[Tafari Makonnen]

Ill just post this gem of a yeme physics model:

lets use my example instead.

take a red brick, stand it on its end.

now cut 20% off the end of the brick.


now stand on a chair(or whatever height you want), and drop the 20% onto the top of the remaining brick.

did the upper block pulverize the bottom 80%?

This is equivalent to the collapse of a building in the mind of a simpleton.

I am sure his economic models are just as accurate.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by Tafari Makonnen

Ill just post this gem of a yeme physics model:



This is equivalent to the collapse of a building in the mind of a simpleton.

I am sure his economic models are just as accurate.

So explain step by step what happened AFTER the start of the collapse.

What happened to each upper section of both towers? did they ride the collapse all the way down providing the force needed to destroy the bottom, stronger, undamaged half?

or did they vaporize in the middle of the collapse?

[yesme]

Originally Posted by Tafari Makonnen

Ill just post this gem of a yeme physics model:



This is equivalent to the collapse of a building in the mind of a simpleton.

I am sure his economic models are just as accurate.

lets see, take your word or his

Quote:
Scott C. Grainger, BS CE, PE – Licensed Professional Civil Engineer and/or Fire Protection Engineer in the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. Owner of Grainger Consulting, Inc., a fire protection engineering firm (23 years). Former Chairman, Arizona State Fire Code Committee. Former President of the Arizona Chapter of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers. Current Member of the Forensic Sciences Committee and the Fire Standards Committee of ASTM International (formerly American Society for Testing and Materials ). Senior Member, National Academy of Forensic Engineers.

Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"Approximately 50% of my work is forensic. I am licensed in 9 States. In addition to my forensic work, a good portion of my work is in the design of structural fireproofing systems.

All three [WTC] collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform."
http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html

man thats a hard choice, tell you what, throw up your resume, and we will see who would understand this stuff more, you or him ok?

[Tafari Makonnen]

You take the opinion of an "expert" because it supports your fantasy, without understanding the problem or knowing anything about the person or his area of expertise.

That guys "forensic engineering" expertise includes:

Fire Sprinkler System Failures
•Piping Related
•Sprinkler Head
•Controls

Fire Alarm System Failures
•Controls
•Devices
•Wiring

Piping System Failures
•Water (underground/above ground)
•Domestic
•Specialty Systems
•Sanitary Sewer

Elevator Equipment

Smoke Management Systems

He is exactly who we should listen to when it comes to the collapse of a skyscraper.

Take 5 ****ing minutes to understand anything and stop being a moron.

"All three [WTC] collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform."

This statement is fundamentally inaccurate. Understand why and you might have hope.

[F1VENOM]

Where's the video that someone posted debunking yesme's conspiracy? Damnit it was a good one, too.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by Tafari Makonnen

"All three [WTC] collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform."

This statement is fundamentally inaccurate. Understand why and you might have hope.

After/if yesme gives an answer, would you care to explain why this statement is inaccurate? I know nothing about anything even tangentially related to engineering.

[licence2kill]

please stop giving this guy attention

[Tafari Makonnen]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Where's the video that someone posted debunking yesme's conspiracy? Damnit it was a good one, too.

You cannot "debunk" the ideas of a crazy person who believes in something without any supporting evidence. They formed their opinions out of rubbish, and will simply "debunk the debunking" by adding more what-ifs and citing minor errors. You will never win because you are trying to "disprove" something that doesn't exist, and that something is an ever changing scenario that will simply adapt to fit around and counter points brought up. He doesn't want to understand the situation and develop a reasonable opinion. He want to live in a fantasy where he knows the real truth and is smarter than anyone else so he can feel better about mopping up vomit in the cafeteria all day.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by yesme

So when they calculate how much i WOULD have paid in rent, and then add that to gdp, that is a ok with you?

What about when they add what i WOULD of paid if my checking account was not free?





Did you not say something about a 10% drop in gdp?

You cannot include something in a calculation and then look at it w/o and pretend that is change. By that definition, we have been in a depression since forever...

[yesme]

Originally Posted by Tafari Makonnen

You take the opinion of an "expert" because it supports your fantasy, without understanding the problem or knowing anything about the person or his area of expertise.

That guys "forensic engineering" expertise includes:



He is exactly who we should listen to when it comes to the collapse of a skyscraper.

Take 5 ****ing minutes to understand anything and stop being a moron.

"All three [WTC] collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform."

This statement is fundamentally inaccurate. Understand why and you might have hope.

I was just listing him as an example of the expertise, are you saying you know more about what temps metal can sustain and fireproofing then this man?

Lets pick another of the 1500 and see if your resume or skill set can match his shall we?

Hugo Bachmann, PhD – Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Author and co-author of Erdbebenbemessung von Stahlbetonhochbauten (Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures) (1990), Vibration Problems in Structures: Practical Guidelines (1995), Biege- und Schubversuche an teilweise vorgespannten Leichtbetonbalken (Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams) (1998), Hochbau für Ingenieure. Eine Einführung (Structural Construction for Engineers. An introduction) (2001), Erdbebensicherung von Bauwerken (Earthquake-proofing Buildings) (2002).

Tages Anzeiger Article 9/9/06: "In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished," says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH [Swiss Federal Institute of Technology] - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, likewise emeritus ETH - Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that "the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished."
English translation: http://www.danieleganser.ch
Original in German: http://www.danieleganser.ch

Earthquake proofing buildings, interesting. i wonder if he might have a clue as to how a building might fall if say some supports were damaged by an earthquake/airplane?

Would you like more?

