Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job and why?

don't assume anything,
I know a good bit more than you give me credit for.
only its all that experience at construction that you
have, is your bias in allegedly knowing how the tower(s)
"collapsed" as they did, and I ask you,
should it be .... that the top 15% of a skyscraper
could collapse down upon the other 85% and cause
total destruction of the entire skyscraper?

or?

 

And I keep telling you that the bottom 85% didn't come into play to resist the onslaught of descending debris. The massive loads caused LOCALIZED failure as it traveled down. I don't care how much support was beneath. The load of the descending debris overloaded the individual floor connections causing failure at that level. You have had this explained to you numerous times.

Each floor is designed to hold up it's own weight and that of objects placed upon it. The load placed upon a floor is transfer, via connections, to the surrounding columns to be distributed downward to the grillages upon bedrock. Below is a diagram of how load distibution works. Follow the arrows.


And if you don't think a smaller upper section can destroy a larger lower section, explain this video. How did three floors destroy the rest below? The lower section was supporting the upper section right? It's way smaller then the lower section right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCjEi4z2KZA

So I'll ask you this how would you expect these floor truss support, designed to support EACH INDIVIDUAL FLOOR AT THAT LEVEL ONLY:


To resist the load of this being applied to them?:


This is where your lack of structures comes into play. You don't understand the concepts being explained to you. So explain how you think each individual floor support system was supposed to resist that falling mass.

 

My education in probability comes in handy here,
you see to have every floor fail uniformly that is the
plane of the failure being completely horizontal, because
if it tipped, the center of gravity of the "pile driver" would
shift off-center, and that would be the beginning of the end
for this action, because it would not totally destroy the tower(s).
there are more possible outcomes that would be NOT total
destruction and really only one way to get it right that is
to totally destroy the tower(s).

 

No, it doesn't. Sorry.

It wasn't uniform genericBob! Jesus H. Christ! When the upper section released, what do you think the core columns did to the floor below? That acted like spears! They drove right through the 4" thick concrete floors. The debris impacted all over the place in quick secession. LOCALIZED FAILURES.

Just... wow...



You honestly think the debris landed perfectly even?

 

First of all does invoking the name of the Messiah
improve your argument?

May I state here that to expect that the destruction
of each floor progressed in a symmetrical & uniform
manner, note that the whole floor would have to as
much as disappear and all at the same time, because
if the floor trusses held on in one part of that acre of
area, the "pile driver" would have to tip, and in tipping
cause a progression of events that would end in incomplete
demolition of the tower(s).

The complete demolition of the tower(s)
makes the assumption that the floors would
simply disintegrate upon overload and do so
all at the same time and repeat that process
at least 90 times over for the north tower.

 

For the seconds time genericBob, the debris was NOT "symmetrical" and "uniform". The impacting debris hit each floor in different areas, but in quick succession. If you refuse to get this right, then I have nothing further to say. Stop misrepresenting my point of view.

 

do you or do you not see that if the plane of the
destruction as the wave traveled down the tower(s)
did not remain level, the tipping would cause the
mass to spill out down the side of the tower, and
therefore stop the "progressive collapse".
The question for probability is: exactly how probable
is it that the plane of the destruction remain level all
the way down? I submit to you, that it is far more probable
that it would not remain level, unless helped by some sort
of intervention.

 

There would be no tipping!!!

The debris smashed right through the floors, shearing and breaking it up. Why is this so hard for you? You are asking in another thread for a debate for the non-PHD, yet you fail to grasp simple concepts.

 

but WHY would there be no tipping?
the structure was under no obligation to break
uniformly, and once the floors were imposed upon
but a load to great to hold, would the truss connections
at the outer wall and also at the core, uniformly let-go?
or would some of them resist just a bit more than others?
and also could the loading from above be relied upon to be
completely uniform in nature or would there be concentrations
of mass that asymmetrically imposed upon any given part of a
deck? To say that it just happened to come down completely
straight down as was observed, and it just happened to do that
because of "localized failures" is asking a LOT.
it is the least probable outcome of all the possible outcomes.

 

Example,

If I drop a box column vertically onto a 4" thick concrete floor and the impact force EXCEEDS the PSI rating of the floor in THAT LOCALIZED AREA, what do you think happens?

 

Obviously it breaks the floor in that local area, however
allegedly in response to asymmetrical damage & asymmetrical
fires, the tower(s) experienced total catastrophic failure of
whole floors. WHY?

for a picture, see #23 in "FEA data regarding WTC1"

 

That may be the case but I'm not exactly inclined to seriously research a conspiracy theory. I'm sorry but the conspiracy theory just strikes me as so insane that I can't take it even remotely seriously.

 

Condemnation without investigation is madness.

oops!

 

To hell with conspiracies do the physics.

That is the problem with this 9/11 crap. Most people on both sides think conspiracies are more important than physics.

The Laws of Physics do not give a damn about people and human beings cannot change them.

psik

 

I agree totally, Do the Physics!
The towers & 7 had to have been helped along to do what was seen on 9/11/2001, added energy and I'm not speculating if that energy was from black powder or black magic, but the buildings had help.

 

Yet there's zero evidence of either black powder or (HA) black magic ... so there you go.

You are arguing from incredulity.

 

Poll is too generic. It needs more options; more than just black and white.

 

Yet the results are clear. Nothing stopping you from making your own poll, of course.

 

And once again we are back to exactly how is it known that there isn't any evidence of explosives at ground zero and you will say there is a document that states testing was done and I ask where is it and you come up with some sort of lame excuse why you can't produce it.
oh well ......

 

(from post #87)

The proof of an inside job is crushing. Have you seen it?
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=348380&p=1063729867#post1063729867

Take a look at some of that info and then watch this video.

Why Can't They See The Truth? Psychologists Help 9 11 Truth Deniers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xzmprkpxac

It all makes sense if you look at the big picture.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=lithium
http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=iraq+oil+euro


It was easy for me to be objective about the proof of an inside job because I was already aware of what the US government really is.
http://www.politicalforum.com/history-past-politicians/371897-american-imperialism.html

I can understand why it would be hard for someone who isn't aware of American imperialism to be objective about the inside job proof. Take a look at some of the info in the above thread.

 

Hello Hannibal. I already did. And I gave more options and the results are radically different.

 

Hmm. Fewer votes cast on your poll, and roughly a 10 percentage point difference in 'yes' answers.
Excellent. What shall you do with those results?

 

link to other poll ..... please (?)

 

only someone who ditched junior high school science classes would not think it was an inside job.

its been proven over and over again it ws an inside job.these two videos here alone prove it was a joint CIA/mossad operation.the 9/11 apologists here never have any answers for them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD_vwzjdTi4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68LUHa_-OlA

 

scott just like I did took all the 9/11 apologists here to school with that link he gave.