Reply With Quote
Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK and Connelly.
Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK and Connelly.
We have become addicted to cynicism in this country.
There is a value to being skeptical, but so many have passed the point where cynicism replaces any sense of logic or critical thinking.
"Truthers" are a prime example. , it is beginning to take on the trappings of an outright religion with dogma, priests, infighting and everything.
Kinda freaky.
Witnesses near WTC7 described sounds typical of buildings falling down.
Get your facts straight.
This is another fallacy known as the appeal to ignorance. To put it very simply, in this case the Truther position is right by virtue of ignorance of all the facts. Conspiracy theorists in general love this one because they can always make it -- "we don't know what else "they" are hiding, etc.
Truthers still need to explain the lack of hard physical evidence and the existence of suspects who confessed. If bin Laden wasn't behind it, then why did he claim that his group was? And why are we chasing him into the mountains?
Number of elevator mechanics working the day shift in the twin towers:
80
Bin Laden was duped or in on it, of course.
To see bin Laden cooperating with any American administration or business interest is quite a leap!
It's simpler, again, to invoke Occam's Razor and say that bin Laden and his cult followers planned and blew up the Towers, like they said they did.
I have a feeling that Truthers are going to be around awhile -- decades perhaps. They may persist like the JFK-niks.
Muslim extremists said they did it, said they would do it and tried before. Everyone who really knew anything about Al Qaeda knew they were going to attack something American that year.
we really showed bin laden by "chasing him into the mountains"
hreallyTo see bin Laden cooperating with any American administration or business interest is quite a leap!
didnt we once arm, train and fund OBL?
Anyone who knows anything about the origins of radical Islam knows that the name, Al-Queda, is a American creation....
Quite right. Many years ago, before he became a sworn enemy of the U.S. around 1990.
Not sure what you're trying to say here.
As someone who knows a thing or two about Islam, I would love to know: Is radical Islam an American creation? Or the name "al-Qaeda" American?
that wasnt long ago at all, not much of a leap
So ... what are you saying? That it is possible that Osama cooperated with the U.S.?
im saying he has done so in the past
And ... it is possible that OBL cooperated with the U.S. in the years leading up to 9-11?
Yeah, I'm thinking the relationship has become untenable and quite possibly beyond repair.
I'd agree. Some Truthers would have us believe that OBL was in cahoots with the DoD, the State Dept., and the White House, and evidently agreed to stage a horrific attack on NYC and the Pentagon, take the blame for all of it, and in the process setting off war against his terror network, turning much of the world's opinion against him, and causing him to have to hide in a cave somewhere. You're right, it's unlikely.
It's far simpler to say that he planned the attack with the intent to destroy America. No conspiracy theory needed.
I don't know what it is but the years leading up to sept 11th were the 90s right?
So? Americans like naming things. It's what we do.
Islamic terrorists have their own things they like to do. 9/11 included.
PE= m *9.8*413= 4073m
Mass is, by definition, simply a measurement of how much force a given amount of material will exert AT REST on an object that is resisting gravity.
SOOOO
The top floor would hit the ground with the same force as a 4073 story building, if that fall was unimpeded.
Now let's consider the fall of the top 30 stories.
They fell through the 3-5 floors of damaged sections and impacted the building below with some amount of force.
Let's call the distance accelerated as 3 floors and be generous. This is 11 meters.
Acceration of an object for 11 meters at 70% of gravity(dan's figure), would yeild an ending velocity of:
v^2= 2ad=2*9.8*.7*11=150=v^2, find the square root of 150, and bada bing, you get 12 meters per second
Subs ute this into the kinetic energy equation:
ke= 150*.5*m=ke=75m
This means the 30 floor section impacts the undamaged portion with the kinetic energy of SEVENTY FIVE TIMES ITS MASS.
Think about this for a moment.
The lower section of the building is designed to hold that 30 stories stationary plus a safety margin of 10 or 20%. So the maximum force that the underlying structure could apply to that falling section is 1.2 times its mass.
