| Author |
Message |
|
Phys
|
Post subject:  Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:15 am |
|
 |
| Anti-Zionist princess |
 |
Joined: Jan 1st, 2007
Posts: 9665
Location: USA
|
Ry wrote: phys's way of arguing is to stick her fingers in her ears and say I just dont believe in facts, science or sense. I have my intuition and can create my own science but um its not based on the actual event but a different event that fits my conclusion.
Phys STOP DODGING THE QUESTION the buliding was 47 stories high and disappeared in 6 seconds straight down. Fire does not melt an entire builing of steel and concrete and turn it into dust in seconds. You coudn't even burn a chimney that fast much less a sky scrapper.
I have already answer all of these question for you, a few times. Check the prior threads.
I havent found your agrumnt on this 
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
Phys
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:26 pm |
|
|
| Anti-Zionist princess |
|
Joined: Jan 1st, 2007
Posts: 9665
Location: USA
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Omega Pi
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:28 pm |
|
|
| Fights PNAC daily |
 |
Joined: Feb 25th, 2007
Posts: 573
|
I'm still a little uneasy on this subject but I definitely think Ry's argument is better than others I have seen. That site you posted is retarded (although I'm not sure what you want to show by posting it). The guy apparently thinks the US government is a group of angels. He also throws a truck load of other fallacies at the reader. Which leads to another point: he focuses on Lose Change and the weak theories (which have been shown to be crap). Take a look at this short video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=OpTIWgk1ZqE . Also, from my own knowledge, Engineers don't build things with such a high chance of failure, there is something called redundancy among other things. However, I honestly don't research this much, mainly because other crimes/persecutions are being committed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GamerS
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:41 pm |
|
|
| Smashing neocons |
 |
Joined: Dec 10th, 2006
Posts: 1490
|
|
It's called "factor of safety" and engineering term and it's not uncommon for an individual structural member to be sized to hold 10x it's actual load so it can compensate in the event of damage to to other members.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Phys
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 6:18 pm |
|
|
| Anti-Zionist princess |
|
Joined: Jan 1st, 2007
Posts: 9665
Location: USA
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Int'l man of mystery
|
Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:35 pm |
|
Joined: Jul 20th, 2006
Posts: 1712
Location: USA
|
|
As I've said before, it's largely conjectural. there's really nothing in the way of solid proof, since most (if not all) the physical evidence was so quickly disposed of.
Phys, the calculations themselves are flawed, as they are based on presumptions and are almost entirely hypothetical. The buildings were pulverized to the ground, and however much you want to counter the demolition theory, the fact remains that it is still a more plausible theory than the truss or pancake theories.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Phys
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:13 am |
|
|
| Anti-Zionist princess |
|
Joined: Jan 1st, 2007
Posts: 9665
Location: USA
|
|
The calculations arent flawed.
They are based on facts apart from the evidence of the buildings.
For example, the mass of thermite and the amount that would be needed for x building so large is a value you can calculate w/o needing debrie from the buildings.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ledskof
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 7:43 am |
|
|
| Over the system |
 |
Joined: Oct 26th, 2006
Posts: 2291
Location: Atlanta
|
|
All the demolitionists I've talked to in Georgia said it looked like controlled demolition. The idea of the building burning and collapsing on itself was humorous to them. It was basically "so why does my job exist?"
Seems like this opinion is common among demolitionists outside my state too. Maybe you can just write it up as, "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." but i don't think so.
_________________
Is your view of the world in sync with what you 'know' about the world?
"The state breaks everything and then blames freedom.
The state destroys everything and then blames those who interact voluntarily for that destruction."
-- Stefan Molyneux
|
|
| |
|
|
|
