Why Didn't NIST Model the Complete Utterly Devastating "Collapses" of the WTC Towers?
A) because strongly-built towers with limited structural damage and limited fires could NEVER undergo the volcanic type of collapse seen on 9/11 without some very powerful extra force-- and NIST knows it
B) because their goal was to perpetrate a monstrous cover-up of what really happened to the WTC towers on 9/11
C) because they are evil (or at least the WTC group is evil)
D) all of the above
I challenge anyone to build a model of a steel tower with similar dimensions and structure to the WTC and show it undergoing complete collapse at near free-fall speed.
B) because their goal was to perpetrate a monstrous cover-up of what really happened to the WTC towers on 9/11
C) because they are evil (or at least the WTC group is evil)
D) all of the above
I challenge anyone to build a model of a steel tower with similar dimensions and structure to the WTC and show it undergoing complete collapse at near free-fall speed.
posted by spooked at 11:17 AM
19 Comments:
"because strongly-built towers with limited structural damage and limited fires could NEVER undergo the volcanic type of collapse seen on 9/11 without some very powerful extra force-- and NIST knows it"
Says who?
shut up john!
your distraction is disingenuous as anyone who cares about real honesty and morals and is familiar with and dwells on the issue of 9/11 knows damn well where to look for the true information so just shut up!
John--
I say so. And so does anyone else with honesty and some knowledge of engineering.
But... feel free to prove that it IS possible. That is why I put out the challenge.
Build a strong tower similar to the WTC and show it undergoing complete rapid collapse from limited damage. prove me wrong!!!
Lol, Conspiracy Smasher has never heard of Judy Woods, apparently. His web of lies continues to unravel, and ultimately his base of support will desert him, leaving him naked, scared and exposed to the world for everyone to see.
No intelligent person supports you, Consmushie. Not one.
You rest your case? That's great! Now we can ignore you!
i hope conspiracy smasher, sword of truth, and the other SPOOKS who troll this and other related blogs/sites, are victims in the next false-flag/state-terror
psy-op...fuck 'em, spooks must die...
conspiracy smasher is totally hung up on that structural engineer-- he seems convinced that only a person of that profession can truely understand what happened at the WTC. his hopeless appeal to 'authority' is difficult to understand, especially when some elementary physics can be used to atleast convince oneself that the OGTC cannot be.
conspiracy smasher needs some serious education on the big lie, or more likely, needs a payraise for endlessly promoting the same line.
i hope conspiracy smasher, sword of truth ... are victims in the next false-flag/state-terror
psy-op.
don't look now, but the next false flag psyop has already begun, and he's attacking the truthlings where it counts.... with mind bullets!
Spook, ol buddy! Why should anyone build a model of a steel tower and do ANY sort of experiment when you have done the definitive, the be-all and end-all, the MOTHER of all experiments! Complete with a picture of your FOOT on the Internet! Seriously, your Chicken...errr....rabbit wire model and simulation was absolutely to DIE for. Aside from getting me my first 5,000 hit day (thanks to National Review Online's link), you re-wrote the book on the scientific method (put it on its ear, actually - or perhaps put your foot down)!
CS has it right - and your minions and strap-hangers and various and sundry morons who sit slavishly at their keyboards and bang out their "WE LOVE YOU SPOOK! YOU ARE A GOD!" worshipful comments all do nothing but add to the hilarious factor that makes up this page.
And I love answer "C" - It is because they are EVIL!!!!!
More scientific method there, Spook ol' buddy!
I need to get back on the ball and get a Moonbattery post up on the Instapinch on your "exotic weapons". I'll let you know when it's done!
Ciao.
I don't think anyone over 11 years old will fall for the Con Smash or Pinch. It must be fun for them to know they helped to murder 3,000 American citizens. Do you enjoy pissing on the ashes of the victims of your failed policies? Why on earth don't you go volunteer for some medical experiments, Conspiracy Smasher? IQ too low?
Pinch, I looked at the "Moonbattery" section of your blog.
Your entry of 7/28/2006 provides a substantive response to a comment on Democratic Underground. Fine, you brought some knowledge and perspective to the problem, albeit one which I had never considered and strikes me as ridiculous. My uninformed response would simply be that the missile would be redirected to sea, disarmed. or detonated in mid-air. Whatever -- this is not a significant theory and not attributable to everyone that questions 9/11.
Your entry of 7/13/2006, responding to Spooked, does nothing but mock and talk about the videos. The point of the experiment is to show that what the videos show is not possible. Get it? So saying the videos show that is not a response.
Commenter Jetman, who claims to be an expert in aviation safety and should have something to bring to the argument, brings nothing but a response to his uncle on another issue.