Further:
That falling section having as much kinetic energy as 75 times its mass means that it is effectively applying the same amount of force at the impact point that a 2270 story building would. if you held it stationary. (simple math: 30*75)
For the statement "the building would not have collapsed without explosives" implies that the building could have been TWENTY TWO TIMES TALLER THAN IT ACTUALLY WAS without collapsing.
STILL FURTHER
Your calculations seem to imply that the building structure below could absorb 30% of the falling energy.
IN JUST THE FIRST 11 METERS OF A 400 METER COLLAPSE THERE IS 62 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF FORCE REQUIRED TO COLLAPSE THE BUILDING.
Your assumption of about 1/3 the energy used to collapse the building is about 20 times what is reasonable. (1/62*20= 1/3) (more actually, if you consider the further distance and mass)
What happens, then when MORE mass is added AND accelerated?
Even if half the mass falls away or off to the side, there is still FAR more force and energy than would be needed to collapse the building WITHOUT ANY EXPLOSIVES.
I ask yet again, for the 16th time.
ARE THERE ANY EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS OF VISIBLE EXPLOSIVE DEVICES?
We all know the answer, but only one of us lacks the honesty to answer the question.
PE= m *9.8*413= 4073m
Mass is, by definition, simply a measurement of how much force a given amount of material will exert AT REST on an object that is resisting gravity.
SOOOO
The top floor would hit the ground with the same force as a 4073 story building, if that fall was unimpeded.
Now let's consider the fall of the top 30 stories.
They fell through the 3-5 floors of damaged sections and impacted the building below with some amount of force.
Let's call the distance accelerated as 3 floors and be generous. This is 11 meters.
Acceration of an object for 11 meters at 70% of gravity(dan's figure), would yeild an ending velocity of:
v^2= 2ad=2*9.8*.7*11=150=v^2, find the square root of 150, and bada bing, you get 12 meters per second
Subs ute this into the kinetic energy equation:
ke= 150*.5*m=ke=75m
This means the 30 floor section impacts the undamaged portion with the kinetic energy of SEVENTY FIVE TIMES ITS MASS.
Think about this for a moment.
The lower section of the building is designed to hold that 30 stories stationary plus a safety margin of 10 or 20%. So the maximum force that the underlying structure could apply to that falling section is 1.2 times its mass.
Further:
That falling section having as much kinetic energy as 75 times its mass means that it is effectively applying the same amount of force at the impact point that a 2270 story building would. if you held it stationary. (simple math: 30*75)
For the statement "the building would not have collapsed without explosives" implies that the building could have been TWENTY TWO TIMES TALLER THAN IT ACTUALLY WAS without collapsing.
STILL FURTHER
Your calculations seem to imply that the building structure below could absorb 30% of the falling energy.
IN JUST THE FIRST 11 METERS OF A 400 METER COLLAPSE THERE IS 62 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF FORCE REQUIRED TO COLLAPSE THE BUILDING.
Your assumption of about 1/3 the energy used to collapse the building is about 20 times what is reasonable. (1/62*20= 1/3) (more actually, if you consider the further distance and mass)
What happens, then when MORE mass is added AND accelerated?
Even if half the mass falls away or off to the side, there is still FAR more force and energy than would be needed to collapse the building WITHOUT ANY EXPLOSIVES.
The funny thing about this bit is that even if you only consider the first 3 meters instead of the first 12 meters, there is still more than enough force to collapse the building.
In response to this, Dan produced a video from a nice young man who also did some calculations, but forgot that gravity didn't stop accelerating mass once it got moving.
So the best the truther movement can come up with are obvious beginners mistakes in physics to support their "it was too strong to collapse without explosives" bit.
Take bad physics, the inability to answer a straight question when asked, taking quotes out of context, outright making up, and what do you think a real jury would make out of that, Dan?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
