Karma, get real.  We've seen enough of this goofy stuff already.

Link

Well, people still deny man on the moon, and the earth is round.  So of course there are going to be some truthers out there.

Gravity is a bitch.

Trade Center pics.

Where?  Here on the forums?  If I knew that, I wouldn't have posted, but I haven't seen anything.

LOL.  The infamous Popular Mechanics article debunked nothing, and in fact has itself been debunked.  Why don't you try to think critically and for yourself instead of relying on what Popular Mechanics or anyone else says?  I can post dozens of links too, from top Ph.D. scientists, and teams of them, supporting my claim - stuff which has been peer-reviewed and published.  But I won't do that - I'd rather people just think for themselves, if that's possible.

Ah, I not only took structural engineering classes, I worked within the structural engineering group of a defense contractor for years.  Actually, we blast tested building designs, came up with new designs, blast tested those, etc.  Quite ironically and unbelievably, this same defense contractor was hired by... geez, it was either NIST or FEMA I belive... to investigate the cause of the "collapse" (cough) of building 7.

I guess I shouldn't have expected anything different.  But instead of throwing quips out there like "read this Popular Mechanics article" or "take some structural engineering classes," why don't you explain how thousands of tons of concrete just jumps up into the air and explodes into dust?  In other words, why don't you actually address the points being made?

Anyone who thinks that there was enough gravitational potential energy in those buildings to do THAT is a moron.  In fact, no one believes that.  I have never seen a claim that gravity pulverized all that concrete.  Instead, this fact just seems to be ignored by mainstream media, governmental investigations, etc.

The amount of potential energy in those buildings has already been calculated.  The amount needed to pulverize that much concrete into dust has also been calculated.  You lack the energy needed by many orders of magnitude.

EDIT:  It's worse than that.  The concrete turns into dust from the very second of "collapse."  In other words, as the first floor goes, that concrete turns to dust.  As the second floor goes, that concrete turns to dust... all the way down.  Where is the gravitational potential energy coming from to turn the TOP floors into dust?  Did you look at the photos?  Don't you see a tower standing, with the top engulfed in concrete dust?

Yes there is.  You don't need to crash a jet into a skyscraper to understand that hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete don't suddenly pulverize into dust without a mechanism for it.  You don't need to crash that jet to understand that jet fuel (kerosene) fires do not melt steel.  You don't need to crash that jet to understand that the top 30-something floors of those buildings cannot fall through the rest of the buildings, at free fall acceleration, taking the path of most resistance... ESPECIALLY considering that those floors had already disintegrated into dust anyway.

And last but not least, you have forgotten about building 7.  It was never hit by an airplane.  Yet it "collapsed" (cough) too (yes, a 3rd skyscraper was destroyed that day).  Do we need to crash a jet into another skyscraper to explain how a building that WASN'T hit by a jet was destroyed?

LOL.

You misunderstand.  I'm not saying a tree is a skyscraper.  I'm simply suggesting that if a tree turned itself into sawdust from the top down, no one would call it a "collapse."  They'd call it something else, i.e. "weird, top-down disintegration" or whatever.

My apologies, that website seems to be removing the pictures.  I'll try to rehost elsewhere, but I bet the same thing will keep happening.

Why should I care if these weren't collapses? Whether they were or not, America is in economic recession, is fighting a "pointless" war (DRILL, BABY, DRILL!), the government never tells us all of the information, the media hyperbolizes and often lies outright, and Congress is unwilling to actually declare war because their panties are up their asses and Republicans & Democrats are shit-flinging to convince common people to cooperate and shut up. So tell me why should we care that these buildings *collapsed* and killed a little more than 1000 americans in a day, when untill the recent Health Bill (which previously mentioned bastards are trying to declare unconstitutional so they can save money by letting people die if they are sick before purchase of insurance) 47000 died each year for lack of health insurance. This conspiracy is so insignificant in the face of REAL lies and problems that I can't understand why people still believe in this.

And just who is debunking it and what methods are they using?  Why don't you think critically rather than believing everything you read on the internet without considering who is saying it and what qualifies them to say it. Anyone is capable of spewing pseudo-science claims, but that does not mean they have a good claim.

If there wasn't a solid mainstream model for what happened to the WTC it would be easier to understand where you're coming from, but the fact is that there is a solid model, so you have to give a strong arguement as to why that model is invalid before I'll even consider your fringe theory.  A few anecdotes and non-sequiturs does not satisfy.


Really, because my understanding was the opposite, that there isn't any credible academic source out there for these theories.  Please, do find those articles.


Now you're just throwing out insults and saying "nuh uh".  Of course gravity wasn't the only force at work in that complex system, but it was certainly one of the principle ones. If you want to argue otherwise, it's up to you to make the case.


Models and predictions are entirely based on real-world observation.  All scientific theories and principles follow from those observations.  Models and predictions are often incomplete when applied to unlike scenarios.  For very large and complicated systems without any appropriate scale analogies, it's very difficult (some might go so far as to say speculative) to create an accurate model, and it's really not proven until you witness an event that confirms it.

So yes, you do need data to come up with accurate models for the collapse, and the only way to get that data would be to crash another similar jet into another similar skyscraper.  Since that's not happening, the best we have are simplified models, and there is sufficient evidence for models that support the conventional theory.


As has already been stated in those articles, no one is claiming that the steel melted, only that the heat weakened it to the point at which it warped and bent.  The heat present was more than sufficient to make the steel lose 90% of its strength, which was more than sufficient to bring down the building.


Why not?  Do you claim some omniscient knowledge of the workings of the universe?  Experimentation and the modeling and theory that results is the only way to determine what is actually possible.  You're just outright saying that it isn't possible with only a few anecdotes to support your belief, which isn't convincing in the least.


Desbris.


If you're just going to laugh at me I have no reason to take you seriously at all.

Sooo, where do you get your info about the healthcare bill?

I'm sorry, what? First, what you quoted mentions nothing of the health care bill's content or meaning. In fact, none of my post mentioned it. I'm not even argueing about the bill, just pointing out that the idiots who are trying to keep their power don't want anything accomplished regarding it. The statistic I used was from Sicko (I can hear haters quaking in their boots that I mentioned a Michael Moore film[e digicons]:rofl:[/e] ). Second, my point was to show that there is no purpose to discuss or support this conspiracy theory because there is so many more critical things to worry about. Third, even if it was pre-planted government explosives, so what? What are you going to do next, eh? Shit bricks, give you money, what?

EDIT: sorry skidi, my post was for those above you.

forum burp.

Yep, I was talking about the statistic

I honestly don't want to talk about teh healthcare bill cause its a big pile of BS right now from all sides and parties

its called being dishonest/cowardly. we all know where he's going with this. ive seen it dozens and dozens of times from truthers who claim to be "just asking questions", lol.