Commenter Steve raises a reasonable question about the mass of the fuel. I don't think that is enough to account for what is depicted in the videos -- the plane entering the building without any deceleration or deformation. The plane would have slowed greatly when the engines hit. Most of the mass of the fuel and the wings is centered between the two engines, so the wing tips should not have gone in. I could see the portion between the engines -- connected by a single spar running through the fuselage center, having enough mass to punch through the columns, but not without slowing greatly, particularly because of the greater resistance of the floors. If the longitudinal resistance of the floors is considered, there is no way what we saw really occurred.
If you have a substantive response, fine. "You're a liberal moonbat" won't cut it.
Telling me I'm an idiot to question the videos won't cut it either.
conspiracy smasher said: giggle...
what a convincing argument con smash - you must be on the debate team at your all girls school.
When facts, logic & physics are against you...ALL you CAN do is mock.
Right "pinch".
;-)
i've been reading this blog for over a year and pinch was already a fixture here when i got here. sword of truth (ha) and conspiracy smasher (as if) are newer to this scene.
anyway, not one single time has any of these 3 ever stated that they actually believe any part of the govt/media 9/11 fairytale, nor has any any of these 3 even once provided a link to anything of substance. all they do is mock, and not even effectively.
my guess is that neither of these 3 actually does believe the govt/media 9/11 fairytale and they know that they would be hard-pressed to actually explain or even merely defend any part of it.
how many times do i have to say to the 3 of you: put up or shut up!
Have your parents asked for a refund on your education?
Did you fall on your head?
Do you still dring a lot?
Have you lost your real job?
Bet you love Bush?
Bet you wish you had brains?
Some real facts would be cool.
Got facts?
Pinch, another f*ckin spook, look at his site...the perps are getting desperate, soon the truth will be known by all...all fuckin spooks must fuckin die...justice for 9-11 will be served...we have to stop being nice with these people...declare war on the spooks!!!
Can we please stop calling others "spooks," "shills," or "disinfo"? I hear so much of that at 911 Blogger. I think we should be nice to everyone, and take what they say on the merits.
"""prove me wrong!!! """ You are wrong out of the box!
You have been wrong for 5 years. Funny as you build models and talk, you were debunked 5 years ago. Proven wrong by events before you speak.
You must of flunked physics; (blind by political bias?) so here is simple tower stuff.
Plane impact 5 to 7 times greater than design.
10,000 gallons of fuel start fires on many floors after impact.
Steel looses strength due to fires and fails.
Three simple steeps.
Only a dolt would miss the facts. Then you missed the fact the fire systems were inop due to impact.
;failed to understand just the energy of the impact was greater then needed to destroy all the supports; did you miss the fact impact energy exceeded 1,300 to 2,000 pound of TNT?
you failed to understand anything of scientific fact, just look at your model, the floors are not even modeled, the height of your floors is off, your ideas are really funny.
Your model is real funny, take it to a structural engineer so you can see someone FOTFLOL for hours.
Do your parents know you are a dolt? Funny as hell, but then you are incapable of rational thinking, you will never be right; 5 years of being wrong, how funny is this?
Good job chicken wire guy – (I thought you were doing a parody of something, but you are a parody of yourself – terminal stupidity on 9/11, does it extend to your real job?)
Hey "Anonymous"...class is about to begin. Time to school yer ass. hehe
I'll just destroy a FEW of the misinformed statements a.k.a "Lies" you just posted above...
Here comes da fun!!...:-)
Anonymous said...
"Plane impact 5 to 7 times greater than design."
Oh REALLY, genius!?? Care to share your data on this claim? But of COURSE you won't/can't, 'cos you just pulled that figure out of yer ass! :-)
Do you even KNOW what the towers were designed to withstand!??
How 'bout see what THE FUCKING WTC Construction Manager had to say regarding your spurious (read: LIE) claim, shall we?
WTC Construction Manager: Towers Were Designed to Take Numerous Plane Crashes
Frank A. DeMartini, Manager, WTC Construction and Project Management, discusses the fact that the WTC towers were designed to take multiple hits from airliners and not collapse, comparing it to poking a pencil through fly netting, DeMartini was adamant that the towers would not collapse.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/141104designedtotake.htm
Betcha he knows just A LITTLE more about the Twin Towers construction than you do..."Anonymous"? ;-)
Me thinks he does. hehe
OK, on to your next Lie..er...I mean "Mistake".
Anonymous said...
Steel looses strength due to fires and fails.
Wow. What an amazingly complex & scientific anaylsis.
Funny how complete and utter collapses of steel framed buildings at near free fall speed from fire never happened before 9/11.
Funny how it's never happened SINCE 9/11.
Funny how it never happened here either:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html
WITH A MUCH MORE DEVASTATING FIRE...BURNING FOR 17+..!!!
Anonymous said...
Only a dolt would miss the facts...
You missed the simple facts that I corrected you on above.
So I guess that makes you a...
If the show fits...hehe :-)
And let's not forget the cutter charges used to bring down WTC #7, seen below:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/281104unmistakablecharges.htm
Post a Comment
<< Home