RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers

RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rulemylife -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 4:41:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne well you can give anything you want lip service till hell freezes over, problem you have is that empty deck your dealing from. Yeah, I know reality doesn't quite compare to the wonderland you live in, where you are an expert on everything known to man and the rest of of us are just ignorant and uneducated fools.

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 4:45:02 PM)
I think you need to understand that anyone with an IQ over 50 wont call this a collapse with out a pay off. The exo does not blow upwards to arch away from the building. Hell and IQ of 20 can recognize that a collapse does not go up then come down!!!! BBWWHAHAHAHAHA Suck it Suck it up!!! quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne DYB, you have a couple people on here that "proof" is whatever the government says. So that means there really were WMDs in iraq after all, the gulf of tonkin really was a vietnamese, never mind that we have the all the evidence to the contrary, and of course lets not forget kennedys uturn bullet, mcveighs bomb that blew nurrah from the inside out, the guv said its teu so damn it dats pwuf!! Now if you read what thorny gave you and you have a physics background you will laugh your ass off. Especially when you get to page 39 - 2 and you get to look at this wonderful mockery of anyone with any intelligence. Only a propaganda whore would sink so low as to call this a fucking "collapse" Buildings always "COLLAPSE" upwards then fly away from the building.. What a bunch of mega tards. and they totally insult and mockery of anyone with even a tiny brain and this is right in the one thorny told you to look at they blew that fucker all to hell and back. They perimeter blasted exactly as the eye witnesses who were not paid off said they did. [Mod edit: images removed from quote.] and this bottom pic is possibly one of the best pics around to make fools out your ilk. you can even see that bright white flash, hey just like in a demolition! and its blowing all that melted iron and thermate all over the place/. (thats the orange yellow stuff)

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 4:53:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The exo does not blow upwards to arch away from the building. Hell and IQ of 20 can recognize that a collapse does not go up then come down!!!! What are the air currents doing at the time? Does dust float, I know dust floats because my room is dusty and I see it floating around me. When you light a fire does the ash rise? Well it does if it's lighter than air.

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:12:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The exo does not blow upwards to arch away from the building. Hell and IQ of 20 can recognize that a collapse does not go up then come down!!!! What are the air currents doing at the time? Does dust float, I know dust floats because my room is dusty and I see it floating around me. When you light a fire does the ash rise? Well it does if it's lighter than air. Some how I think you are serious and that is fucking scary. I am very sorry but those are smoke trails from the iron being blown off the building some to the tune of 60tons. the dust is following the iron all the way to the ground no less. Wow thats just like a demolition! [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/spirelarge030.jpg[/image]

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:16:26 PM)
Being as you are a construction expert I'm sure you'll be able to tell me what this below represents? I mean I don't want to be wasting my time now do I? [image]local://upfiles/255286/B454D4A8969B4588972B6D1506CF2F53.jpg[/image]

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:25:09 PM)
so what do you want for an answer? are you asking me what the variables represent or that you are solving for something over time? delta t not that it makes a shit for this aspect of the topic since we are talking about explosives here and demolitions. LMAO do you know how much power it takes to throw a 60 ton hunk of iron over 300 feet? do you plan on calculating the tensile strength of that 60 tone hunk of iron? How about this, do you know how much power it takes to aerosolize over 90% of the concrete in those buildings? Do tell where all that power came from.

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:30:32 PM)
[:D] I understand you may not be familiar with BS 8110 and so the symbols used may be different to your American standards but you should be able to recognise what the equation at the bottom represents none the less (from the form). All buildings of a certain type require such a relationship for good reliable design, 8110 is a concrete code that be a clue.

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:34:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa [:D] I understand you may not be familiar with BS 8110 and so the symbols used may be different to your American standards but you should be able to recognise what the equation at the bottom represents none the less (from the form). All buildings of a certain type require such a relationship for good reliable design, 8110 is a concrete code that be a clue. ok but do you realize that it has been years since I have pulled out a calculator to go over any of this stuff at all? Look at what I posted above, I once upon a time when I was really into it did a generic model with a conservative approximation of the energy requirements to get an average or 60microns particle size and there isnt remotely enough to do the kinds of miracles that took place on that day. and if by that do you mean do I do tensile, moment, stress, failure calculations yada yada for a business every day of my life fuck no. Am I able to do the math? Sure. Math is math doesnt matter what you are plugging in. Just get the handbook.

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:36:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne so what do you want for an answer? are you asking me what the variables represent or that you are solving for something over time? delta t It's not calculus obviously, do you see dx/dy anywhere?

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:42:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne ok but do you realize that it has been years since I have pulled out a calculator to go over any of this stuff at all? Look at what I posted above, I once upon a time when I was really into it did a generic model with a conservative approximation of the energy requirements to get an average or 60microns particle size and there isnt remotely enough to do the kinds of miracles that took place on that day. Tell me more about this numerical model: how did you discretise the differential equations? Was it a conservation model i.e. conservation of energy, conservation of momentum? What is your actual background?

MrRodgers -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:44:02 PM)
Which and whose conspiracy theories does this study pertain to ? The Bush admin. theory of what happened on 9/11 for example or... maybe millions of other people who may believe there was another ? For any study to objectively asses any suspicion of resulting mental illness or void...one must also asses govt. mental capacity for what by presupposition is to be accepted as truth...and by definition also is a theory that must exist for any other conspiracy theory challenges. The US Govt. has many very public dirty, violent hands throughout the whole of the 20th century for anyone to feel this study is anything other than...unmitigated bullshit. This is another way fascism takes hold. ALL conspiracy theories questioning any govt. conspiracy theory automatically means those questioning govt....are thus psychologically disturbed. There is also the irrefutable evidence that has been pointed out referring to very specifics attributes of the govt.'s conspiracy theory, as well as compelling general aspects such as asking believers to accept a violation in the laws of physics, aerodynamics and logic. Those questions hardly reflect the crap this study is trying to promote.

