100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: 9/11: A Conspiracy Theory | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Iam not at all suprised you didnt see the link Your slipping up on this thread as well Invictus  Pay Attention Young Man  who the hell adds a link in the middle of the copied page? it either goes at the top or bottom of the copied material.. I knew it wasn't his anyway... There were consecutive sentences that had no misspelled words.. Its verry difficult to have an honest discussion with people who claim to be educated yet have such closed minds and jump to such hasty conclusions. For the record though I will never win a spelling bee or a typing contest. I have a short attention span.. So that settles that.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr conrad please provide your link. It sure as Hell isn't his own work  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floors don't support a building. What do you thin the 40th floor is supported by the 39th floor? I am sorry that is not how it works. So the support structure further down the building is weakened. Then you get an increased instantaneous force on the building from the moving mass. As it continues to collapse the mass and velocity continue to grow and so does the force. That is why it collapsed so fast. No it really wont. Will paper give resistance to a bowling ball? Yea sure but its so immeasurable you wont really see a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floors don't support a building. What do you thin the 40th floor is supported by the 39th floor? I am sorry that is not how it works. So the support structure further down the building is weakened. Then you get an increased instantaneous force on the building from the moving mass. As it continues to collapse the mass and velocity continue to grow and so does the force. That is why it collapsed so fast. No it really wont. Will paper give resistance to a bowling ball? Yea sure but its so immeasurable you wont really see a difference. Actually, Chazster, presents an excellent example. Have two standing people hold the corners of a sheet of paper firmly with nothing under it. Gently place a bowling ball, brick, small watermelon, ... whatever on the sheet of paper. The paper (standard copy paper) will not fail unless the load is over about twenty pounds, but supporting fifteen pounds with a sheet of paper shows that a lot of weight can be supported by very little weight. Now take the bowling ball or whatever and hold it a few feet over the piece of paper and drop it. You will find out that there is no chance of paper stopping and supporting the bowling ball and the ball WILL NOT SLOW DOWN as it tears it's way through the paper even though the paper has proven it can support the weight of the ball. This is what happened as the floors fell on 9/11. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bushidobillyclub
on
Wed 04/18/12 07:25 AM
|
|
Floors don't support a building. What do you thin the 40th floor is supported by the 39th floor? I am sorry that is not how it works. So the support structure further down the building is weakened. Then you get an increased instantaneous force on the building from the moving mass. As it continues to collapse the mass and velocity continue to grow and so does the force. That is why it collapsed so fast. No it really wont. Will paper give resistance to a bowling ball? Yea sure but its so immeasurable you wont really see a difference. Actually, Chazster, presents an excellent example. Have two standing people hold the corners of a sheet of paper firmly with nothing under it. Gently place a bowling ball, brick, small watermelon, ... whatever on the sheet of paper. The paper (standard copy paper) will not fail unless the load is over about twenty pounds, but supporting fifteen pounds with a sheet of paper shows that a lot of weight can be supported by very little weight. Now take the bowling ball or whatever and hold it a few feet over the piece of paper and drop it. You will find out that there is no chance of paper stopping and supporting the bowling ball and the ball WILL NOT SLOW DOWN as it tears it's way through the paper even though the paper has proven it can support the weight of the ball. This is what happened as the floors fell on 9/11. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conspiracy Theorists are geniuses. They form the most amazing segment of Earth's population. Profound researchers all, they dive into the very fabric of reality uncovering the grim truths concealed beneath all which is held true by today's modern population. Sadly, the number of conspiracy theorists is believed to have declined in recent years. This is widely believed to have been the work of the CIA, or possibly the dark forces of Zionism. Seriously! Open your eyes! We have pictures, and some of them look only slightly blurred! Becoming a Conspiracy Theorist Not an easy task. First, not everyone is cut from the right thread to become a conspiracy theorist. A particular mix of rapid analytical ability must combine with a phenominal talent for creative deduction. (See Creativity ). Second, an aspiring conspiracy theorist must be a vehement individualist. You have to truly know inside that your ideas are inherently more valid than everyone else's. Science, public education, religion, and your teachers telling you that you're a ****ing psycho... all this must be tossed to the side in favor of the truth you know is within you. It's easiest to start small. Begin with something already established. The Kennedy assassination is a good choice, and an entry-point for the burgeoning conspiracy theorist. Kennedy was a great president. Why would he be shot? The answer is simple. A world leader of his talent might very well have caused world peace to flood o'er the lands. If there was peace, we'd have no-one left to kill. Ah yes, we can easily see that the