911 and the Demo Truth
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Intermediate Accounting 12th and 13th edition Kieso Weygandt
Next: JSH: Back to conic section parameterization result
From: AZ Nomad on 21 Sep 2009 14:57 On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:36:00 -0400, AllYou! <idaman(a)conversent.net> wrote: >In >news:8b5a1301-cad7-4b17-a3ee-52095febed12(a)m3g2000pri.googlegroups.com, >knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> Buildings don't collapse from "office fires." >Then why is the structural steel in office buildings supposed to be >fire insulated? It is to protect them from CIA operatives sneeking in at 1am with demolition charges. It's been a real problem.
From: AllYou! on 21 Sep 2009 15:28 In news:a94ab180-1b7d-457d-bfa7-f62b42343073(a)k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com, knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> mused: > On Sep 21, 8:39 am, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: >> In article >> <psKdnZYItuyXACrXnZ2dnUVZ_oWdn...(a)posted.choiceonecommunications>, >> AllYou! <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >>> In >>> news:c913816d-d4a2-4917-aeb2-2db21dca9e15(a)z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com, >>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >>>> Doesn't matter. >>>> "Multiple jet hits." >> >>> Right. "HITS" The WTC towers didn't fall due to the HITS. They >>> fell due to the fires from which structural steel is supposed >>> to be insulated. >> >> In "Report From Ground Zero" (pgs 310-311), FDNY structures >> expert >> Vincent Dunn describes how the WTC towers had effectively no >> fireproofing when compared to the older steel buildings, built >> to >> standards that required 2 inches of brick and masonry on all >> structural steel. Dunn also says that the WTC towers were >> unique in >> the minimal fireproofing. >> >> Source:http://snurl.com/j54ud [Page 310, Report From Ground >> Zero] >> >> Who is Vincent Dunn? >> http://unjobs.org/authors/vincent-dunn > So why doesn't NIST release it's WTC "collapse" modeling and > data set? What has that to do with the above?
From: AllYou! on 21 Sep 2009 15:29 In news:ca141024-af33-42ac-8b10-763aa0791085(a)m3g2000pri.googlegroups.com, knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> mused: > On Sep 21, 8:39 am, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: >> In article >> <psKdnZYItuyXACrXnZ2dnUVZ_oWdn...(a)posted.choiceonecommunications>, >> >> >> >> AllYou! <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >>> In >>> news:c913816d-d4a2-4917-aeb2-2db21dca9e15(a)z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com, >>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >>>>> By the way, the 707 was a lighter airplane than the modern >>>>> 757 and 767, and the design took into account a low-fuel >>>>> instrument approach to LGA going off course at low approach >>>>> speed hitting the building, not fully-laden and fueled >>>>> heavier jetliners slamming in at 500+ mph. BIG difference. >> >>>> Doesn't matter. >>>> "Multiple jet hits." >> >>> Right. "HITS" The WTC towers didn't fall due to the HITS. They >>> fell due to the fires from which structural steel is supposed >>> to be insulated. >> >> In "Report From Ground Zero" (pgs 310-311), FDNY structures >> expert >> Vincent Dunn describes how the WTC towers had effectively no >> fireproofing when compared to the older steel buildings, built >> to >> standards that required 2 inches of brick and masonry on all >> structural steel. Dunn also says that the WTC towers were >> unique in >> the minimal fireproofing. >> >> Source:http://snurl.com/j54ud [Page 310, Report From Ground >> Zero] >> >> Who is Vincent Dunn? >> http://unjobs.org/authors/vincent-dunn >> > And for whom does he make the most money for "consulting?" Can you dispute the report?
From: AllYou! on 21 Sep 2009 15:31 In news:c48f2f67-d40c-41f8-80d3-498b7ff24a88(a)g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com, knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2chew(a)yahoo.com> mused: > On Sep 21, 11:16 am, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: >> In article >> <ca141024-af33-42ac-8b10-763aa0791...(a)m3g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> >> <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> On Sep 21, 8:39=A0am, ady...(a)panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote: >>>> In article >>>> <psKdnZYItuyXACrXnZ2dnUVZ_oWdn...(a)posted.choiceonecommunicatio= >>>> ns>, >> >>>> AllYou! <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: >>>>> In >>>>> news:c913816d-d4a2-4917-aeb2-2db21dca9e15(a)z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com, >>>>> knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: >> >>>>>>> By the way, the 707 was a lighter airplane than the modern >>>>>>> 757 and 767, and the design took into account a low-fuel >>>>>>> instrument approach to LGA going off course at low >>>>>>> approach speed hitting the building, not fully-laden and >>>>>>> fueled heavier jetliners slamming in at 500+ mph. BIG >>>>>>> difference. >> >>>>>> Doesn't matter. >>>>>> "Multiple jet hits." >> >>>>> Right. =A0"HITS" =A0The WTC towers didn't fall due to the >>>>> HITS. =A0They fell due to the fires from which structural >>>>> steel is supposed to be insulated. >> >>>> =A0 In "Report From Ground Zero" (pgs 310-311), FDNY >>>> structures expert =A0 Vincent Dunn describes how the WTC >>>> towers had effectively no =A0 fireproofing when compared to >>>> the older steel buildings, built to =A0 standards that >>>> required 2 inches of brick and masonry on all =A0 structural >>>> steel. =A0Dunn also says that the WTC towers were unique i= n >>>> =A0 the minimal fireproofing. >> >>>> =A0 =A0 Source:http://snurl.com/j54ud=A0[Page 310, Report >>>> From Ground Zer= o] >> >>>> =A0 Who is Vincent Dunn? >>>> =A0http://unjobs.org/authors/vincent-dunn >> >>> And for whom does he make the most money for "consulting?" >> >> Ad hominem much? >> >> -- >> Al Dykes >> News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is >> advertising. - Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail > > You don't think it's a fair question? It's a moot question. If the report were flawed, you could show that it is. But if the motives of those issuing reports are in play, then any reports which you cite are worthless.
From: Daniel on 21 Sep 2009 16:27
On Sep 21, 11:34 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > Innews:c913816d-d4a2-4917-aeb2-2db21dca9e15(a)z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com, > knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > >> By the way, the 707 was a lighter airplane than the modern 757 > >> and 767, and the design took into account a low-fuel instrument > >> approach to LGA going off course at low approach speed hitting > >> the building, not fully-laden and fueled heavier jetliners > >> slamming in at 500+ mph. BIG difference. > > > Doesn't matter. > > "Multiple jet hits." > > Right. "HITS" The WTC towers didn't fall due to the HITS. They > fell due to the fires from which structural steel is supposed to be > insulated. REALLY? So you want to stand on your claim that the planes crashing into the towers had NOTHING to do with their collapse? |