Pentagon Attacks
- Thread starter ISpentHowMuch
- Start date
..you guys laugh all you want I know zilch about Physics, but it certainly is not too hard to tell on this board who knows what they are talking about. Ranger you kill me, you seem to know a little about history I would have suspected you would recognize and appreeciate when somebody else comes on and tells us about something they know. In this case Physics. You know nothing of course so you insult him instaed. Boo Hoo Hoo all you want, 9/11 was our Kennedy assassination , and once again we are just going to let the govt get away with it, and swallow their pathetic lies, thanks alot Hdog and Exclusive. Great post !
Dude, I majored in Physics.
Nice try, though.
I could point out all the flaws in those retarded postings, but I just don't have the inclination.
Of course, this isn't PHYSICS this is *STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING* we're talking about.
Anyway, have a nice night.
LOL
Nice try, though.
I could point out all the flaws in those retarded postings, but I just don't have the inclination.
Of course, this isn't PHYSICS this is *STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING* we're talking about.
Anyway, have a nice night.
LOL
There are many other Government cover-ups like those of Alien visitors from outer space, Bigfoot, Yeti, Yowie, Sasquatch, and the Skunk Bush Ape Man. I find this more alarming then that of 9/11. You would think that the Bush administration would not care to find out more about the Skunk George Bush Ape Man!
So is your sarcsam. Perhaps you should re-read the posts from before we got silly. It may be difficult to follow without a background in the material which is what the conspiracy pseudo-scientists depend on. Lots of theories make sense untill you understand enough of the actual science.
Lets see exclusive's points.
- weakened metal, metal on fire - addressed. Only has to be weakened enough to stress other members.
- factor of safety - addressed. WTC had a lower than normal factor of safety du to the need to keep the structure as light as possible. Add to that the large chunks missing because of the crash.
- panckae theory - addressed. Dynamic loading and excessive forces on consecutive adjacent members. The debris that fell in the time expected for freefall was just that, debris. With all the dust, It would be extremely difficult to see how long it took the floors to fall.
- aluminum in the pentagon. - Ok, not huge amount of explanation possible without access to the site but it is feasible that melted aluminum was mixed with all the other debris. This is the only point that was sidestepped for lack of evidence. overall, science looks for evidence, not conjecture and there is more than enough evidence to deal with all the other theories.
From a political slant, what reason would the us blow up or cover up a bomb or rocket attack, especially on such short notice?
- weakened metal, metal on fire - addressed. Only has to be weakened enough to stress other members.
- factor of safety - addressed. WTC had a lower than normal factor of safety du to the need to keep the structure as light as possible. Add to that the large chunks missing because of the crash.
- panckae theory - addressed. Dynamic loading and excessive forces on consecutive adjacent members. The debris that fell in the time expected for freefall was just that, debris. With all the dust, It would be extremely difficult to see how long it took the floors to fall.
- aluminum in the pentagon. - Ok, not huge amount of explanation possible without access to the site but it is feasible that melted aluminum was mixed with all the other debris. This is the only point that was sidestepped for lack of evidence. overall, science looks for evidence, not conjecture and there is more than enough evidence to deal with all the other theories.
From a political slant, what reason would the us blow up or cover up a bomb or rocket attack, especially on such short notice?
Dude, if you weren't so retarded, I might consider wasting more time on your nonsense.
Saying that, from a Grade 12 or 13 knowledge of phyics, you can talk authoritatively about the collapse of a building is like saying knowledge of mathematics let's you talk authoritatively about the general theory of relativity.
LOL
Saying that, from a Grade 12 or 13 knowledge of phyics, you can talk authoritatively about the collapse of a building is like saying knowledge of mathematics let's you talk authoritatively about the general theory of relativity.
LOL
do u have proof of that? from what i've heard, the towers, like all buildings were built lots stronger then they need to be. u know around the WW II period, a B-17 (i think) crashed into the empire state building.... did that collapse?strange1 said:
now hwat do u say about building 7??? it collapsed like a controlled demolition yet no plane ever hit it... it had a few minor fires... and that building was the most recent... built in 1987... how the hell does a few office fires make building 7 collapse when a fire that CONSUMED 8 floors of a philadelphia building of similar dimensions didnt make it collapse? explain that to me. explain how the hilton hotel across the street from the towers only suffered minor damage, yet WTC7, 200 yards AWAY from the towers, collapsed. explain please!
I'm getting the impression that people (assoholic, exclusive) think that the US intentionally blew up the WTC and killed a few thousand americans as an excuse to go somewhere else and get some more americans killed. This is too fu**ed up for me. I'm out. Goober, I'll carry the freezers.
Actually there was a hour program either on PBS or the Discovery Channel, that adressed the very same issue.Exclusive said:
i am not an engineer, but from what I understood, the collapse was due, to what you could almost classify as a design flaw.
The basic structure looked like a house of cards, once on part of the structure gave way, the rest literally imploded.
Common sense would tell me that the designer of the building never allowed for a 767 to hit the building. Back then that was just to far fetched.
Rest asssure those calculations will be part of the new design.