Kennedy Assasination was a set up. Never mind that thousands of people took tens of thousands of pictures, and captured virtually every single angle of the motorcade procession, from every conceivable point. The CIA had already guessed that NOBODY would be looking at that grassy knoll, or the book suppository. Ignore all that "factual evidence" crap. You've seen the movie 13 Days. The Joint Chiefs hated that ****ing hippie in the oval office. They set it all up. Locating Existing Conspiracy Theorists Conspiracy Theorists are EVERYWHERE! And We are being WATCHED! I tell you it's the CIA! They are watching over us because they see the threat WE present! Or, the threat they present. Yeah, 'cause I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I believe everything that the government tells me, because America is run by good and honest people who only hide important military secrets, and even then, only when absolutely necessary... Yeah... Conspiracy theorists are notoriously hard to locate. They aren't on Uncyclopedia, that's for sure. If you do a websearch on conspiracy theorists, all you'll find are historic documentation unearthed by government researchers tracking down filthy terrorists... And besides,the Clue is in the Text itself!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floors don't support a building. What do you thin the 40th floor is supported by the 39th floor? I am sorry that is not how it works. So the support structure further down the building is weakened. Then you get an increased instantaneous force on the building from the moving mass. As it continues to collapse the mass and velocity continue to grow and so does the force. That is why it collapsed so fast. No it really wont. Will paper give resistance to a bowling ball? Yea sure but its so immeasurable you wont really see a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floors don't support a building. What do you thin the 40th floor is supported by the 39th floor? I am sorry that is not how it works. So the support structure further down the building is weakened. Then you get an increased instantaneous force on the building from the moving mass. As it continues to collapse the mass and velocity continue to grow and so does the force. That is why it collapsed so fast. No it really wont. Will paper give resistance to a bowling ball? Yea sure but its so immeasurable you wont really see a difference. Actually its not bs. Lets even take your demolition theory. How do you think a demolition works? You think they blow up the floors? No they don't. They just blow up supports. Gravity does the rest. And if you have a heavy enough bowling ball you wouldn't see a difference. Or if the supports holding the paper were damages so it couldn't hold its maximum weight you wouldn't see a difference. The distance is a big factor too. You can't just shrink the size and say its the same as the force of gravity over time in constant no matter how big or small something is. Put that bowling ball as high as the towers and space a piece of paper the distance of every floor and tell me you are going to see a difference (except maybe because of terminal velocity because the bowling ball is so small) Where are you getting your "BS"? From you intuition? Its defiantly not from studying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floors don't support a building. What do you thin the 40th floor is supported by the 39th floor? I am sorry that is not how it works. So the support structure further down the building is weakened. Then you get an increased instantaneous force on the building from the moving mass. As it continues to collapse the mass and velocity continue to grow and so does the force. That is why it collapsed so fast. No it really wont. Will paper give resistance to a bowling ball? Yea sure but its so immeasurable you wont really see a difference. Actually its not bs. Lets even take your demolition theory. How do you think a demolition works? You think they blow up the floors? No they don't. They just blow up supports. Gravity does the rest. And if you have a heavy enough bowling ball you wouldn't see a difference. Or if the supports holding the paper were damages so it couldn't hold its maximum weight you wouldn't see a difference. The distance is a big factor too. You can't just shrink the size and say its the same as the force of gravity over time in constant no matter how big or small something is. Put that bowling ball as high as the towers and space a piece of paper the distance of every floor and tell me you are going to see a difference (except maybe because of terminal velocity because the bowling ball is so small) Where are you getting your "BS"? From you intuition? Its defiantly not from studying. What we have are buildings that fell so close to free fall speed that the floors had to be blown. Virtualy no resistance at all from the undamaged floors below. None |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong again. But thanks for playing. Sorry but even a second or so is a long time. Obviously there is some resistance as it is measurable. Just the resistance was so small it didn't seem like much to the eye. Yes the structure of the lower floors were already weakened. Yes they already have forces acting on them from gravity before the rest of the tower fell on it. You are just not understanding how these forces are interacting interacting guess. Go take some physical classes and get back to us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Wed 04/18/12 06:21 PM
|
|
The official "pancake collapse" account of what happened to the towers is just wrong wrong wrong. Controlled demolition? Not really.
But I suspect that it was a combination of several things that resulted in the destruction of the towers 1& 2. It was a carefully planned attack and a test of a new kind of weapon.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dont fight it Chaster.
