Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   9/11 Loose change 2nd edition
Codegate
Member (Idle past 848 days)
Posts: 84
From: The Great White North
Joined: 03-15-2006


Message 14 of 60 (318344)
06-06-2006 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by riVeRraT
06-04-2006 10:29 PM


To start with, just a general point.
I thought this 'documentary' was very well put together, but people need to learn to stop treating things like this as fact. Use it as a springboard to increase your own understanding of things. Asking questions is never a bad thing, but treating a single source of input such as this video as factual is.
"riVeRraT" writes:
1. I totally can understand how the buildings fell, they were designed to fall straight down. Probably the force of the falling tower snapped all the welds, between floors.
note: I am not sure if they were welded or not. It is possible that they were put together with shear bolts, which would have snapped easily.
I watched documentary on the construction of the building a couple of years ago, but my recollection could be a little foggy.
My understanding is that there were only two 'rigid' parts of the towers - the central core and the exterior walls. The actual floors of each story were suspended from these two structures using massive L brackets that were bolted in place.
The argument went that the heat of the fire caused two things to occur. Firstly, it caused the actual floors to expand due to the heat. This caused them to bow as the were sandwiched between to the two rigid structures.
Secondly, the heat although not hot enough to melt the steel was sufficient enough to slightly soften the L brackets. This softening combined with the bowing caused the entire floor to drop pretty close to instantly once the failure point was reached.
As soon as the falling floor hit the floor beneath it the impact stress caused the immediate failure of the L brackets of that floor. This process continuted at near to freefall speed until they completely fell.
"riVeRraT" writes:
2. The fire in the towers was more than just jet fuel, so the 1488F temp is wrong. I spent 11 years fire proofing hospitals in NYC and I have a good education on what it takes to bring a building down in a fire. As I watched the buildings burn, I was telling my wife on the phone that they would be down in less than 2 hours, and that I did not understand why the NYFD (the ones who teach us this stuff) were sending people into the buildings.
This is an area that I have very little knowledge of. I would love to hear from you how the temperature could have exceeded the temperature of burning jet fuel. I've read other accounts that go into how there was actually very little fuel that made it into the buildings and how the black smoke is indicative of an oxygen starved fire which implies a lower burning temperature. Could you please provide some expertise on this point?
"riVeRraT" writes:
4. Any cameras that would have caught the plane flying into the pentagon, would not show a clear picture, if they could catch the plane at all. Traveling 530mph, and 1 or 2 frames per second from a security cam, do not make for clear video. As a matter of fact a plane traveling at 530mph is doing 777feet per second(7 times the length of the plane), and could easily be missed completely by the camera.
I have a really hard time believing this. I don't understand how with all of the security cameras, highway cameras, gas station cameras, etc, etc, that are in the DC area that SOMETHING wouldn't have picked up a very large plane inbound. The two clips they have released are really quite pathetic and don't show anything. I know I'm arguing from indredulity which is NOT a good thing but I just can't fathom how something wouldn't have caught the plane in flight.
To sum up, I think the biggest failing of the US goverment on this tragedy is their lack of up front communication with the populous. There were so many mis-cues and faulty reports issued that it is very easy for someone to assume they are trying to hide something where in all likelyhood it was probably their own incompetance caused by the stress and bedlam of the day.
I hope that someday the 'truth' of the matter can be determined and the full suite of information that was gathered by the authorities is released to the public so we can truly decide for ourselves what happened.
Edited by Codegate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by riVeRraT, posted 06-04-2006 10:29 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 2:26 PM Codegate has replied
 Message 33 by riVeRraT, posted 06-06-2006 11:31 PM Codegate has not replied

  
Codegate
Member (Idle past 848 days)
Posts: 84
From: The Great White North
Joined: 03-15-2006


Message 16 of 60 (318377)
06-06-2006 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by arachnophilia
06-06-2006 2:26 PM


"arachnophilia" writes:
but one of the cameras DID catch a plane, in the air, seconds before impact. it's just blurry, from it being in motion.
also, you really don't begin to understand just how bad the average security camera is until you've had to use one.
I've watched both of the parking lot cameras footage and I can't see anything that looks anything like a plane. This is another one of those cases where I just wish they would release all of the info that they had. They confiscated several cameras footage of the event from the area around the pentagon (a hotel, a gas station and the highway cameras come to mind) and they still have yet to acknowledge that they even took them.
I never have used a security camera, so I really don't know how likely it is that anything was captured or the quality that it would be. I just want to feel that information isn't being hidden from me in the case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 2:26 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by CK, posted 06-06-2006 3:54 PM Codegate has replied
 Message 20 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 6:06 PM Codegate has not replied

  
Codegate
Member (Idle past 848 days)
Posts: 84
From: The Great White North
Joined: 03-15-2006


Message 18 of 60 (318395)
06-06-2006 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by CK
06-06-2006 3:54 PM


"ck" writes:
What I don't understand about that explanation is how would you account for(in the planning stage) all the people who would see the pentagon just blow up rather than a plane hit it?
Well, the conspiracy buffs out there would say that people will believe what they are told to believe. There will be a small number of people that clearly saw what truly occurred. These ones are the true problem and are either silenced via pressure or completely discredited somehow.
There will be a much larger group of people that just only marginally saw the event that can easily be 'programmed' by dis-information released by the authorities.
In the case of wrong place/wrong time camera you confiscate it immidiately and put out the appropriate spin and pressure to neutralize and discredit it.
Now, all that said, I really don't believe there is a massive conspiracy involved here. I think that events occurred, for the most part, how they are reported.
What is bothering me, is that the government/authorities are failing miserably at keeping the public informed. I can only hope that there is some top secret national security reason why they are not being more forthcoming with information. I'm really getting the impression that we are just being fed information and we are expected to believe it with no proof.
The fact that a group had to force the government to release that second camera footage using the law is indicative of somebody trying to hide something.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by CK, posted 06-06-2006 3:54 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by CK, posted 06-06-2006 5:04 PM Codegate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024