CurvedSpace Forums: Loose Change - CurvedSpace Forums

Jump to content

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Loose Change

#16 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Ferret Overlord {lang:icon}

  • Citizen Snips
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 4,558
  • Joined: 21-February 03

Posted 31 March 2006 - 08:28 PM

They weren't designed to withstand a plane. They were designed to survive any natural disasters.

I repeat myself:
QUOTE
Do you see how far in that plane went? More than halfway. There is no way that a building could survive after being cut in half at the base.


I'll even draw you a picture:


CODE
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
NO WAY OF STANDING -----------------
NO WAY OF STANDING -----------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

HI! I'M BACK SPORADICALLY! Nobody probably remembers me :(
0

#17 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Aaron {lang:icon}

  • Hai
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_gallery}
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 6,067
  • Joined: 26-December 04
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 12:06 AM

I watched the entire movie, and I have to say that there was something odd about the whole thing. I just cannot accept that our own government is responsible for the attacks. I think that for the Twin Towers, the bombs that seemed to be planted in the building must've been part of the plan of the terrorists, if those bombs really are there. I cannot say. The group that produced this film do bring forth a very convincing and valid argument, but I just cannot believe that a few billion dollars and gold would be the driving force behind causing a catastrophic attack upon our nation. I do not know what happened, but I can say it seems deeper than I once thought.

This post has been edited by Nighthawk551: 01 April 2006 - 12:12 AM

0

#18 {lang:macro__useroffline}   asyluman {lang:icon}

  • Yeah.
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 1,781
  • Joined: 10-May 04
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 12:22 AM

QUOTE(wikipedia)
criticisms of the WTC design feature six main points:

  1. Longspan floors supported by external columns are inherently weaker than the traditional box frame column/girder arrangement with internal walls.
  2. The bunching of all internal columns in a relatively narrow center shaft in a building is an "all your eggs in one basket" configuration-- if that region on any floor below the top floor is catastrophically damaged, the entire building is doomed. This stands in stark contrast to earlier generations of skyscrapers which utilize full skeletons of stepped columns, usually one row approximately every 25 feet (7.6 m) from the center to the perimeter.
  3. The World Trade Center exclusively used lightweight materials, especially in the facade. Had the WTC facade contained even minimal masonry elements and/or traditional heavy steel outermost column rows, it is less likely the aircraft would have cleanly penetrated to the core of each tower— a significant portion of debris and jet fuel would have remained outside, a much different scenario.
  4. Single-bolt connections binding the longspan floorplates with the load-bearing external columns were extremely lightweight for their assigned task. One study group from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has concluded the proximal cause of the south tower collapse was failure of these bolts in the southeast corner of the building. Double-bolts should have been used.
  5. The use of gypsum cladding instead of reinforced concrete to shield stairwells. Almost all skyscrapers, including those built since the WTC, shield stairwells in reinforced concrete. On September 11th, it was the collapse of all stairways above the impact level that consigned all people above the impact zone in Tower One to death. Tower Two had two of its three stairwells taken out above the impact area by the plane. Some people above the impact zone survived, as they used the third stairwell. Computer models have shown that most of the stairwells in both towers would likely have remained usable until the general collapse had they been shielded in concrete.
  6. According to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States, each tower's core consisted only of a hollow steel shaft.


mmkay?
Shake: I'm on TV a lot. This is my sitcom, with the--
Shake (On TV): I'm in your house.
Shake:...
Meatwad:...
Shake: With the sci-fi horror twist.
0

#19 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Ratty {lang:icon}

  • Bigrat2
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Super Moderator
  • Posts: 10,910
  • Joined: 01-October 03
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 01:50 AM

QUOTE(ticktockclok @ Apr 1 2006, 04:21 AM)
QUOTE(Ferret Overlord @ Mar 31 2006, 02:17 AM)
QUOTE(ticktockclok @ Mar 30 2006, 06:19 PM)
QUOTE(Ferret Overlord @ Mar 30 2006, 10:02 PM)
QUOTE(ticktockclok @ Mar 30 2006, 03:05 PM)
If anyone can watch this video, and still have the same opinion of the crappy US government, I'd like them to tell me why. Its long, over an hour, but it'll show you that 9/11 was NOT the work of Osama bin Laden.

Just one example, among hundreds. No building has ever fallen because a plane crashed into it, and it has happened dozens of times before. Jet fuel is 1000 degrees Farenheit too cool to melt steel, so it is IMPOSSIBLE that the World Trade Centers were brought down without the help of explosives. And after the Boeing 757s crashed into the World Trade Centers, witnesses clearly heard the crackle of explosives in the buildings, and after examining films of the World Trade Centers, you could clearly see explosives blowing up in the buildings.

Why and how would the Dicked up Bush Administration pull this off? Check out the video  if you want to find out.
{lang:macro__view_post}



Sigh... Jet fuel can't MELT steel, but it sure as hell can warp it. If a girder were to buckle, a story would collapse, putting excess weight on the story below it, collapsing THAT, and so on.

And wanna know why that explosion happened? Do you know what happens to superheated fuel after being released from a condensed space? Take a mentos tube, cut a tiny slit in it, and drop it into a bottle of soda. Then, really quickly, put the cap on. I suggest running after that. THAT'S a small scale replica, ok? Don't listen to these conspiracy idiots, they have no idea what they're talking about.

Plus, it didn't leave 14 jets to protect the whole country. Counties surrounding DC contain air bases. Even if there weren't, 14 jets is nothing to sneeze at. They could tear any plane into pieces, no matter what the size.
{lang:macro__view_post}



Seeing your argument, I'm guessing you watched about the first 10 minutes. You know how on September 11 itself, they constantly showed the World Trade Centers following again and again on news channels such as CNN, etc? Well, you can clearly see it, I think it was about 20 minutes from the end, where you can see tiny grey things going off in the World Trade Centers.
{lang:macro__view_post}



....
Tiny gray things? That doesn't make any sense. Explosions are red, due to spontaneous combustion from the explosive charge. If you're talking about debris, the whole building was grey.

Oh, I see. I don't think he realizes what happens to anything inbetween two collapsing floors when they collapse. Anything would be forced into the stair shafts then thrown out by the enormous pressure of the concrete, blasting the windows. That's dust, it's not explosion. Here's a picture of an exploding c4 packet.

user posted image

I'm sure there would be a lot more than the one packet shown in the pic to blow the building out.

One final thing before I go to bed. Watch the impact video closely. Do you see how far in that plane went? More than halfway. There is no way that a building could survive after being cut in half at the base. The supports were designed to stand in case one or two beams went out. Not 20. It's amazing it held out as long as it did.
{lang:macro__view_post}



I'm too tired to argue, but its never happened before, referring to a plane taking down a building, so why should it happen twice in one day? Especially in buildings built so well, that they are equipped to withstand any catastrophe, including a plane crashing into it?
{lang:macro__view_post}


Yeah, But how big of a plane did they account for? Paper planes? Light aircraft? Not a Boeing 767.

(im not sure what particular type of 767 were used in the attack)

767's range from 50 metres to 70 metres - 160feet to 200feet - long
Safe to say that the plane could've weighed anywhere from 120tonnes to 160tonnes(max takeoff weight)

All i can say is.... Those are some helluva big planes....

QUOTE
The government's calculations put the speed of the first plane at 494 mph, and the second at 586 mph. The MIT analysis determined the first plane was traveling 429 mph, and the second 537 mph, The Times said.

Even for the slower speeds calculated, Thats 690.4km/h and 864.2km/h.

So, Not only are they friggin' huge. They're travelling goddamn fast.

I cant say i've read the thread, Nor watched the documentary. But there is more than enough reason for those towers to go down when they were hit by the planes.

There werent bombs on the plane, and there werent bombs in the tower.

EDIT:

QUOTE(Tick)
but its never happened before, referring to a plane taking down a building, so why should it happen twice in one day?

One simple answer:

Some sick **** woke up one day, and thought. "Yeah. Im going to get with my friends, plan some stuff, then knock down those two big towers. {Whole lot of anti-america stuff}."

