Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria? #2 (Page 83): You're babbling again. Study the photo below and try to determine if what you say is true. Is the falling mass...

This topic was split up because it has reached high page count.
You can find the follow-up topic here.

payne1000

emarine wrote:

maybe you want to explain how the 20 top floors hi... (show quote)

You're babbling again.
Study the photo below and try to determine if what you say is true. Is the falling mass really being added to the mass alleged to have crushed the tower?
Anyone with eyes should be able to see that 80% to 90% of the mass is being exploded out and away from the lower floors which are being taken out by explosives.

payne1000

Blade_Runner wrote:

payne1000 @ When Newton's third law of motion is applied to the theory that gravity crushed one floor at a time, then there would be an equal and opposite reaction on each floor as the towers came down.
This would mean there would be a jolt or pause in the collapse 90 times on the North Tower as it came down. There is not one equal and opposite reaction in the fall.

You haven't explained how this can happen without cutting charges and explosives.
I'm getting tired of this infantile horseshit, but what the hell, one more time:

Gravity IS NOT a theory.
Gravity is one of the Four Fundamental Forces in the Universe. Gravity is why one WTC tower weighed 500,000 tons.
Gravity did not crush the tower.
Gravity is the force that pulled the MASS of the tower down.
Under the pull of Gravity, the MASS OF THE TOWER crushed the entire building.

If you want to go with 20 floors, we'll go with 20 floors.

The MASS of each individual floor system (slabs, trusses, and office contents) weighed an average of 4500 tons.

The MASS of the 20 floors above the BIG WOUND weighed 90,000 tons. (4500 tons x 20 = 90,000)

Each individual floor system supported its own weight plus whatever was placed upon it.

The vertical support system--core and perimeter columns--held each individual floor system in place. We can deduce from this that each individual floor system was bearing DOWN on the vertical support system. We can further deduce that the strength and support of each individual floor system did not depend on any other floor system, above or below it.

Due to the force of Gravity acting upon it, the natural tendency of each individual floor system was to FALL DOWN. (That's why buildings generally have a vertical load bearing system. You know, to hold up the floors and keep them from FALLING DOWN.)

The floor system would FALL DOWN if its connections to the vertical support system were broken. This is, IN FACT, what happened in the devastated area of tower EVEN BEFORE IT BEGAN TO COLLAPSE.

Now, when the 90,000 ton MASS of the 20 floors above the BIG WOUND began to collapse, it came down first on the floor system immediately below it. When this 90,000 tons of MASS IN MOTION collided with the 4500 ton MASS AT REST, an EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION occurred. Yes, it did. This is a scientific fact. Newton's 3rd Law.

However, since the collapsing mass was 20 times more MASSIVE than the floor system it collided with, Newton's 2nd Law came into play. The acceleration of an object is dependent upon both FORCE AND MASS. The acceleration and mass of the collapsing portion of the tower far exceeded the static mass of the floor system.

The floor system first in the path of the collapsing upper MASS was already straining against its connections to its vertical support, so when it was hit by that collapsing mass and its connections to the vertical support were broken, it had no choice but to join the big guy in his mad, crushing rush to the ground. The little fellow actually added his weight to the charge downward.

And as the collapse progressed, both the acceleration and the mass increased. One floor system after another joined the onrush. Once the Big Fellow up top started DOWN, the tower didn't have a chance.

payne1000 @ When Newton's third law of motion is a... (show quote)

Famous scientist Richard Feynman explains why the theory you are supporting is wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIxvQMhttq4

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Now back to the topic of this thread; 'Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria?'

emarine wrote:
"Why would Assad gas his own people????... because he's an ass & has done It before..."

The Covert Origins of ISIS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMjXbuj7BPI&feature=player_detailpage

The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkamZg68jpk

emarine

payne1000 wrote:

Famous scientist Richard Feynman explains why the theory you are supporting is wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIxvQMhttq4

You think that repetitive stupidity makes you a winner?... How many times will you post your straw & brick bullshit when it does not apply to 911?... we all already know that a stiff leg post is strong in compression... they even call them compression posts found in the basement of many residential houses supporting the floor... That's not what caused the main collapse... the outer compression posts bent or peeled outward away from the building from the overload from above shearing off the floor truss connections which held the compression posts in place... Try gluing your cardboard floors to the inside of your straws to simulate what happened on 911 not the top of the straws... this would better represent a floor truss failure & your brick will hit the floor @ near freefall speed... your dust cloud theory is bullshit... we know that 90% of the truss connections failed from inspection of the columns after the failure... so there were some floor trusses that ripped apart the concrete flooring as they remained connected to the outer framework that fell outside the footprint of the tower making for a very explosive looking dust cloud 1400 foot high... 1000's of tons of concrete & your super strong sheetrock turning to dust as gravity pulled the failed structure down... what's the problem here putz... all this just too simple for ya...F=m*a

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

emarine wrote:

You think that repetitive stupidity makes you a wi... (show quote)

Now back to the topic of this thread; 'Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria?'

emarine wrote:
"Why would Assad gas his own people????... because he's an ass & has done It before..."

