Charlie Sheen Requests Meeting With Obama Over 9/11 Cover-Up

[ghettopalmetto]

For you to pick and choose which structural engineers you choose to listen to...shows that you have bias. Admit it.


I have it too, but mine is strengthened by ALL of the available data, including Operation Northwoods and the NORAD stand-down. Both bigger than a bunch of Saudi losers on a supposed mission.


Sincerely,
John

I have a bias toward engineers who were actually at the site, conducting the investigation. Did your little movie show something that dozens of engineers missed at the site?

Operation Northwoods and a NORAD stand-down don't prove that the buildings were demolished by the U.S. Government.

I really am happy to explain the principles to you, should you desire to ever come around to the fact-based world.

[Gannon]

If you cannot conclusively prove that the World Trade Center and Pentagon were demolished through use of explosives, your entire story falls apart.

No, it doesn't.


You sound like a logical idiot with that one. Keep this up, it is getting good.


How, exactly, does one prove conclusively ANYTHING that happens under the guise of Top Secret clearance?! When the evidence is rushed away and melted down in a Chinese scrap facility?


You still haven't mentioned your take on Operation Northwoods...

[Gannon]

Again with the attacks...heh.

Did your little movie show something that dozens of engineers missed at the site?

What little movie are you talking about? Look down the list of your talking points...please tell me what you are talking about...I am unaware of one thing that made me doubt.


It was an entire lifetime collection of things...


Sincerely,
John

[ghettopalmetto]

No, it doesn't.


You sound like a logical idiot with that one. Keep this up, it is getting good.


How, exactly, does one prove conclusively ANYTHING that happens under the guise of Top Secret clearance?! When the evidence is rushed away and melted down in a Chinese scrap facility?


You still haven't mentioned your take on Operation Northwoods...

Operation Northwoods is irrelevant to determining the cause of collapse of the World Trade Center.

Before the evidence was "rushed away", it was taken to New Jersey, where it was stored and examined by dozens of engineers. The alleged "rush" in clearing the WTC site was so recovery workers could locate missing persons and bodies.

Elganned, you are a reasonable person. And I agree that inquiry is the basis through which one obtains knowledge. It hardly follows, though, that the presence of questions in a complex series of events automatically gives credibility to the implosion theory.

The official explanation is consistent with engineering science and principles. The implosion theory has yet to provide a single shred of physical evidence supporting the claim.

[Gannon]

I never said they were demolished by the government, THAT is too big a reach.

They were brought down by a small number of men hidden under TOP SECRET clearance.

Access to the buildings provided by complicit ownership and a security company with a Bush on the Board of Directors.


The whole was covered up by more than those few...but due the nature of Top Secret clearance if anything was questioned, especially by anyone allowed behind the big fence around the property, they would've capped it securely. Sealed the Leak, so to speak.


In Nixon's White House, they had Plumbers for that...some of the same fellows were in the Bush White House at the time.


Heh...wow. Amazing how volatile you are, how do you get the opportunity to play with explosives?!

Cheers

[ghettopalmetto]

I never said they were demolished by the government, THAT is too big a reach.

They were brought down by a small number of men hidden under TOP SECRET clearance.

Access to the buildings provided by complicit ownership and a security company with a Bush on the Board of Directors.


The whole was covered up by more than those few...but due the nature of Top Secret clearance if anything was questioned, especially by anyone allowed behind the big fence around the property, they would've capped it securely. Sealed the Leak, so to speak.

And, of course, you have copies of the documentation that verifies all of this?

[Gannon]

Operation Northwoods is irrelevant to determining the cause of collapse of the World Trade Center.

Irrelevant to the mechanism they used to down the buildings, maybe, but EXTRAORDINARILY RELEVANT to the whole event.

You are a simple-minded man, or are paid to talk people down. Which is it? Both?!

Cheers

[elganned]

I do have a question, however, that you might be able to help me with.

If the building "pancaked", as is reported, down the structural support beams, I envision it like a series of platforms attached to a telephone pole; they "slid" down the pole, the weight of the accummulating platforms causing the lower one to detach from the pole and continue the "slide". Presumably all of the platforms and the wreckage therefrom would collect at the bottom.

So, what happens to the telephone pole?

Since all the platforms detached from it and it served as a "guide", so to speak, directing each platform down to the one below it, then presumably the pole itself will still be standing when the dust clears, sticking up out of a pile of rubble.

So my question is: What happened to the support pillars?

I would assume they would be festooning lower Manhattan like a bunch of spaghetti or the bristles of a particularly long broom stood on end; they wouldn't have had enough structural strength on their own to hold up their length, but they would have bent, folded, and if they simply broke they would have broken off in long successive sections. Yet I see no long ribbons of steel laying about in any of the photos; the longest piece I can see is only about 30' in length.

