9/11 media happenings

[TeeJay]

Might you care to explain to this layman what pwned means?

'pwned' is a deliberate typo of "owned", is one of these internet type memes and means something along the lines of "you just got your arse served up to you on a plate"

alternatively: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pwn

 

[MikeMcc]

But the point above - which everyone ignores, of course, is that - how did they know it was going to come down? It's by far the most surprising collapse of the three, and such a collapse - just by fire, wasn't even hit by a plane - had never happened before, ever. Yet it seemed word was out that it was about to come down, and sure enough it did. How on earth could anyone have known?

And besides, although there's certainly some fire going on there, it pales compared to fires like One Meridian Plaza, etc.

The record of the Fire Department converstaions clearly shows that they suspected that it would collapse which is why they pulled their men out.

 

[MikeMcc]

But the point above - which everyone ignores, of course, is that - how did they know it was going to come down? It's by far the most surprising collapse of the three, and such a collapse - just by fire, wasn't even hit by a plane - had never happened before, ever. Yet it seemed word was out that it was about to come down, and sure enough it did. How on earth could anyone have known?

And besides, although there's certainly some fire going on there, it pales compared to fires like One Meridian Plaza, etc.

They'd just observed two steel framed buildings collapsing, had a fire enveloping the entire structure, refer to structural damage involving a [bthird[/b] of the south face of teh building, and had minimal water to fight the fire anyway. Why on earth shouldn't they expect the building to collapse!

One Meridian Plaza fire was smaller, was not preceded by major structural damage and the fire department had water to fight the fire with.

ETA point about 1 Meridian Plaza

 

[MikeMcc]

Hi MikeMcc,

This has been bothering me a bit. Could you clarify whether this quote included the phrase 'this will be the point at which the component fails' or was that your addition?

Is that the only point you could think of? Yes it was my addition, but clearly follows on from the yield point being exceeded.

There are three possible scenarios:

1. Yield point grossly exceeded and load not removed before failure - the member will continue to deform until it fails.

2. Yield point marginally exceeded initially, member deforms in such a way that the yield point is no longer exceeded (i.e. the cross sectional area increases). The member survives but is permanently deformed. Any increase in load will result in further deformation.

3. The excess load is removed in the time period between yield and failure, again the member survives but is permanently deformed.

In the case of the WTC the load was continuous applied and was grossly greater than the member could survive, remember the factor of 64 times? Therefore the first scenario is the one that occurs, hence my comment.

edited for spelling and to slightly modify point 1

 

[TheArchitect]

I think some of us should get together and get all the best debunking arguments together and link out to other debunkers...

I'll help.

 

[detective-boy]

Could this be Jazzz being:

a) thicker than pigshit?
b) Slightly thicker than option A?
c) a dishonest little shite?

Can I have a (c) please, Bob ...

 

[editor]

You're saying that because they haven't actually come out and said so; however it's not necessarily for them to do that.

Your attempts to project your own sick conspiracy fantasies on to these people is obscene.

 

[8den]

You're saying that because they haven't actually come out and said so; however it's not necessarily for them to do that. They are asking questions as to how their husbands died. It's pretty clear they are deeply unhappy with the investigation. They want answers to questions like 'why did Bush spend 15 minutes listening to a bunch of kids?'. 'Why did NORAD fail to intercept any of the hijacked aircraft'. Etc. Exactly the same questions that the conspiraloons have been asking.

So if I have this clear, you've no evidence whatsoever that the Jersey Girls think 911 was an inside job, you just really think they do.

Bless.

 

[editor]

We're at crossed wires here, one or both of us is misunderstanding.

Yes i said that. And no, i can't give you any support for the claim coz i've lost everything on my computer.

So are you going to finally substantiate what you claimed and provide a source for your story, or are you going to continue to post up more source-untroubled conspiracy-tastic statements as fact?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

You're saying that because they haven't actually come out and said so; however it's not necessarily for them to do that

So, yet again, you don't actually need evidence of something, you just believe it to be true.

You are a member of a cult. Simple as that.

