Canadian 9/11 Petition for Parliament

[petros]

We aren't playing dominoes and Newtons third law is why we build the way we do.

Was the collapss elastic or inelastic?

 

[Cannuck]

Hey, if anyone wants to sign that petition, go right ahead. I think it'll be a waste of time to sign that petition, but again, no one's stopping anyone.

Like I said in my first post, I'll sign it just because I can see the entertainment value of what would obviously be a gong show. It also might bring the nutters out of their parent's basement and put a face of them.


YouTube - WTC collapse simulation [free fall speed comparison]

 

[petros]

YouTube - Vérinage Compilation - Explosiveless Demolition

 

[Cannuck]

Interesting video. Completely irrelevant but interesting nonetheless.

 

[petros]

Not at all irrelevant. It shows you don't need explosives, fire or an airplane crash to make a pile of rubble from a building.

 

[ironsides]

One floor at a time, forgot to mention air compression. Downward forces just kept increasing.

 

[Cannuck]

Not at all irrelevant. I shows you don't need explosives to make a pile of rubble.

There were explosions in that video. You can see all the smoke from the explosions shooting out as it begins to fall (I'm just using the same silly arguments that the conspiracy nutters use).

 

[CDNBear]

sniffing bear gets close to falsification honey trap, backs away mumbling rubbish, bear not know what mass is

beave's usual reply when he can't follow along and offer anything resembling an intelligent post.

We aren't playing dominoes and Newtons third law is why we build the way we do.

I know we aren't. But according to your version of physics, dominoes don't fall.

Was the collapss elastic or inelastic?

According to you, irrelevant, if we narrowly follow Newton's third law alone. Which of course you can't. Not in the real world anyways. But of course, that isn't where C/T nutters get their science from.

But if you want to use the silly swinging ball pic as your base, that would be nearly elastic. But the momentum is tethered by the strings. In the collapse of something like a building, there are no strings, restricting or redirecting the momentum.

YouTube - Vérinage Compilation - Explosiveless Demolition

And not one has ever started at the top of a building. Go figure.

But thanx for proving me right. The momentum of the upper portion, does decelerate, but not enough to stop.

Anything else you'd like to post that proves me right?

 

[petros]

There were explosions in that video. You can see all the smoke from the explosions shooting out as it begins to fall (I'm just using the same silly arguments that the conspiracy nutters use).

That is dust. It's an explosionless techinque called Verinage.

 

[Cannuck]

That is dust. It's an explosionless techinque called Verinage.

Why is it dust in your video but explosion in the WTC collapse?

 

[petros]

beave's usual reply when he can't follow along and offer anything resembling an intelligent post.

I know we aren't. But according to your version of physics, dominoes don't fall.

According to you, irrelevant, if we narrowly follow Newton's third law alone. Which of course you can't. Not in the real world anyways. But of course, that isn't where C/T nutters get their science from.

But if you want to use the silly swinging ball pic as your base, that would be nearly elastic. But the momentum is tethered by the strings. In the collapse of something like a building, there are no strings, restricting or redirecting the momentum.

And not one has ever started at the top of a building. Go figure.

Debunking the Debunkers: Debunker Verinage Fantasies are Bunk!

Anything else you'd like to post that is a complete failure?

How many of those building were framed with overengineered columns and skinned by a stainless steel web that was self supporting from the columns or were they all concrete?

 

[CDNBear]

How many of those building were framed with overengineered columns and skinned by a stainless steel web that was self supporting from the columns or were they all concrete?

You already know the answer.

But I can see why you would choose to ask me that, instead of concede to the fact that you're wrong.

 

[Tonington]

Things don't bounce in your world either?

Of course they do. So why don't you spill your crack pot theory that is bouncing off the walls of your cranium. What happened on 9/11 that you think Newton's third law proves that the twin towers were not brought down by planes, jet fuel, and fire?

 

[petros]

I know we aren't. But according to your version of physics, dominoes don't fall.But if you want to use the silly swinging ball pic as your base, that would be nearly elastic. But the momentum is tethered by the strings. In the collapse of something like a building, there are no strings, restricting or redirecting the momentum.

I've never tried it with glued together dominoes wrapped and pinned to a self-supporting mesh.

 

[CDNBear]

I've never tried it with glued together dominoes wrapped and pinned to a self-supporting mesh.

You can dance around your own words all day long, you're still wrong. You just can't admit it, or don't understand the very theories you keep throwing out.

 

[Machjo]

Dizzy yet?

 

[CDNBear]

Dizzy yet?

Nah, it's just like the ballerina's do, you keep your eyes on one spot at a time.

Hence why the C/T nutters dance all over the place. trying to flood the conversation with as much baffle gab and BS from all sorts of angles. Because they can't stick to one train of thought at a time. This is simply caused by the fact that they can't actually win the debate on the merits of fact. So they have no other choice really.

But they're so much fun to play with.

 

[petros]

Of course they do. So why don't you spill your crack pot theory that is bouncing off the walls of your cranium. What happened on 9/11 that you think Newton's third law proves that the twin towers were not brought down by planes, jet fuel, and fire?

Ahhh the insults. Very mature of you Tonnington. So lets get this straight, the entire building was hit by an airplane and jet fuel fires.

That would be a great way to make it topple but fall symetricially? The odds of that not so goood. Simply watch the TV mast of the North Tower in a video of your choosing and explain why the existing center columns that were allegedly impacting the lower columns and destroying the building did push that mast up while the remaing roof dropped around it? Were all of the columns equally expose to the raging inferno causing them to collapse all at the same instant with no resistance?

Bear likes dominoes. I prefer Jenga where the tower always tumble.

 

[CDNBear]

Bear likes dominoes. I prefer Jenga where the tower always tumble.

So in other words, you don't understand?

Why else would you latch onto one analogy?

Or is it, your theory came crashing down around you, and you haven't the ability to concede?

Which is it? Because making the same silly "domino" comment, just makes your post look childish.

And honestly...I like reality where you can't pick which law you will chose to narrowly apply to each scenario.

But hey, if it makes life easier for you, to think no other laws apply, have at it. Some people like the simple life.

 

[petros]

Keep an eye on the TV mast....

YouTube - 9/11 North Tower Demolition - High Quality With Extended Analysis (CBS Dub 6 Clip 4)