The pancake theory holds that one of the floors above crashed on the floor below causing the floor to over load and breaking the joints crashing into the next floor etc etc. We are to believe there was no resistance at all not even a second? You shouldnt try to explain to people that the floors of the twin towers can smash through steel and concrete as fast as those same floors would as falling through thin air. Its absurd. No matter what you believ happened or did not happen at the World trade Center or who was behind the attacks you now understand that there is no chance for the pancake theory to be correct. Not a little bit of a chance! No Chance at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The CIA blew it all up with firecrackers and used a fake robot head of Bin Laden to act like it was coordinating the Al-Qaida operatives and all paid for with money they made farming hallucinogenic mushrooms in Antarctica. Everybody knows that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dont fight it Chaster. The pancake theory holds that one of the floors above crashed on the floor below causing the floor to over load and breaking the joints crashing into the next floor etc etc. We are to believe there was no resistance at all not even a second? You shouldnt try to explain to people that the floors of the twin towers can smash through steel and concrete as fast as those same floors would as falling through thin air. Its absurd. No matter what you believ happened or did not happen at the World trade Center or who was behind the attacks you now understand that there is no chance for the pancake theory to be correct. Not a little bit of a chance! No Chance at all. You realize in a demolition the floors are just falling into each other right? You realize the only difference in what happens structurally in a demolition and the explanation behind 9/11 is what actually destroyed the supports don't you? This is laughable. If you don't think the building can fall as fast as it did because of its weight and gravity then you don't think it could do that in a demolition either because that is what is happening. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The official "pancake collapse" account of what happened to the towers is just wrong wrong wrong. Controlled demolition? Not really. But I suspect that it was a combination of several things that resulted in the destruction of the towers 1& 2. It was a carefully planned attack and a test of a new kind of weapon. The Ray Gun is BACK! OMG! The truth finally arrives! The only possible explanation is a giant ray gun that makes buildings go POOF! I bet it has a label on that says "We don't need no stinking terrorists!" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dang, I am not an engineer, but I did take physics. And bestinshow and all truthers, you are not accounting on the tons of debris along with the weight of the floor driving down with more force as each floor collapsed.
Besides, one doesn't fill a prescription without a doctor, why try to explain this without a degree in engineering? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dang, I am not an engineer, but I did take physics. And bestinshow and all truthers, you are not accounting on the tons of debris along with the weight of the floor driving down with more force as each floor collapsed. Besides, one doesn't fill a prescription without a doctor, why try to explain this without a degree in engineering? Good point peccy. There is also the fact that the building is already supporting its own weight under gravity which is ever closer to failure with the deformation cause across the whole structure. (as one piece starts to fail that load is shifted else where.) This plus the Kinetic energy of the falling piece. That is KE= 1/2mass*(velocity)^2. The mass keeps growing yes but the velocity increase caused by gravity is the biggest culprit. See that it is squared. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dang, I am not an engineer, but I did take physics. And bestinshow and all truthers, you are not accounting on the tons of debris along with the weight of the floor driving down with more force as each floor collapsed. Besides, one doesn't fill a prescription without a doctor, why try to explain this without a degree in engineering? THe same tons of material from above would meet more tons of material below that would provide resistance slowing the speed of the fall. The fact that it fell at "freefall speed" tells me something had to break those floors below loose before the floors above fell on them. No way can a building fall through itself as fast as it would take to drop a bowling ball through thin air. Please come back to reality we welcome you here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dang, I am not an engineer, but I did take physics. And bestinshow and all truthers, you are not accounting on the tons of debris along with the weight of the floor driving down with more force as each floor collapsed. Besides, one doesn't fill a prescription without a doctor, why try to explain this without a degree in engineering? The same tons of material from above would meet more tons of material below that would provide resistance slowing the speed of the fall. The fact that it fell at "freefall speed" tells me something had to break those floors below loose before the floors above fell on them. No way can a building fall through itself as fast as it would take to drop a bowling ball through thin air. Please come back to reality we welcome you here. The amount of energy it took to fail all the connections supporting the floors of the twin towers is easy to calculate. "The Charpy impact test, also known as the Charpy v-notch test, is a standardized high strain-rate test which determines the amount of energy absorbed by a material during fracture. This absorbed energy is a measure of a given material's toughness and acts as a tool to study temperature-dependent ductile-brittle transition. It is widely applied in industry, since it is easy to prepare and conduct and results can be obtained quickly and cheaply. A major disadvantage is that all results are only comparative.[1] The test was developed in 1905 by French scientist Georges Charpy. It was pivotal in understanding the fracture problems of ships during WWII. Today it is used in many industries for testing materials used in the construction of pressure vessels and bridges and to determine how storms will affect materials used in them.[2]" The amount of energy it took to accelerate the mass of each floor is given and easy to calculate. Once the columns buckled, all the weight of the building above is accelerating with the force of gravity. The force created by that large accelerated mass overwhelmed the energy absorption ability of the floors below (just like the bowling ball and piece of paper)and accelerated their mass so fast, it appears instantaneous. No one ever claimed the building fell at free fall speed, it fell at near free fall speed because the difference is insignificant. This is the actual science and what actually happened. You are either capable of verifying it independently or you are not. You are either capable of understanding the science or you are not. So far you are not. There is no cure for stupid. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what caused the mass of rubble to turn into dust?
Explain that. |
|
|
|
|