 

[kyser_soze]

Can anyone who's interested in my suggestion PM me and we'll see if we can self-organise and actually get something done, true anarcho stylee...

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Can anyone who's interested in my suggestion PM me and we'll see if we can self-organise and actually get something done, true anarcho stylee...

It's been done before, but Jazzz won't read it and we sure as hell can't make him do so.

 

[pk]

Can anyone who's interested in my suggestion PM me and we'll see if we can self-organise and actually get something done, true anarcho stylee...

This is why I want to make a film.

Get it out there on Youtube and the like, I'm pretty sure I can secure funding, and the conspiraloons have no right to privacy seeing how they invade the privacy of the victims relatives.

Jazzz - show me one widow who believes in your fucking hologram horseshit.

Go on. Just one.

 

[Jazzz]

Is that the only point you could think of? Yes it was my addition, but clearly follows on from the yield point being exceeded.

There are three possible scenarios:

1. Yield point grossly exceeded and load not removed before failure - the member will continue to deform until it fails.

2. Yield point marginally exceeded initially, member deforms in such a way that the yield point is no longer exceeded (i.e. the cross sectional area increases). The member survives but is permanently deformed. Any increase in load will result in further deformation.

3. The excess load is removed in the time period between yield and failure, again the member survives but is permanently deformed.

In the case of the WTC the load was continuous applied and was grossly greater than the member could survive, remember the factor of 64 times? Therefore the first scenario is the one that occurs, hence my comment.

edited for spelling and to slightly modify point 1

Jesus Christ, that was really off of you MikeMcc, I took what you said as if your reference work had said it. You can't present your own opinions as those of reference works no matter how right you think you may be.

Confusion over - I was absolutely right. And my calculations showing a safety factor of over 300% were quite sound.

Your three points are wrong. Even when the yield point is exceeded the member can continue to take increasing loads. It will deform, and is more at risk of buckling, but if it does not buckle then it will continue to take increasing loads until final failure which is the 'compressive yield strength' - absolutely not the same as the compressive yield point (which is what your quote seemed to say).

As an example the standard for H-200 steel H-sections requires a compressive strength equal to the tensile strength.

This is why the NYC building code specifies a 150% redundancy without deformations but a 250% redudancy until final failure.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Confusion over - I was absolutely right.

Do you ever conclude otherwise? Didn't think so.

 

[Jazzz]

This is why I want to make a film.

Get it out there on Youtube and the like, I'm pretty sure I can secure funding, and the conspiraloons have no right to privacy seeing how they invade the privacy of the victims relatives.

Jazzz - show me one widow who believes in your fucking hologram horseshit.

Go on. Just one.

1) I don't believe in the hologram theory as you know perfectly well. Stop lying.

2) The families have rejected the 9/11 Commission as a farcical investigation and are calling for a proper one. They are not satisfied with the official narrative.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

1) I don't believe in the hologram theory as you know perfectly well. Stop lying.

2) The families have rejected the 9/11 Commission as a farcical investigation and are calling for a proper one. They are not satisfied with the official narrative.

All the families? Dear god, don't let Jazzz start thinking before posting, it'd make proving him to be a lying toerag slightly tricky as opposed to the current trivial.

 

[editor]

2) The families have rejected the 9/11 Commission as a farcical investigation and are calling for a proper one. They are not satisfied with the official narrative.

And are they satisfied with the loons' fact-free invisible bombs, faked calls and passengers 'murdered-by-the-govt' narrative? No?

Then get stop trying to associate your callous, lunatic theories with them and their plight. It's sickening.

 

[Pete the Greek]

1) I don't believe in the hologram theory as you know perfectly well. Stop lying.

2) The families have rejected the 9/11 Commission as a farcical investigation and are calling for a proper one. They are not satisfied with the official narrative.

When you say families, what do you mean?

Do you mean, all members of all the families of the 3 thou odd who died? That's alot of people. Are you saying they are "all" dissatisfied?

 

[editor]

When you say families, what do you mean?

Do you mean, all members of all the families of the 3 thou odd who died? That's alot of people. Are you saying they are "all" dissatisfied?

