(02-11-2013, 01:13 AM)JayRodney Wrote:(02-10-2013, 10:09 PM)オタマジャクシ Wrote:(02-10-2013, 03:37 AM)JayRodney Wrote: Yes god forbid anyone interject any common sense on that subject. Whoever tries is a MORON, and the subject is closed.
We all know it was a plot contrived in a cave in Afghanistan by Osama Bin Laden, who was on kidney dialysis at the time; and those dumbass architects and engineers who support such fallacies are, in fact - terrorists.
God knows we all know more than architects and engineers.
Here is the official govt account. Any tin foil hat wearing paranoid conspiracy theorists who disagrees is a douchebag.
The engineering societies, in particular the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) helped NIST with the analysis. There were probably more engineers involved in the actual analysis than have signed on to AE911.
So... it is the official position of millions of engineers that the official analysis is what happened.
A few million engineers vs a handful of unstable malcontents...
The engineers findings didn't make it into the The 9-11 Commission Report .
The Report did not deal with the evidence that supports the conclusion that the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 (WTC 7) were destroyed by controlled demolition.
The Report avoided even mentioning the complete, symmetrical, and rapid collapse of WTC 7, although that collapse was unprecedented in the 100-plus-year history of steel-framed skyscrapers.
So regardless of how many engineers worked on it, it was left out of the report, and for all intents and purposes that means they were not even involved.
On the other hand, over 1,700 architects & engineers demanding a real 9/11 investigation are signed up on their facebook page.
zero vs. over 1,700. I can do that math without a calculator believe it or not.
This is so wrong I don't know where to start.
The ASCE produced a paper on the subject:
There were two NIST authors and the rest were ASCE.
Controlled demolition isn't done to bring a building down. It is done to bring it down in one spot. The weeks of time and dozens of men needed to drill and weaken the major supports, the tons of dynamite, and the extensive damage to the interior (to access the main beams) in the weeks before the collapse weren't reported by anyone. The damage to adjacent buildings caused by the toppling of the building (instead of a controlled collapse) is pretty obvious. 30 W. Broadway (across the street) was heavily damaged by the collapse of WTC7.
The wall were observed to be bulging hours before - which is why the fire crews were pulled. The Windsor tower - with steel rather than reinforced concrete wings collapsed from fire in two hours. WTC7 collapsed in about 6 hours. It actually did better than should have been expected.
If the exterior walls are bulging - the internal structure is on its way to failing. 47 story exterior walls won't support themselves. Without lateral support an unsupported wall crumbles. The internal supports under went a progressive collapse starting with column 79.
As to the 1700 "Architects and Engineers" how many of them are American Engineers? Architects aren't the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to structural analysis.