David Leifer, BSc, B.Arch, M.Ed, PhD, IEng, ACIBSE – Coordinator, Graduate Programme in Facilities Management, University of Sydney. Formerly taught at University of Auckland (1993 - 2001), University of Queensland (1986 - 1993), Mackintosh School of Architecture (1984 - 1986). Registered Architect. Incorporated Engineer.

Statement 7/1/07: "The frequently repeated TV images of the aircraft slamming into the World Trade Centre overwhelmed any thoughtful response. Naturally, the collapse of the buildings was attributable to this traumatic event.

It was only later when pictures emerged showing the inappropriate damage to the Pentagon – reported to have been caused by a large aircraft crashing through several layers of external wall – that professional doubt was aroused in my mind. Thereafter, The fall of the World Trade Center video showed the side of one tower ‘unzipping’ along one side of a damaged floor. My knowledge of structure and dynamics told me that unless the other sides simultaneously ‘unzipped’ there was no way that the tower would have ‘pancaked’ onto it’s own footprint: it should surely have toppled outwards. That both towers did the same was just too improbable to be plausible.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by Tafari Makonnen

You cannot "debunk" the ideas of a crazy person who believes in something without any supporting evidence. They formed their opinions out of rubbish, and will simply "debunk the debunking" by adding more what-ifs and citing minor errors. You will never win because you are trying to "disprove" something that doesn't exist, and that something is an ever changing scenario that will simply adapt to fit around and counter points brought up. He doesn't want to understand the situation and develop a reasonable opinion. He want to live in a fantasy where he knows the real truth and is smarter than anyone else so he can feel better about mopping up vomit in the cafeteria all day.

evidence, yes please, you got any.

this is your chance to be the hero my man.

I will leave this forum forever when you provide test results that say the fires in the towers were 600oC for 40 mins.

Test results

you know, evidence that backs your wild *** belief.

Get busy yo.

[yesme]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

You cannot include something in a calculation and then look at it w/o and pretend that is change. By that definition, we have been in a depression since forever...

Ah, so just keep adding in those phony numbers instead of realizing that the last 30 years of "growth" has really been 30 years of debt fueled mania that needs to get paid off now. Sounds good to me.

In 30 years of "growth" we have racked up...

14 trillion national debt
1 trillion in credit card debt
1 trillion in student loan debt
13 trillion mortgage debt

untold trillions in pension,local,state other debts.


Now, here is where you tell me the 30 years of growth got us the positive stuff. Let me have it.

[licence2kill]

oooo big numbers so scary

[AlphaNeo36]

take the 16 trillion us debt and convert the dollars to bricks. if you take those bricks and put them on a steel chair it will collapse just like the us will.

i am yesme

buy razors

[Tafari Makonnen]

Originally Posted by yesme

evidence, yes please, you got any.

this is your chance to be the hero my man.

I will leave this forum forever when you provide test results that say the fires in the towers were 600oC for 40 mins.

Test results

you know, evidence that backs your wild *** belief.

Get busy yo.

You are depressingly stupid.

Reading the arguments provided by the "experts" you listed above was equally depressing. It was the same old ****. Assertions of things being impossible followed by oversimplified and worthless "calculations" demonstrating absolutely nothing.

Why don't you give this a look. At the very least read the executive summary. After you get done with that there are lots of pretty pictures for you to look at.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire05/art138.html

THAT is what a well researched and documented experiment that supports your argument look like. Some twat making a powerpoint to convince people who don't know anything of something ridiculous is not to be taken seriously by anyone worth a ****.

[F1VENOM]

I've done this once before and posted specific passages from the results. He will just ignore it as usual.

[Eric the Fish]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Where's the video that someone posted debunking yesme's conspiracy? Damnit it was a good one, too.

Its called "Screw Loose Change" http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

[yesme]

Originally Posted by Tafari Makonnen

You are depressingly stupid.

coming from a retarded engineer that is not saying much

Reading the arguments provided by the "experts" you listed above was equally depressing. It was the same old ****. Assertions of things being impossible followed by oversimplified and worthless "calculations" demonstrating absolutely nothing.

Ah, so i was right, everyone but you is wrong. so if i was to set up a debate between you and one of these so called experts, you won't mind having your *** handed to you? First i am sure they will want to see your resume, as there are hundreds of dimwitted engineers who barely made it thru class

Why don't you give this a look. At the very least read the executive summary. After you get done with that there are lots of pretty pictures for you to look at.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire05/art138.html

LMFAO, yeah because i have never seen that report before dip****. Let me start off by explaining something to you. If i test a piece of metal and it comes back that it got up to 250oC, how the **** does that mean i set my model up for 800oC tests? Are you that fricken dense dude? I asked for one thing, ONE ****ING THING. test results done ON RECOVERED WTC METAL that shows temps of 600oC for 45 mins. Anything else you can just shut the **** up about. it's called put up or shut the **** up.


THAT is what a well researched and documented experiment that supports your argument look like. Some twat making a powerpoint to convince people who don't know anything of something ridiculous is not to be taken seriously by anyone worth a ****.

Read last thing i said, well researched if your a ****ing moron.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Eric the Fish

Its called "Screw Loose Change" http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

I don't think that's it. It was a ~10 minute video that I think Treghc posted.

Originally Posted by yesme

Read last thing i said, well researched if your a ****ing moron.

How much of the total steel was analyzed?

[yesme]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

I've done this once before and posted specific passages from the results. He will just ignore it as usual.

Interesting, i've read the nist report 3 times, and i looked thur all your posts to me, go ahead and requote why don't you.

[licence2kill]

"i've read the nist report 3 times"

dude you're a ****ing loser