You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #4: what a big fat non-sequitur! [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
szatmar666 Donating Member (532 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. what a big fat non-sequitur!
I am talking about the pieces in the structure that would have allowed to provide a finite element analysis of the ACTUAL COLLAPSE SEQUENCE. What the NIST report has is a finite element model of the aircraft crash and the fuel dispersion ie events BEFORE the actual collapse. You are not only ignorant and intellectually dishonest but you didn't even bother to address my point. I doubt you even read the New Civil Engineer article I posted a link to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Missing Steel... wildbilln864  Aug-23-09 01:01 PM   #0 
  - That piece of steel has always been at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute  Bolo Boffin   Aug-23-09 01:21 PM   #1 
     - the steel that's really missing is in the pieces  szatmar666   Sep-06-09 09:20 PM   #2 
        - No, that steel is not.  Bolo Boffin   Sep-06-09 09:52 PM   #3 
           - what a big fat non-sequitur!  szatmar666   Sep-06-09 11:36 PM   #4 
              - Why would anyone need to model the ACTUAL COLLAPSE SEQUENCE?  Bolo Boffin   Sep-06-09 11:49 PM   #5 
                 - perhaps in ballet and busshit school that's all you need  szatmar666   Sep-07-09 12:05 AM   #6 
                 - NIST did prove their point beyond your feeble personal incredulity. n/t  Bolo Boffin   Sep-07-09 12:06 AM   #7 
                 - Wouldn't you model it to make sure it behaves the way the model says it will?  lovepg   Sep-07-09 12:17 AM   #8 
                    - Not the actual collapse sequence.  Bolo Boffin   Sep-07-09 12:22 AM   #9 
                       - But what if the top section did not fall the way it did in the video? Wouldn't that tell ..  lovepg   Sep-07-09 12:29 AM   #10 
                       - How do you know it didn't? n/t  Bolo Boffin   Sep-07-09 12:32 AM   #11 
                          - Nobody knows because they did not model it. If i developed a vacine I would not..  lovepg   Sep-07-09 12:44 AM   #13 
                       - THERE IS NO MODEL OF THE PANCAKE THEORY  szatmar666   Sep-07-09 12:38 AM   #12 
                          - You understand the pancake explanation of how the collapses started is no longer operative, right?  Bolo Boffin   Sep-07-09 01:17 AM   #14 
                          - read the article  szatmar666   Sep-07-09 01:42 AM   #15 
                             - I read the article - back in 2005.  Bolo Boffin   Sep-07-09 02:09 AM   #16 
                          - Hmmm. That's not what I remember the NIST report saying.  AZCat   Sep-07-09 09:15 PM   #17 
                             - I am not at all surprised about that either.  Realityhack   Sep-07-09 09:18 PM   #18 
                             - Exactly - it's not that interesting of a engineering question. n/t  AZCat   Sep-07-09 09:40 PM   #19 
                             - The question that would be answered is, IS YOUR MODEL CORRECT!  lovepg   Sep-07-09 10:22 PM   #20 
                                - dumbassed to the extreme"?  AZCat   Sep-08-09 12:26 AM   #21 
                                - I am very sorry that...  Realityhack   Sep-08-09 11:33 AM   #22 
                                   - Is it more complex than the FEA modeling of the entire Earth's Climate Balance?!  szatmar666   Sep-08-09 11:42 PM   #23 
                                      - I see you think the buildings collapsed into their own footprint.  Realityhack   Sep-09-09 01:01 PM   #25 
                                         - I see, so you have nothing to say  szatmar666   Sep-09-09 01:48 PM   #26 
                                            - What an interesting way of admitting you are wrong about a basic factual issue. n/t  Realityhack   Sep-09-09 02:12 PM   #27 
                                               - you are obviously deluded  szatmar666   Sep-09-09 05:01 PM   #28 
                                                  - Even if I gave you that...  Realityhack   Sep-09-09 08:23 PM   #29 
                             - again: you are refering to the structural impact damage models  szatmar666   Sep-09-09 08:28 AM   #24 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC