Questioning what happened on 9/11
- Thread starter moghrabi
- Start date
Re: RE: Questioning what happ
With respect, my comment does make sense. The less you knowledge you have about something, the more open you would be to suggestion. That is why there are thousands of laymen who watch videos like the one earlier in this thread that questions the official explanation of how the towers collapsed and swallow it hook, line and sinker. I can assure you that the 'official' explanation is accepted by the vast majority of structural engineers. I know its not as exciting as a vast conspriracy involving bombs, insurance money etc... but there it is.
moghrabi said:
With respect, my comment does make sense. The less you knowledge you have about something, the more open you would be to suggestion. That is why there are thousands of laymen who watch videos like the one earlier in this thread that questions the official explanation of how the towers collapsed and swallow it hook, line and sinker. I can assure you that the 'official' explanation is accepted by the vast majority of structural engineers. I know its not as exciting as a vast conspriracy involving bombs, insurance money etc... but there it is.
Re: RE: Questioning what happened on 9/11
Thats exactly the point Jim, Questions come up that go against the hogwash explaination that they gave the American people, You know, I'm not trying to get people to believe me, don't believe me, I'm just trying to get people to think! don't always accept as fact everything they tell us is true because they said so!
There are to many anomalies with this whole story to just accept it as fact and I could spend a month and overflow the memory of this forum with questions and evidence and fact but what good would it do?
It would still just be questions to you right? I wonder what would happen if I took the mold off of an orange and tried to create a medicine that would help people? It would remain a question if I didn't explore it. :wink:
jimmoyer said:
Thats exactly the point Jim, Questions come up that go against the hogwash explaination that they gave the American people, You know, I'm not trying to get people to believe me, don't believe me, I'm just trying to get people to think! don't always accept as fact everything they tell us is true because they said so!
There are to many anomalies with this whole story to just accept it as fact and I could spend a month and overflow the memory of this forum with questions and evidence and fact but what good would it do?
It would still just be questions to you right? I wonder what would happen if I took the mold off of an orange and tried to create a medicine that would help people? It would remain a question if I didn't explore it. :wink:
It would remain a question if I didn't explore it.
-----------------------------------jjw1965-----------
Exactly, so go explore it.
I'm just fighting the rhetorical device of using a question as innuendo, as some substitute for legitimate suspicion, as though it were some truth posed in and of itself without the hardwork of moving beyond the question and getting answers.
-----------------------------------jjw1965-----------
Exactly, so go explore it.
I'm just fighting the rhetorical device of using a question as innuendo, as some substitute for legitimate suspicion, as though it were some truth posed in and of itself without the hardwork of moving beyond the question and getting answers.
Re: RE: Questioning what happened on 9/11
Answer - perhaps an independent inquiry could get beyond theory and answer some real hard questions, but that wouldn't be very American.
----------------------------------------------------------------jimmoyer said:
Answer - perhaps an independent inquiry could get beyond theory and answer some real hard questions, but that wouldn't be very American.
Oy veh.
Aye carrrumba, PoisonPete2.
Start a new thread on the JFK conspiracy, man.
We are all well aware of each other's prejudice and bias on this board, and do we not see each other jump for anything that will support it?
Our biggest problem is putting our own bias through the acid test than it is to put others' prejudice through rigorous challenge, isn't it ?
Aye carrrumba, PoisonPete2.
Start a new thread on the JFK conspiracy, man.
We are all well aware of each other's prejudice and bias on this board, and do we not see each other jump for anything that will support it?
Our biggest problem is putting our own bias through the acid test than it is to put others' prejudice through rigorous challenge, isn't it ?
jimmoyer, MMMike.
Rather than throwing around insults and innuendo, why don't you two experts tell us why the mechanical penthouse collapsed before the rest of the building even began to fall. The floor of that penthouse would have been particularely strong because it had to support the weight of boilers, pumps, chillers, cooling towers, etc. I'm guessing that WTC 7 was built 40 odd years ago and it would have had a huge safety factor built into the structural design. Greater than it would have if it were built today. I have enough experience to know that causing a 47 story bldg to fall into it's own footprint is the result of the placing and sequential detonation of explosives with careful planning and knowledge of the particular structure of a given building. The few isolated fires in that building could not have caused the perfect implosion that we saw in the video.
