|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 31, 2015 16:13:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 1, 2016 1:39:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jan 1, 2016 3:38:37 GMT
Once again, in North America, 1 warm winter- climate, human caused. 2 previous very cold and icy winters (have you already forgotten)- weather.
And, remember: the cold winters were credited with significantly hurting the economy by the Obama administration. This warm winter has been a big boost in an otherwise weak economy.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 1, 2016 7:35:12 GMT
They feed on themselves and each other ... and speaking of that ... his web page had a link to video showing that luxury Dubai highrise on fire. Pretty impressive.
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Jan 1, 2016 10:54:51 GMT
and that one din't fall down ... ?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 1, 2016 14:34:01 GMT
and that one din't fall down ... ? Perhaps it was built better. No skimping on fireproofing of load bearing structures and sufficient engineering forethought to put sufficient internal strength to avoid the 'Ronan Point' pancaking collapse which the Twin Towers showed. Put simply the structure needs to have sufficient extra strength to remain standing even with failures of floor supports above. This costs money and quick and cheap does not support the resilience engineering as such failures will 'never happen' - except when they do of course.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 1, 2016 18:48:33 GMT
Thanks Code. Wasn't aware of that.
Knowing what I know about physics tho, I still wrestle with how dog gone perfect both towers fell, and then WTC7 as well.
AS far as the twins, identical falls, but from two difference impact points etc. Would make sense if the stimuli were identical, but they weren't.
Makes no difference tho, as both towers are rubbish.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jan 2, 2016 1:31:58 GMT
That architect built one in Tulsa too, that really is pretty similar to the New York ones. Is 52 stories. They didn't seem like any super attractive design, just 1970's concrete and glass. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BOK_Tower
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 2, 2016 15:19:14 GMT
All have the same weak design. If you have an event that causes a floor support to weaken the pancaking down of that floor on the one below results in a series of successively more rapid failures and the tower concertinas down. If any of those other towers is due for demolition it would be very useful as a validation test to just demolish one floor say floor 40 of a 50 floor block then show that the tower collapses completely just from the failure of that one floor.
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Jan 2, 2016 21:13:14 GMT
All have the same weak design. If you have an event that causes a floor support to weaken the pancaking down of that floor on the one below results in a series of successively more rapid failures and the tower concertinas down. If any of those other towers is due for demolition it would be very useful as a validation test to just demolish one floor say floor 40 of a 50 floor block then show that the tower collapses completely just from the failure of that one floor. and you just keep beleaving that then .. from all the eng and Architectural reports i've read they were all sound and should never have come down .. but hey ho it's the past and din't happen over here .. i'll move on ..
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 4, 2016 10:33:11 GMT
All have the same weak design. If you have an event that causes a floor support to weaken the pancaking down of that floor on the one below results in a series of successively more rapid failures and the tower concertinas down. If any of those other towers is due for demolition it would be very useful as a validation test to just demolish one floor say floor 40 of a 50 floor block then show that the tower collapses completely just from the failure of that one floor. and you just keep beleaving that then .. from all the eng and Architectural reports i've read they were all sound and should never have come down .. but hey ho it's the past and din't happen over here .. i'll move on .. You should really read this then Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed A Fire Chief ’s AssessmentYou will note the similarity to the Ronan Point pancaking collaapse.
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Jan 4, 2016 12:15:47 GMT
the Ronan Point pancaking collapse. yeah slight problem with that if this was to happen the fall speed would be less than the speed of gravity ..as impact on impact would slow it down .. wtc was equal to gravity meaning there was no resistance floor upon floor .. but look there will never be an answer to the many questions here .. but in the wake of it how much of your liberty's have you lost ? and if you look at the whole episode there are many wtf's
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jan 4, 2016 17:00:31 GMT
I have changed my mind about the aesthetics of those towers, I have to admit that there is something to their stark but balanced design. There is more to them than meets the eye at first. Ironically, they give the impression of strength and solidness.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jan 4, 2016 19:00:55 GMT
I don't believe there is much more to the event than what we were told. The government told us what happened, and Osama Bin Laden confirmed that same explanation exactly. Two planes were flown into the two towers and they were badly damaged, and a few minutes later, collapsed. What would anyone have possibly have gained from creating some dark conspiracy, which would certainly be uncovered anyway. Bush was set to retire as an ex-president with a terrific lifestyle, why would he care to "enrich his oil cronies"? If you even choose to believe that Bush was that incredibly evil, which I do not, what motivation would he have had to get involved in that?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 4, 2016 20:21:00 GMT
I don't think President Bush had a clue. It gets back to replications. 2 different stimuli, yet exactly the same physical response. Ever figured the odds of that with mechanical engineering as a guide?
|
|