67,000 people believe something's wrong with what we were told about 9/11

Discussion in '9/11' started by MkStevenson, Jul 20, 2014.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LoneStrSt8 said
    "the mass weighs the same at all times."

    But mass, isn't weight.
     
  2. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Parsing grammar? Okay.

    The point remains: it has the same mass. Try to focus on the important parts, won't you?
     
  3. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    sorry kid,but mass is calculated by weight,when I said that mass weighs to same at all times.I meant that a mass having 1pound on earth,would have one pound in orbit
     
  4. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In a previous discussion about airspeed
    I was bashed unmercifully about the difference
    between "knots" & "MPH" wow man, language
    matters, now in the discussion with the terms
    "weight" & "mass" being used, I can't question
    the use of words in a given context?

    what?
     
  5. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How mass is calculated confuses you?

    And you were NOT 'bashed unmercifully',stop whining.
     
  6. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not the one who is confused about the application
    of the words "mass" & "weight", thank U very much.

    Have a nice day

    : )
     
  7. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm in no way confused
     
  8. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    RE: High Rise Safety Initiative

    Please, anyone who has any pointers to any of the advertising for ( or against ) this ballot measure, please either post to the forum, or for that matter send me email or something. I would very much like to see what the psychological warfare does to this issue.
     
  9. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Two seconds of Google.

    http://911blogger.com/news/2014-07-04/we-did-it-67192-signatures-submitted-city-new-york

    Get those checks in quickly.
     
  10. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    To clarify, I would like to see the efforts of the
    opposition to this ballot measure also, Not
    just from the people promoting it. I understand
    that there will be opposition to this, there always is.
    The question is, what form will that opposition take?
     
  11. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Correct.

    The upper section sheared the connections of the lower section as it descended. There is no way that the connections on the level immediately below and first impacted by the descending upper sections would have resisted. They were not designed for that.

    You're lack of understanding is why you are using terms like "idiotic manner".

    Explain to me how the Conservation of Momentum applies to the load paths of the lower section when impacted by the descending upper section. Do you understand a structure works? From the impact point out, the load created tries to travel through the components to reach the grillages which sat upon bedrock. If at any point the traveling load passes through a component that cannot handle said load, the component fails.

    The problem with your understanding is that you cannot explain how the Conservation of Momentum applies to complex objects.
     
  12. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My question about all of this, is it a guaranteed certainty
    that ALL of the connections to ALL of the floor trusses on
    any given level would break and all at the same time?
     
  13. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What part of the descending upper section, contained withing an approximate 208' x 208' footprint and impacting components below would NOT have impacted/sheared components below? Furthermore, it was NOT all at the same time. You are making this up. Case in point, the tilted upper section.

    Keep dancing in circles genericBob.
     
  14. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is only one instance of visible asymmetrical
    breakage of connections and that is the south tower
    tilt and that part of the building disappeared behind
    a cloud of smoke/dust or just plain disappeared because
    it was blown up. in all other cases, the vertical descent
    is evidence of symmetrical breakage of connections
    within the tower. Given that the building was allegedly
    damaged by an airliner crash, the upper mass could
    not possibly be totally uniform in nature, there would
    be an inconsistency in the "punch" from above.
     
  15. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I thought you said all the connections were removed at the same time?
     
  16. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,951
    Likes Received:
    1,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have no idea what you think is correct when your whole premise is incorrect. Its about the collision of 2 masses not what it was designed to do.

    2 masses collided and when they do you get deceleration

    [​IMG]






    wtc 1 had no point of deceleration hence no support hence the support was removed before any impact could occur.




    .
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They weren't all sheared at the same time.
     
  18. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    so from the 93rd story down, ( in the case of the north tower )
    there would be an imbalance, there would be a shift in the
    center of gravity of the upper mass, and as the center of
    gravity shifts, this would become a progressive event, that
    is the more it shifts, the more it would have a tendency to
    shift further and eventually dump huge amounts of rubble
    over the side of the tower, stopping the action.
    Why should the action continue right down to ground level?
     
  19. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Really?

    Can you please explain why the total collapse time frame of WTC1 was not in the duration it would have taken for a free falling object to reach the ground?
     
  20. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    its amazing that anybody actually asks this question,
    the fact of there being some mass in the lower and
    as yet undamaged part of the building below the alleged
    airliner crash site, and this mass (short of a hydrogen bomb blast)
    would have to constitute some resistance to the fall of the upper mass.
     
  21. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Same old question that has been answered numerous times.

    I'm done. Continue running in circles: but realize you're going nowhere.
     
  22. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you have no rebuttal at all for the argument that
    the upper mass would have required special magic
    to make sure that it stayed on top in order to crush
    the lower part of the building, because if it didn't,
    the loss of mass by dumping rubble over the side
    would stop the action, leaving the tower damaged
    but not destroyed.
     
  23. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No,seems what he's saying is he keeps answering your questions,and you keep hand waving them away,only to ask the same questions later
     
  24. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    problem is, there has NOT been a rebuttal to
    any of the bits posted about why should the
    towers simply "collapse" in the manner that
    they did ( that is without some serious help).
     
  25. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Problem is,you won't accept any rebuttal that runs counter to your truther manifesto...
     

Share This Page