Tick. It was planned. Thats why it happened twice in one day.
Empty sig is empty.
0

#20 {lang:macro__useroffline}   asyluman {lang:icon}

  • Yeah.
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 1,781
  • Joined: 10-May 04
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 02:55 PM

Pwnt.
Shake: I'm on TV a lot. This is my sitcom, with the--
Shake (On TV): I'm in your house.
Shake:...
Meatwad:...
Shake: With the sci-fi horror twist.
0

#21 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Ferret Overlord {lang:icon}

  • Citizen Snips
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 4,558
  • Joined: 21-February 03

Posted 01 April 2006 - 03:45 PM

And this stuff HASN'T happened before. It's not like they slammed a jet liner into the Twin Towers earlier on to test the capabilities. I was listening to this one idiot on the radio. He came on right after Savage, and he was talking about a conspiracy. The lady he was talking to said, "Why wasn't there any remains found? Hmm? It's because the government blew up the building."

NEWS FLASH! Jet fuel exploding incinerates anything it touches!
HI! I'M BACK SPORADICALLY! Nobody probably remembers me :(
0

#22 {lang:macro__useroffline}   asyluman {lang:icon}

  • Yeah.
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 1,781
  • Joined: 10-May 04
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 04:22 PM

QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 09:55 AM)
Pwnt.
{lang:macro__view_post}




Shake: I'm on TV a lot. This is my sitcom, with the--
Shake (On TV): I'm in your house.
Shake:...
Meatwad:...
Shake: With the sci-fi horror twist.
0

#23 {lang:macro__useroffline}   ticktockclok {lang:icon}

  • Retro Week!
  • Icon
  • Group: New Member
  • Posts: 2,717
  • Joined: 03-February 04
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 04:22 PM

sicka.gif I'll just shut up now.......
And now we have the quote of the day, from greenl2l: PLONGED!!!
IPB Image
0

#24 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Baseballl {lang:icon}

  • Senior Member
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 5,469
  • Joined: 20-December 02
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 01 April 2006 - 04:38 PM

If you'd like we could conduct a test. Ticktock, turn on your oven and heat it up to 200 degrees and let it sit for about 20 minutes. Now, place your hand on the oven rack for 30 seconds. Take that pain and damage and multiply it by 10. Now pretend all that happened in about 2 seconds. Ouch.
Alex
0

#25 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Spikeout {lang:icon}

  • Tired
  • Icon
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 9,068
  • Joined: 02-April 03
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 05 April 2006 - 12:23 AM

QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 11:22 AM)
QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 09:55 AM)
Pwnt.
{lang:macro__view_post}


{lang:macro__view_post}






0

#26 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Ferret Overlord {lang:icon}

  • Citizen Snips
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 4,558
  • Joined: 21-February 03

Posted 05 April 2006 - 12:25 AM

Wonder how many times Tick's gonna get pwnt.


QUOTE(Spikeout @ Apr 4 2006, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 11:22 AM)
QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 09:55 AM)
Pwnt.
{lang:macro__view_post}


{lang:macro__view_post}


{lang:macro__view_post}




Four so far.



user posted image
HI! I'M BACK SPORADICALLY! Nobody probably remembers me :(
0

#27 {lang:macro__useroffline}   Ratty {lang:icon}

  • Bigrat2
  • Icon
  • {lang:view_blog}
  • Group: Super Moderator
  • Posts: 10,910
  • Joined: 01-October 03
  • Location:Rochester, AKA The Frozen North

Posted 05 April 2006 - 11:17 AM

QUOTE(Creamsicle @ Apr 5 2006, 11:25 AM)
Wonder how many times Tick's gonna get pwnt.


QUOTE(Spikeout @ Apr 4 2006, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 11:22 AM)
QUOTE(asyluman @ Apr 1 2006, 09:55 AM)
Pwnt.
{lang:macro__view_post}


{lang:macro__view_post}


{lang:macro__view_post}




Four so far.



user posted image
{lang:macro__view_post}


Pwnt.

5 plx?

Oh, and nice piccy.
Empty sig is empty.
0

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users