Holes shaped like planes?

This is simple genericBob. If those FEAs were faked in any way, then your truther engineering group could easily create their own FEAs to show just how fake they are. In 13+ years they have come up with NOTHING. Why, because they know the FEAs show exactly what happened. Any engineer worth anything could show these they are fake if indeed they are. Why don't you hit up Richard Gage and ask him to perform his own FEAs. He pats himself over $80,000 to find the "truth". Maybe instead of going on his vacatio... err... truth crusades, he could find it in his heart to do something worthwhile with the money he gets.

>>>MOD EDIT Off Topic Removed<<<

 

So rather than produce documentation, you complain
about the lack of proof to the contrary by Gage & co.

But the fact remains, the "FEA" bits that have been shown
publicly, do not have the necessary supporting data to be
certain that the "FEA" does indeed reflect the structure of
the steel box columns & steel re-enforced concrete decks.
or?

 

So if the FEAs were faked then why haven't any of the truther engineers come forth with their own FEAs showing the actual truth?

 

& that is a very good question, there is the possibility that it hasn't been done because there is so much debate about the actual composition of the tower(s) What exactly was the weight of the steel used in the box columns in the upper floors, like above the 36th floor and also above the 72nd floor, and what exactly was the composition of the core at various levels?
If the variables could be nailed down, I'd consider running it myself, if I could muster the resources. There really should be some serious computing power and nerds willing to operate it for this effort, but its one of those things that at least right now is both information and resources starved projects. sad really, I'd really appreciate a proper FEA done,
OPEN SOURCE, and that would put the question to rest, for once & for all.....

 

Those figures are publicly available.

 

Seriously? What a cop-out.
The truth is that if no-planers could in any way prove those previous FEA's wrong, they would have done so a long time ago. The info is widely available, at least enough to do a reasonable estimate and get some ball-park data. I'll give you a link to an article containing Purdue's modeling data right here. Why not start there? Let's see your own FEA data. Show us why the plane penetrations are impossible. Here you go:
On Efficient Modeling of High-velocity Fluid Solid Impact

 

I find it fascinating that the application for this PHD
was dated 10/08/08 and the abstract was dated
December 2008 and then this appears at the end:

I submit to you that this document is strictly
POLITICALLY CORRECT content.

 

Completely wrong.

It's not because the composition of the towers cannot be nailed down. All that information is contained in the engineering drawings and project files at Leslie Robertson's firm and can be obtained.

It's it's either:

A) No truther wants any part of coming up with any detailed analysis because they know in the end they'll be subjected to the same detailed scrutiny that the truthers aply to the "official story" evidence and whitepapers

or

B) For people like Gage, they want to continue the charade so they can continue to suck money out of the devout followers and pay themselves a nice salary or to keep what little internet fame they currently have. Do you know how much Gage pays himself? Any clue? Why do you think you truthers have so many different theories? Each person who heads up a particular conspiracy theory wants a little bit of internet fame.

 

Even if there are outright charlatans among the 9/11 "truthers"
there is something that just plain stinks about the whole
hijacked airliners used as weapons story.
The fact that 4 airliners allegedly were hijacked and then
crashed leaving only token bits of aircraft remains and even
then, the authorities didn't document exactly how much of
each plane was recovered(?) whats up with that?
The total "collapse" of three steel framed skyscrapers,
leaving behind a rubble pile that was indistinguishable
from that produced by controlled demolition and as yet
the alarms have not been set off, what is with people
these days?

BTW: on the subject of the constant demand to "show the math"
Note that a lawyer can spend hours addressing the court without
ever once so much as uttering 2+2=4 ..... there is logic & reason.
we have here what is clearly a battle for hearts & minds.

 

Just plain ridiculous.

Could you design a structure with logic and reason. These types of comments amaze me. It takes math and engineering to construct such structures but only logic and reason to explain how the same structures could have been completely destroyed due to structural failure and gravity.

 

ah, but what if it was not only "structural failure & gravity"?

 

Your arguing/debating that it could never have been structural failure & gravity. That it 100% had to be controlled demolition. You are basing your argument that it HAD to 100% be controlled demolition on logic, reason, and what people are parroting. I have not seen one shred of mathamatical or engineering proof from anyone on your side that controlled demolition could have created what we saw.

On the other hand, many here have provided you with mathematical and structural engineering data to show that it is possible for gravity and structural failure to have created the scenario we saw. You continue to ignore this evidence based on the fact the you think the government is lying. You have no clue how to correctly interpret or refute the data we have provided which is why your only defense is "it's lies" or "they're fake".

 

LOL! Lamest red-herring ever.
His dissertation was defended and approved in October. It was published in December. The abstract was probably written specifically for publication. And you think it's suspicious that he took a job before defending his dissertation? That's very common for PhD students.
Is that all you got? That's the only excuse you could find to entirely dismiss the research? You were "fascinated" by the dates?
Any whit of credibility you may have had here is not completely gone.

 

ah, but is it probable? is it indeed plausible?
Given that in the course of destroying the lower 93 stories,
the stuff would have to align just right to hit the structural
bits in the next floor in a manner that would cause ALL of
the floor trusses to break or disengage from the outer wall
and core, and do so all at the same time.

 

Show me evidence that this was the case. Show me any visual evidence that show all the floor truss connections to the perimeter columns and the core being severed at the same time.

 

That is the problem, after the fact, and given that there was
very poor documentation of the site, its impossible to tell from
the wreckage, however from the event itself, there is plenty of
evidence, because the plane of destruction stayed level all the
way down, therefore the connections at each floor level must
have all broken at the same time.

 

Speculation all the way around. Except for the documentation part. In that case, you're just wrong.

 

ok, were is the documentation? are you going to give me a link
to a picture book produced by somebody who simply ran around
the site snapping pix but didn't take any notes
( or at least refuses to publish said notes ) or am I going to
be encouraged to process a FOI request? There have been
already MANY FOI requests for data from the establishment
and it has resulted in rather little in the form of actual evidence.

 

How many have you personally filed?

 

Show me your visual evidence of this.

Case in point. How could the "plane of destruction" be level in the case of the tilted upper section?

 

Glad you brought that up, the south tower is a prime example
of why gravity was not the only force at work, people insist that
gravity works straight down therefore the towers collapsed
straight down. In the case of the south tower, there was a tilt,
and why? For the strictly gravity scenario to work, then you have
to admit that some connections within the structure broke
asymmetrically, and with that, WHY not have many more other
connections within either tower break asymmetrically?
The fact is, both towers were subject to asymmetrical forces
from the very beginning because of the damage caused by the
alleged airliner crash.

 

I would bet that hundreds of the connections broke asymmetrically. They certainly didn't all break simultaneously!

 

1. You avoided my question yet again. What visual evidence do you have that shows the plane of destruction staying level
2. You just voided your point that explosives went off SIMULTANEOUSLY by admitting the tilt. Now what?
3. So you're telling me that if I had a box and it tilted on a fulcrum that was placed in the bottom middle of said block, and then removed the fulcrum, you think the box would continue to fall sideways instead of dropping straight down?

 

You're contradicting your own theory genericBob. You keep saying that the plane of destruction was LEVEL and that the explosives went off SIMULTANEOUSLY.

How are asymmetrical forces created from explosives going off at the same time? How does the destruction plane stay level if the force are asymmetrical?

This is why you have been asked to provide visual evidence of this "level plane of destruction".

 

No answer genericBob?