So tell me what happened to them, if you can. I'm not trying to be contentious, I just would like to know.

[Meddle]

^^^ That just proves you know nothing about the construction of tall buildings.

[ghettopalmetto]

I do have a question, however, that you might be able to help me with.

If the building "pancaked", as is reported, down the structural support beams, I envision it like a series of platforms attached to a telephone pole; they "slid" down the pole, the weight of the accummulating platforms causing the lower one to detach from the pole and continue the "slide". Presumably all of the platforms and the wreckage therefrom would collect at the bottom.

So, what happens to the telephone pole?

Since all the platforms detached from it and it served as a "guide", so to speak, directing each platform down to the one below it, then presumably the pole itself will still be standing when the dust clears, sticking up out of a pile of rubble.

So my question is: What happened to the support pillars?

I would assume they would be festooning lower Manhattan like a bunch of spaghetti or the bristles of a particularly long broom stood on end; they wouldn't have had enough structural strength on their own to hold up their length, but they would have bent, folded, and if they simply broke they would have broken off in long successive sections. Yet I see no long ribbons of steel laying about in any of the photos; the longest piece I can see is only about 30' in length.

So tell me what happened to them, if you can. I'm not trying to be contentious, I just would like to know.

Excellent question.

As you can imagine, steel columns are not perfectly rigid elements. Design of compression members [[i.e. columns) is based upon slenderness of the member. The slenderness is determined by the effective length of the column, which is to say, the distance between bracing points. Typically, these bracing points are provided by horizontal framing [[beams).

Slenderness is taken into account with the expression Kl/r, where:

K = an effective length coefficient, determined by the bracing conditions at each end of the column

l = the length between bracing points

r = the radius of gyration of the member, defined as the square root of [[I/A), where I is the moment of inertia of the cross section, and A is the cross-sectional area.

The higher the value of Kl/r, the more slender the column is, and the lower its axial load capacity. If you increase the unbraced length of a particular column, you are reducing its capacity. Design standards do not allow columns to have a Kl/r value exceeding 200. As an example, from my trusty AISC Manual [[9th Edition), a steel column with a specified yield strength of 36 ksi has an allowable stress of only 12.98 ksi when it's slenderness ratio [[Kl/r) is equal to 100.

In the case of a pancake failure, you are both removing bracing points AND increasing the load on each column. This causes out-of-plane buckling of the column and increased stresses due to secondary effects [[an out-of-plane column has a lower axial load capacity than if the same member were plumb). Through this mechanism, you will eventually exceed the strength of the material, and it will fail.

Because the columns buckle and fail, they don't so much act as a guide, but are merely in the path of failure. The building falls vertically because of gravity [[i.e. there are no external lateral loads applied to the falling mass to cause it to move out-of-plane).

Bear in mind that in a pancaking failure, you have tremendous impact loads being imparted to the remaining intact structure. These loads are significant enough to shear through bolted and welded connections, much as they are significant enough to shear through the concrete floor diaphragms.

In short, the steel columns buckle and end up buried in the debris.

[fazaz]

I, too, know a duck when I see one.

As to the experts, there's Richard Gage, AIA who founded Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth just a few years back, and now has 800+ members.

I believe his lecture [[DVD) which will give clarity to ghettopalmetto's list of questions [[on page 1) is free to watch online. http://www.ae911truth.org/

There's Steve Jones, PHD physics professor who has been on it earlier than the A&E group. He will answer the question 'What explosives were used?' They were found at the 9/11 site.

The 3,000 citizens who died might feel less 'tarnished' if a clean investigation is supported, as their family members have been asking for.
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/
http://nyccan.org/mission.php
Now, that 6 of the 10 Washington hand-picked 9/11 Commission members have gone on record saying their report is inaccurate, maybe some of the people who have stood by the official theory of the conspiracy, will question it as the commissioners have.

BTW - 7,000 US workers die per year from preventable work place accidents; 100,000 US civilians die per year from properly prescribed medications.

[ghettopalmetto]

Richard Gage may be a practicing architect, but he is no expert in structural failures. What are his credentials as pertains to knowledge of structural systems? I would definitely let him pick out the carpet and paint in my house, but that's about it.

I've watched Richard Gage discuss this issue before, and frankly, the guy is doing nothing but embarrassing himself. He's so full of shit he doesn't even know it, because again, he is NOT knowledgable of what he speaks. This is a case where one sticks to his area of expertise, and makes deference to those are have the proper educational and experiential background. The science nullifies every claim that Mr. Gage makes.

I too have a friend who has a PhD in physics. I wouldn't trust her to design a building for anything. She's real good with a telescope, though.

Have fun with your ducks, but please quack quietly amongst yourselves.

[elganned]

Okay, so maybe it's not a duck...a loon, do you think?

[ghettopalmetto]

Okay, so maybe it's not a duck...a loon, do you think?

Now that, I can agree with.

My advice is to be very careful. Just because someone has initials like PhD, AIA, or even P.E. after their name doesn't necessarily make them an expert in that field. One has to examine their curriculum vitae for their entire body of work, and from there, determine if the alleged expert has the proper credentials to make such claims. In legal terms, this is known as "qualification" of a witness.

Taking Richard Gage's word as truth would be akin to having a bank teller or loan officer give a detailed explanation as to the causes of the financial collapse in October 2008.

[Meddle]

This duck is formed out of chopped chicken livers.

[elganned]

Well, after all that I still think it looks like a planned demolition.
I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...

[Thomcat52]

Popular Mechanics tackled these issues. You can read it here...http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/1227842.html.

[In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.]

[ccbatson]

This question [[was 911 a conspiracy other than by the islamic terrorists) should be a screening question for assessment of psychiatric patients. Is there any better tool to expose paranoid delusions?

[fazaz]

ghettopalmetto's opinion as to steel and the pancake theory is perfectly valid, but 800 architects and engineers, and thousands of people in other professions have a different opinion from his.

What are his credentials as pertains to knowledge of structural systems?

He's so full of shit

Richard Gage short bio:
Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He is the founding member of AE911Truth. He has been a practicing architect for over 20 years and has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed steel-framed buildings. Most recently he worked on the construction documents for a $400M mixed-use urban project with 1.2 million square feet of retail, parking structure, and 320,000 square feet of mid-rise office space—altogether about with 1,200 tons of steel framing.

Then, there are 800 more architects' and engineers' [[on record) bios to sift through that agree with Gage .

[elganned]

This question [[was 911 a conspiracy other than by the islamic terrorists) should be a screening question for assessment of psychiatric patients. Is there any better tool to expose paranoid delusions?

Well, there's always membership in the Ayn Rand Fan Club...that's usually a pretty solid indicator of psychosis...

[ccbatson]

Elganned...what type of psychosis are you referring to [[ie paranoid, delusional, catatonic, dysphoric, etc)? Or are you just speaking from ignorance and out of an alternate orifice?

[elganned]

Specifically, delusional. Probably hearing voices, too.

And it's the Randians who speak from ignorance. As for an alternate orifice...are you a proctologist, perchance?

[ccbatson]

Auditory hallucinations? What evidence is there of that? What about rational objectivist thought is delusional?

Care to explain and substantiate your claim of "Randians" [[whatever that is) speaking from ignorance....I dare you to try.

Nope, not a proctologist.

[ghettopalmetto]

ghettopalmetto's opinion as to steel and the pancake theory is perfectly valid, but 800 architects and engineers, and thousands of people in other professions have a different opinion from his.

Richard Gage short bio:
Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He is the founding member of AE911Truth. He has been a practicing architect for over 20 years and has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed steel-framed buildings. Most recently he worked on the construction documents for a $400M mixed-use urban project with 1.2 million square feet of retail, parking structure, and 320,000 square feet of mid-rise office space—altogether about with 1,200 tons of steel framing.

Then, there are 800 more architects' and engineers' [[on record) bios to sift through that agree with Gage .

Architects don't know the first thing about what keeps a building standing, which is why they hire structural engineers. I guarantee you I have a better grasp on the topic than Richard Gage. Then again, I'm licensed to practice structural engineering. He is not. There could be 8 billion architects that agree with Richard Gage. It doesn't mean they're correct.

And frankly, just because someone is an engineer doesn't imply he understands the failure mechanisms present in the World Trade Center. An electrical engineer, although perfectly capable in his own field, doesn't know the first thing about structures. If there are licensed Professional Engineers in the group, they're treading on dangerous territory by expressing opinions on matters beyond their expertise.

Even more telling is that not one peer-reviewed trade publication or academic journal in the structural engineering industry has published Gage's report. Not a single one. What does that tell you?

[rb336]

Auditory hallucinations? What evidence is there of that? What about rational objectivist thought is delusional?

Care to explain and substantiate your claim of "Randians" [[whatever that is) speaking from ignorance....I dare you to try.

All that needs to be done is compile your posts on virtually any topic, but particularly those where solid scientific or historical evidence flies in the face of your dogma