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:46:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne ok but do you realize that it has been years since I have pulled out a calculator to go over any of this stuff at all? Look at what I posted above, I once upon a time when I was really into it did a generic model with a conservative approximation of the energy requirements to get an average or 60microns particle size and there isnt remotely enough to do the kinds of miracles that took place on that day. Tell me more about this numerical model: how did you discretise the differential equations? Was it a conservation model i.e. conservation of energy, conservation of momentum? What is your actual background? yeh I realized that after I took a closer look at it. again I dont do this for a living and if your point is that you have to be in the business to do that math than you are sadly mistaken.

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:50:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne ok but do you realize that it has been years since I have pulled out a calculator to go over any of this stuff at all? Look at what I posted above, I once upon a time when I was really into it did a generic model with a conservative approximation of the energy requirements to get an average or 60microns particle size and there isnt remotely enough to do the kinds of miracles that took place on that day. Tell me more about this numerical model: how did you discretise the differential equations? Was it a conservation model i.e. conservation of energy, conservation of momentum? What is your actual background? very simple model because one needs to look no further. add up tha mount of concrete, forget the fuckign around with elasticity et al, and sinply add up the amount of concrete, and the power it would take to areosolize it. what do you want to do calculate the momentum et al as if that will explain the white flashes the big booms and 60 ton chunks of smoking iron tossed over 300 feet? pure white smok I might add. Not a dingy brownish grey that you get from blasting cement. You want to drag this into a quagmire of bullshit so we can talk past the obvious?

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 5:57:16 PM)
Actually you can do the maths in a lot of subjects but understand nothing about them like in soil mechanics. You need to have the analogy in your head or the maths will mean nothing. If you've not had people highlight issues such as getting steel in reinforced concrete to yield first you'll be ignorant as to the two ways an R.C. building can collapse. Similarly for steelwork buildings such as the WTC's you need to understand structural failure such as local torsional buckling to understand what you are seeing there. You don't get that from a book you get it from seeing tests done. You can teach yourself so much but you'll also be assuming things that are wrong with no one to correct you.

Real0ne -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 6:03:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa Actually you can do the maths in a lot of subjects but understand nothing about them like in soil mechanics. You need to have the analogy in your head or the maths will mean nothing. If you've not had people highlight issues such as getting steel in reinforced concrete to yield first you'll be ignorant as to the two ways an R.C. building can collapse. Similarly for steelwork buildings such as the WTC's you need to understand structural failure such as local torsional buckling to understand what you are seeing there. You don't get that from a book you get it from seeing tests done. You can teach yourself so much but you'll also be assuming things that are wrong with no one to correct you. ok and you need to understand that big booms and white flashes are explosives. Have you added that to your model? first off there was literally no fire in the building the alledged plane missed the whole core that had molten iron pouring out of the corner. How did you model that btw? What effect does molten iron cutting the beams have on torsional buckling et al? again you want to take this into a quagmire and talk past what is biting you right in the nose.

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 6:18:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne very simple model because one needs to look no further. add up tha mount of concrete, forget the fuckign around with elasticity et al, and sinply add up the amount of concrete, and the power it would take to areosolize it. You'll not find much concrete in steel building, just the cores normally but the towers had steel cores. That which you do see is mostly the floor slabs. 27x41m x101.6 mm thick x 101 No floors 11,359.6m^3 of concrete roughly (excluding service penetrations) The above figures are based on info from the net so could be wrong. There was gypsum board for fire protection so you'll also see some of that.

MrRodgers -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 6:19:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Considering that the news feeds clearly show the buildings collapsing from the top down, as floors pancaked down on one another. Well from what I saw and have reviewed since, bldg. designers agreed but if they had in fact done as implied, then one would find those floors (at least most of their steel frames) 'pancaked' on or near the ground. They were not...almost every floor was completely destroyed. WTC 7 is one very large key here. If what it suffered is typical because those fires were, than why haven't more bldgs. fall from fire alone...alone and then fall in on itself like the videos have shown 7 did. Also, the owner of the WTC Center Silverstein, is on tape actually saying 'the decision was made to pull bldg. 7' Pull is a demolition industry term meaning to demolish and WTC 7 was 'pulled.' That obviously visible occurrence since shown all over...had to have been prepared over some time and before 9/11.

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 6:33:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne ok and you need to understand that big booms and white flashes are explosives. Have you added that to your model? I don't model history because it's pointless, I want to predict future events not the past. quote: first off there was literally no fire in the building the alledged plane missed the whole core that had molten iron pouring out of the corner. Your recollection of events seems to be wrong as most people saw a fire. quote: How did you model that btw? What effect does molten iron cutting the beams have on torsional buckling et al? Quite a significant effect if you remove a floor and in so doing remove column restraint. quote: again you want to take this into a quagmire and talk past what is biting you right in the nose. Not particularly. You are the one talking about modelling 911 and you've still not really elaborated on that modelling process or your actual background.

SohCahToa -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 6:41:52 PM)
Just for your curiosity because I know you'll be looking on the internet for ages try to match that equation shown earlier. It's the stress block for a reinforced concrete section derived via similar triangles. The aim is to limit the neutral axis depth 'x' to a fraction of d (the effective depth of the section) and in so doing ensure Ecc is equal to Est.

jlf1961 -> RE: The inner worlds of conspiracy believers (4/23/2010 7:02:36 PM)
SohCahToa, you are fighting a losing battle, if GOD told real that his was wrong he would call god a liar.

Page: << < prev 7 8 9 [10] 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875