Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2019 14:17:57 GMT -5
Just saying... LOL...I am not expecting different results. I am just allowing Willie to illustrate his insanity. So far, he has not let me down. Your question is irrelevant regarding the free fall collapse. The NIST never explained what abruptly destroyed the lower substructure-- causing the proven free fall collapse sans resistance. Tell clueless Harry, your gadfly salesman side kick who knows nothing about physics. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Sept 18, 2019 14:20:15 GMT -5
LOL...I am not expecting different results. I am just allowing Willie to illustrate his insanity. So far, he has not let me down. Your question is irrelevant regarding the free fall collapse. The NIST never explained what abruptly destroyed the lower substructure-! causing free fa collapse sans resistance. Tell clueless Harry, thevsalesman. Gawdammit. YES, they do discuss it, and in considerable detail. Why do you insist on remaining so f-ing ignorant? |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by oujour76 on Sept 18, 2019 14:32:46 GMT -5
Just saying... LOL...I am not expecting different results. I am just allowing Willie to illustrate his insanity. So far, he has not let me down.  |
|
|
Full Season 2022 Douche Champion
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2019 14:36:10 GMT -5
LOL...I am not expecting different results. I am just allowing Willie to illustrate his insanity. So far, he has not let me down. Here's the key, original Einstein quote about WTC7 for you two hairy chickens. (My nickname in high school was, "Einstein.") If you can't explain the physics straightforwardly, you probably don't understand it. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2019 14:45:52 GMT -5
Your question is irrelevant regarding the free fall collapse. The NIST never explained what abruptly destroyed the lower substructure-! causing free fa collapse sans resistance. Tell clueless Harry, thevsalesman. Gawdammit. YES, they do discuss it, and in considerable detail. Why do you insist on remaining so f-ing ignorant? Forget the NIST "trees" of WTC7, Walter. It was a pseudo-intellectual cover up of Larry Silverstein's pre-arranged Mossad demolition. Just look at the fxcking "forest." It was a perfectly executed Mossad/Urban Moving Systems free fall, symmetrical demolition, after Silverstein said he, "told them to pull it." |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Sept 18, 2019 15:02:13 GMT -5
Gawdammit. YES, they do discuss it, and in considerable detail. Why do you insist on remaining so f-ing ignorant? Forget the NIST "trees" of WTC7, Walter. It was a pseudo-intellectual cover up of Larry Silverstein's pre-arranged Mossad demolition. Just look at the fxcking "forest." It was a perfectly executed Mossad/Urban Moving Systems free fall, symmetrical demolition, after Silverstein said he, "told them to pull it." ...LOL...because you and a bunch of clickbait fruitcakes say so? Uh...no. That ain't how it works. The physics is physics. The engineering is engineering. And of the latter, to paraphrase: "If you can't refute the engineering, it probably means you don't understand it." I think I'm done here. YOU can't hang. You don't understand the engineering, you have no desire to read about the engineering, and you believe the Clickbait Squad for no other reason than that you think it's cool to do so. Next you'll start telling me that a bunch of old, fat guys with long beards and funny hats talk directly to God. Good luck with that nonsense as well. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2019 21:08:15 GMT -5
Forget the NIST "trees" of WTC7, Walter. It was a pseudo-intellectual cover up of Larry Silverstein's pre-arranged Mossad demolition. Just look at the fxcking "forest." It was a perfectly executed Mossad/Urban Moving Systems free fall, symmetrical demolition, after Silverstein said he, "told them to pull it." ...LOL...because you and a bunch of clickbait fruitcakes say so? Uh...no. That ain't how it works. The physics is physics. The engineering is engineering. And of the latter, to paraphrase: "If you can't refute the engineering, it probably means you don't understand it." I think I'm done here. YOU can't hang. You don't understand the engineering, you have no desire to read about the engineering, and you believe the Clickbait Squad for no other reason than that you think it's cool to do so. Next you'll start telling me that a bunch of old, fat guys with long beards and funny hats talk directly to God. Good luck with that nonsense as well. Walter, Your knowledge of physics is worse than sophomoric. And I should know. I was recruited by my old Physics Professor Phillip Bray to tutor undergraduates in Physics at Brown, and I had a perfect Physics score on my MCATs in 1978. You, obviously, still don't understand the physics (or chemistry) of the 9/11 WTC demolitions. You've been suckered by the NIST computer "simulation" model -- for which those overpaid government cons didn't even publish their "data!" |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Sept 18, 2019 21:42:49 GMT -5
...LOL...because you and a bunch of clickbait fruitcakes say so? Uh...no. That ain't how it works. The physics is physics. The engineering is engineering. And of the latter, to paraphrase: "If you can't refute the engineering, it probably means you don't understand it." I think I'm done here. YOU can't hang. You don't understand the engineering, you have no desire to read about the engineering, and you believe the Clickbait Squad for no other reason than that you think it's cool to do so. Next you'll start telling me that a bunch of old, fat guys with long beards and funny hats talk directly to God. Good luck with that nonsense as well. Walter, Your knowledge of physics is worse than sophomoric. And I should know. I was recruited by my old Physics Professor Phillip Bray to tutor undergraduates in Physics at Brown, and I had a perfect Physics score on my MCATs in 1978. You, obviously, still don't understand the physics (or chemistry) of the 9/11 WTC demolitions. You've been suckered by the NIST computer "simulation" model -- for which those overpaid government cons didn't even publish their "data!" At least I have read it. You are scared to death to learn. SAD! When is the last time, or hell, the first time you actually applied that Physics knowledge in real life since 1978? 40 years later, your book-learned 'expertise' does not impress me. I use it nearly every day. You couldn't engineer a doghouse if I gave you a week to figure it out. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2019 23:09:02 GMT -5
Walter, Your knowledge of physics is worse than sophomoric. And I should know. I was recruited by my old Physics Professor Phillip Bray to tutor undergraduates in Physics at Brown, and I had a perfect Physics score on my MCATs in 1978. You, obviously, still don't understand the physics (or chemistry) of the 9/11 WTC demolitions. You've been suckered by the NIST computer "simulation" model -- for which those overpaid government cons didn't even publish their "data!" At least I have read it. You are scared to death to learn. SAD! When is the last time, or hell, the first time you actually applied that Physics knowledge in real life since 1978? 40 years later, your book-learned 'expertise' does not impress me. I use it nearly every day. You couldn't engineer a doghouse if I gave you a week to figure it out. Walter,
I'm a theoretician, not an engineer or an architect.