Rather than throwing around insults and innuendo, why don't you two experts tell us why the mechanical penthouse collapsed before the rest of the building even began to fall. The floor of that penthouse would have been particularely strong because it had to support the weight of boilers, pumps, chillers, cooling towers, etc. I'm guessing that WTC 7 was built 40 odd years ago and it would have had a huge safety factor built into the structural design. Greater than it would have if it were built today. I have enough experience to know that causing a 47 story bldg to fall into it's own footprint is the result of the placing and sequential detonation of explosives with careful planning and knowledge of the particular structure of a given building. The few isolated fires in that building could not have caused the perfect implosion that we saw in the video.
RE: Questioning what happ
I just have to say this. If I was going to commit a crime, I'd pull an OJ and use misdirection to get away with it. Confusion and mystery is a result of poor investigation, or a cover up. When a 7 billion dollar complex falls, they make sure they know why it fell without question.
It's all about math, and math is never wrong, it's an impossibility. What do I mean, the buildings fell nearly unimpeded, or in an almost freefall. When a buiding collapses normally, it's slowed by each floor, and ususally doesn't excellerate anywhere near the excelleration of gravity. When building 7 fell nearly unimpeded although the structural damage was very minor, this was the building that sealed the case that explosives where used. These buildings were designed to withstand bombs and earthquakes, so the shockwave from the other two towers would not be enough to bring this building down no matter what your arguement is. Buildings of that quality just don't fall like that without some serious engineering and explosives use.
I just have to say this. If I was going to commit a crime, I'd pull an OJ and use misdirection to get away with it. Confusion and mystery is a result of poor investigation, or a cover up. When a 7 billion dollar complex falls, they make sure they know why it fell without question.
It's all about math, and math is never wrong, it's an impossibility. What do I mean, the buildings fell nearly unimpeded, or in an almost freefall. When a buiding collapses normally, it's slowed by each floor, and ususally doesn't excellerate anywhere near the excelleration of gravity. When building 7 fell nearly unimpeded although the structural damage was very minor, this was the building that sealed the case that explosives where used. These buildings were designed to withstand bombs and earthquakes, so the shockwave from the other two towers would not be enough to bring this building down no matter what your arguement is. Buildings of that quality just don't fall like that without some serious engineering and explosives use.
#juan said:
This is, of course, absolutely insane.
What the hell do you know about structural integrity?
I saw a piece after 911 on a plane that flew into the Empire State Building decades ago. The building was practically not damaged. The engineer narrating the piece pointed out that they did not understand structural stresses as much when the ESB was built, so they built in huge margins of error, but newer buildings like the World Trade Center, were built without real margins of error, as stress was much better understood. No one expected a huge plane to fly into it.
It is exactly the weight of boilers pumps etc. etc. that MIGHT have caused the penthouse to collapse.
If you were going to blow up buildings that might have 50,000 people inside, why the hell would you care whether it fell into its own footprint?
Why are so few engineers asking questions?
Do you understand the huge conspiracy that would have been necessary to pull this off?
I have a suggestion. If you think this was a conspiracy, consult your shrink.
Large doses of mind altering drugs may help your paranoia.
I always thought lefties were nuts. Now you guys are proving it.
MMMike
Both you and jimmoyer have suggested that the people who believe in a conspiracy are not knowledgable or are poorly informed or uneducated or something.
In answer to your earlier little question,"Structural?" No I was a mechanical engineer. I don't consider that a problem. Back in the olden days when I went to college, all engineers learned about "strength of materials", etc, and basic structures.
Now MMMike, answer my question." Why did that penthouse collapse before the rest of the building?"
Both you and jimmoyer have suggested that the people who believe in a conspiracy are not knowledgable or are poorly informed or uneducated or something.
In answer to your earlier little question,"Structural?" No I was a mechanical engineer. I don't consider that a problem. Back in the olden days when I went to college, all engineers learned about "strength of materials", etc, and basic structures.
Now MMMike, answer my question." Why did that penthouse collapse before the rest of the building?"
#juan said:
To answer your last question Juan - I have no idea. I don't know enough about the structure (WTC7) the fire or the physical damage done to even hazard a guess.
With respect to what I said earlier, you are distorting my position a little bit. I'm not saying that people that believe a 'conspiracy theory' are necessarily uninformed or uneducated. What I am saying is what I consider to be self-evident: the less knowledge you have about something, the easier you can be swayed. I don't think that is particularly controversial.
Although I haven't been active in design the past number of years, I am a structural engineer, and work in a structural engineering consulting firm. There is no great controversy in the industry about 'what happened to the towers?'. There has been enough analysis and discussion that the "official" explanation is generally accepted amongst us folks. Maybe we are all 'in on it'??? 8O That said, people are welcome to believe whatever they want. Its a whole lot more fun to pretend there are vast conspiracies afoot, and shadowy figures pulling our strings like puppet masters.