Indeed. Perhaps Jazzz could put a figure or a percentage to the amount of families he's claiming are all "dissatisfied."

 

[Jazzz]

Well here's their documentary.



e2a: I'm referring to the families as a political movement, very much represented by the Jersey Girls. That's how they got the 9/11 Commission. During the run up to the Iraq War, Bush tried to get them all to go to the White House to support the lies against Saddam Hussein. They refused.

 

[Pete the Greek]

Jazz....you are pissing me off.

I can't be arsed to watch a Youtube screening, when all I want to do is read a couple of quick paragraphs in response to my question.

Good God, man. Stop it with the links already.

 

[Jazzz]

Jazz....you are pissing me off.

I can't be arsed to watch a Youtube screening, when all I want to do is read a couple of quick paragraphs in response to my question.

I think you've revealed your mentality and those of many of these boards. You don't have a genuine interest in anything except 'conspiracy bashing'.

Everyone - certainly everyone who would like to think that they give a shit about the 9/11 families - should find the time to watch this documentary.

 

[Pete the Greek]

I think you've revealed your mentality and those of many of these boards. You don't have a genuine interest in anything except 'conspiracy bashing'.

Everyone - certainly everyone who would like to think that they give a shit about the 9/11 families - should find the time to watch this documentary.

How did my post provide you with evidence that all I wanna do is conspiraloon bash?

I just don't want to watch Youtube clips. I want to read words. Is that ok?

 

[MikeMcc]

Jesus Christ, that was really off of you MikeMcc, I took what you said as if your reference work had said it. You can't present your own opinions as those of reference works no matter how right you think you may be.

Confusion over - I was absolutely right. And my calculations showing a safety factor of over 300% were quite sound.

Your three points are wrong. Even when the yield point is exceeded the member can continue to take increasing loads. It will deform, and is more at risk of buckling, but if it does not buckle then it will continue to take increasing loads until final failure which is the 'compressive yield strength' - absolutely not the same as the compressive yield point (which is what your quote seemed to say).

As an example the standard for H-200 steel H-sections requires a compressive strength equal to the tensile strength.

This is why the NYC building code specifies a 150% redundancy without deformations but a 250% redudancy until final failure.

No my points are not wrong, it will fail if the load is continuously applied.

 

[editor]

Well here's their documentary.



e2a: I'm referring to the families as a political movement, very much represented by the Jersey Girls. That's how they got the 9/11 Commission. During the run up to the Iraq War, Bush tried to get them all to go to the White House to support the lies against Saddam Hussein. They refused.

I'll ask again, ever hopeful of a non-wriggling, straightforward, honest answer:

Jazzz could you put a figure or a percentage to the amount of families that you are claiming are "dissatisfied," please?

 

[editor]

I think you've revealed your mentality and those of many of these boards. You don't have a genuine interest in anything except 'conspiracy bashing'.

Everyone - certainly everyone who would like to think that they give a shit about the 9/11 families - should find the time to watch this documentary.

Perhaps you could find the time to explain why people should watch these random clips and answer people's questions first.

I'll be fucked if I'm going to waste nearly an hour and a half downloading some YouTube clip made by fuck-knows-who regurgitating the same stolen news footage to make some Big Important Point or another.

How many families have "rejected the 9/11 Commission as a farcical investigation and are calling for a proper one" please Jazzz?

 

[Jazzz]

Jazzz could you put a figure or a percentage to the amount of families that you are claiming are "dissatisfied," please?

No.

 

[Jazzz]

Perhaps you could find the time to explain why people should watch these random clips and answer people's questions first.

I'll be fucked if I've got to waste nearly an hour and a half downloading some YouTube clip made by fuck-knows-who regurgitating the same stolen news footage to make some Big Important Point or another.

If you've spent anything like the time I have on this thread an hour-long documentary produced by those representing the families as a political movement is nothing and if you had a genuine interest in 9/11 you'd watch it.

 

[axon]

Well how about in a few bullet points telling us why you think there was controlled demolition of the WTC towers. And why you think that planes and fires couldn't lead to the collapse.