Think about WTC7 for a moment in terms of theoretical physics-- gravitational force, velocity, acceleration, etc.
It was, basically, a large rectangular box supported by an array of steel girders.
If the box abruptly collapses, symmetrically to earth at the rate of the acceleration of gravity, we know that, by definition, that there was no significant resistance to the collapse. If there had been, it would not have accelerated at the acceleration induced by earth's gravity.
Ergo, something abruptly and simultaneously demolished all of the steel girders. The destruction didn't occur in a step-wise, partial, or asymmetrical fashion.
The thing came straight down in a free fall, without pancaking of top floors into those below.
If you don't believe me, look at the film!
We don't really need to know precisely what happened to each girder and bolt in the building to deduce the above.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Sept 19, 2019 7:48:14 GMT -5
At least I have read it. You are scared to death to learn. SAD! When is the last time, or hell, the first time you actually applied that Physics knowledge in real life since 1978? 40 years later, your book-learned 'expertise' does not impress me. I use it nearly every day. You couldn't engineer a doghouse if I gave you a week to figure it out. Walter, I'm a theoretician, not an engineer or an architect.
Think about WTC7 for a moment in terms of theoretical physics-- gravitational force, velocity, acceleration, etc.
It was, basically, a large rectangular box supported by an array of steel girders. If the box abruptly collapses, symmetrically to earth at the rate of the acceleration of gravity, we know that, by definition, that there was no significant resistance to the collapse. If there had been, it would not have accelerated at the acceleration induced by earth's gravity.
Ergo, something abruptly and simultaneously demolished all of the steel girders. The destruction didn't occur in a step-wise, partial, or asymmetrical fashion. The thing came straight down in a free fall, without pancaking of top floors into those below. If you don't believe me, look at the film! We don't really need to know precisely what happened to each girder and bolt in the building to deduce the above.
LOL... Sorry. That simply is not correct. We are dealing with extremely large loads that quickly overwelm the engineered system. It's like pondering the physics of progressive collapse of a matchbox house when a elephant steps on it. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2019 17:22:52 GMT -5
Walter, I'm a theoretician, not an engineer or an architect.
Think about WTC7 for a moment in terms of theoretical physics-- gravitational force, velocity, acceleration, etc.
It was, basically, a large rectangular box supported by an array of steel girders. If the box abruptly collapses, symmetrically to earth at the rate of the acceleration of gravity, we know that, by definition, that there was no significant resistance to the collapse. If there had been, it would not have accelerated at the acceleration induced by earth's gravity.
Ergo, something abruptly and simultaneously demolished all of the steel girders. The destruction didn't occur in a step-wise, partial, or asymmetrical fashion. The thing came straight down in a free fall, without pancaking of top floors into those below. If you don't believe me, look at the film! We don't really need to know precisely what happened to each girder and bolt in the building to deduce the above.
LOL... Sorry. That simply is not correct. We are dealing with extremely large loads that quickly overwelm the engineered system. It's like pondering the physics of progressive collapse of a matchbox house when a elephant steps on it.
Dead wrong. You still don't understand the physics, Walter.
For one thing, the WTC7 matchbox wasn't crushed by an elephant. There was no gravitational "pile driver" effect-- pancaking of floors.
Secondly, even if an elephant stepped on the matchbox, it would not have collapsed at free fall acceleration unless something had abruptly reduced the substructural resistance to zero.
Put on your thinking cap... You and Harry will get it, eventually, if you try.
(I've been waiting for years for the 9/11 light bulbs to turn on in your heads.)
WATCH THE WTC7 MATCHBOX COLLAPSE
|
|
Jan 13, 2020 17:38:49 GMT -5
May 1, 2022 14:04:40 GMT -5
