ment schedule. Look it up.

It was in the NIST report.

Lookie here, this guy figured it out.

911research.wtc7.net...

2.3 Amount of Steel
NIST gives the total the weight of structural steel in the two WTC towers as 200,000 tons.11 NIST describes steel contracts in NCSTAR1-3 (p.16), and the values are shown in Table 2 below.3 These contracts do not include trusses outside the core, steel deck, concrete reinforcements or grillages.

Originally posted by Nutter

Shall I continue or are we going to admit that we were wrong?

Pretty funny coming from a guy that won't address this

On page 2 under "Another Perspective: Initial Vertical Velocity" they explain that a velocity needed to collapse the first floor can be achieved from a free fall of 3.69 m (which they then explain is over one story but is clearly beyond the range of possibilities).

1-G. Szuladzinski says that. Not Bazant.

2- Bazant gives about a dozen reasons why his energy absorption calcs are wrong

3- do you agree that Bazant is correct in his criticism?

reply to post by Joey Canoli


Wow. Looks like a lot of work just to decipher something that should have been given. But, I commend him for his extravagent effort. I wish I had the time to do that much research.

I'm curious though.

So far you guys have thrown a few papers into the mix here. All pretty much telling us that the other is incorrect.

I.E. if you read the paper you just linked me to, you will find where he states how Bazant was incorrect. Bt, going on to my point.

Wouldn't these papers be by definition from "conspiracy theorists" since they do not agree with each other and especially Quintiere disagreeing with NIST.

So, then has the thread OP been satisfied? I think so. You guys have provided plenty of "conspiracy theorists" OWN investigations.

Thanks again.

Thread closed.