The Covert Origins of ISIS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMjXbuj7BPI&feature=player_detailpage

The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkamZg68jpk

payne1000

emarine wrote:

You think that repetitive stupidity makes you a wi... (show quote)

Of course the floor truss connections failed when the massive lateral forces of the explosions hit the outer walls. The floor truss connections were designed to support weight sitting on them, not massive force applied to them in a lateral direction.
By the way, those super strong sheetrock and metal stud walls would have prevented a gravity-induced pancaking of floors. Any one who knows anything about construction and basic engineering would know that.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

payne1000 wrote:

Of course the floor truss connections failed when the massive lateral forces of the explosions hit the outer walls. The floor truss connections were designed to support weight sitting on them, not massive force applied to them in a lateral direction.
By the way, those super strong sheetrock and metal stud walls would have prevented a gravity-induced pancaking of floors. Any one who knows anything about construction and basic engineering would know that.

Now back to the topic of this thread; 'Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria?'

emarine wrote:
"Why would Assad gas his own people????... because he's an ass & has done It before..."

The Covert Origins of ISIS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMjXbuj7BPI&feature=player_detailpage

The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkamZg68jpk

emarine

payne1000 wrote:

Of course the floor truss connections failed when the massive lateral forces of the explosions hit the outer walls. The floor truss connections were designed to support weight sitting on them, not massive force applied to them in a lateral direction.
By the way, those super strong sheetrock and metal stud walls would have prevented a gravity-induced pancaking of floors. Any one who knows anything about construction and basic engineering would know that.

Your crazy quote..."By the way, those super strong sheetrock and metal stud walls would have prevented a gravity-induced pancaking of floors. Any one who knows anything about construction and basic engineering would know that."[/quote]

If life were a game of chess... you just checkmated yourself putz... nice work...you just made many @ ASME chuckle... there is a big meet in San Francisco next month...Thanks' for the talking points...

payne1000

emarine wrote:

If life were a game of chess... you just checkmated yourself putz... nice work...you just made many @ ASME chuckle... there is a big meet in San Francisco next month...Thanks' for the talking points...

You avoid explaining why structural strength sheetrock walls could not prevent floor slabs from collapsing on one another.
You want to give that a try? You avoided discussion of floor truss connections' vertical strength as opposed to lateral strength.

If the American Society of Mechanical Engineers do meet next month, this notable mechanical engineer will probably be there to
educate those who don't yet know the truth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V3WdpzaA4o

emarine

payne1000 wrote:

Of course the floor truss connections failed when the massive lateral forces of the explosions hit the outer walls. The floor truss connections were designed to support weight sitting on them, not massive force applied to them in a lateral direction.
By the way, those super strong sheetrock and metal stud walls would have prevented a gravity-induced pancaking of floors. Any one who knows anything about construction and basic engineering would know that.

You talking about those massive lateral forces strong enough to hurl 1000's of tons of 14x14 structural steel box section 100's of feet outward but could only blow out random glass windows with puffs clocked @ 100MPH by morons putz?...

emarine

payne1000 wrote:

You avoid explaining why structural strength sheetrock walls could not prevent floor slabs from collapsing on one another.
You want to give that a try? You avoided discussion of floor truss connections' vertical strength as opposed to lateral strength.

that would require the green Bay Packers & the Dallas cheerleaders... remember putz?... you put it in writing for the entire world to read... these ball players & gals must be pretty beefy to compare to a 90,000 ton overload in motion... you do understand the motion part don't you?... that means all your players have to jump up & down on your massive super strong sheetrock...

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Now back to the topic of this thread; 'Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria?'

emarine wrote:
"Why would Assad gas his own people????... because he's an ass & has done It before..."

The Covert Origins of ISIS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMjXbuj7BPI&feature=player_detailpage

The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkamZg68jpk

payne1000

emarine wrote:

You talking about those massive lateral forces strong enough to hurl 1000's of tons of 14x14 structural steel box section 100's of feet outward but could only blow out random glass windows with puffs clocked @ 100MPH by morons putz?...

If the floors pancaked downward from gravity, there would be no lateral forces. There would be no explosive debris clouds. The Massive center core would have remained standing. Even the outer wall structure would have remained together since a downward force would not be able to disassemble such a strong dense assembly of high strength steel columns welded and bolted to horizontal steel spandrel at all 100 floors. All your claims are talking points you got from NIST which is an agency controlled by the perpetrators. This mechanical engineer explains all the fallacies of the NIST reports: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V3WdpzaA4o

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Now back to the topic of this thread; 'Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria?'

emarine wrote:
"Why would Assad gas his own people????... because he's an ass & has done It before..."

The Covert Origins of ISIS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMjXbuj7BPI&feature=player_detailpage

The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkamZg68jpk

payne1000

emarine wrote:

that would require the green Bay Packers & the Dallas cheerleaders... remember putz?... you put it in writing for the entire world to read... these ball players & gals must be pretty beefy to compare to a 90,000 ton overload in motion... you do understand the motion part don't you?... that means all your players have to jump up & down on your massive super strong sheetrock...

Your math is off by 10x. You claim the floor slabs fell independently of the outer wall structure and the center core, Each floor slab weighed about 450 tons. 20 times 450 = 9,000 tons, not 90,000 tons.

You have never explained how small random fires which did not cover any floor entirely could cause the massive center core and the outer wall structure of 100psi steel to totally collapse.
The video shows the antenna atop the North tower falling without any resistance. This means the center core was taken out before any floor slabs started to contact each other.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo