I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

  • 14391 Replies
  • 3075626 Views
*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-35
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9960 on: October 02, 2018, 09:44:17 PM »
Heiwa you are retarded.  There was no controlled demolition.  Two planes crashed into the towers.  The planes themselves did not bring down the towers as the towers stood for some time after impact before collapsing, but they were the cause.  The weakened support structure from the gigantic gaping holes as well as the fire were the direct cause of the initial collapse, gravity did the rest.

I bet you think that the WTCs were of a traditional building construction where there are vertical support beams through out the building.  You would be wrong.  The WTCs were of a distinct design where all the load bearing support was provided by exterior walls, which allowed for a relatively open floor plan without the mess of vertical support beams through out the floor.

You can watch the footage.  As the building collapsed, you can see the exterior walls push out as the building dropped down.  As the exterior walls gave way, the floors inside had nothing to hold them up and add to the collapse.


If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9961 on: October 02, 2018, 09:53:49 PM »
Heiwa you are retarded.  There was no controlled demolition.  Two planes crashed into the towers.  The planes themselves did not bring down the towers as the towers stood for some time after impact before collapsing, but they were the cause.  The weakened support structure from the gigantic gaping holes as well as the fire were the direct cause of the initial collapse, gravity did the rest.

I bet you think that the WTCs were of a traditional building construction where there are vertical support beams through out the building.  You would be wrong.  The WTCs were of a distinct design where all the load bearing support was provided by exterior walls, which allowed for a relatively open floor plan without the mess of vertical support beams through out the floor.

You can watch the footage.  As the building collapsed, you can see the exterior walls push out as the building dropped down.  As the exterior walls gave way, the floors inside had nothing to hold them up and add to the collapse.
Sorry but you sound like a terrorist. No structure of any kind can collapse by gravity from top down, i.e. a little top C of a structure drops and crushes the (intact) bottom A of the structure below into dust.
In this case the vertical members supporting the structure were the external walls and a solid core of columns and it seems it was the solid core of columns that were destroyed by explosives. I explain more at http://heiwaco.com/nist.htm and http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm .
« Last Edit: October 03, 2018, 03:48:19 AM by Heiwa »

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9962 on: October 02, 2018, 10:55:03 PM »
I heard it was termites.

*

MicroBeta

  • 2490
  • +1/-0
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9963 on: October 03, 2018, 02:05:43 AM »
Heiwa you are retarded.  There was no controlled demolition.  Two planes crashed into the towers.  The planes themselves did not bring down the towers as the towers stood for some time after impact before collapsing, but they were the cause.  The weakened support structure from the gigantic gaping holes as well as the fire were the direct cause of the initial collapse, gravity did the rest.

I bet you think that the WTCs were of a traditional building construction where there are vertical support beams through out the building.  You would be wrong.  The WTCs were of a distinct design where all the load bearing support was provided by exterior walls, which allowed for a relatively open floor plan without the mess of vertical support beams through out the floor.

You can watch the footage.  As the building collapsed, you can see the exterior walls push out as the building dropped down.  As the exterior walls gave way, the floors inside had nothing to hold them up and add to the collapse.
Sorry but you sound like a terrorist. Non structure of any kind can collapse by gravity from top down, i.e. a little top C of a structure drops and crushes the (intact) bottom A of the structure into dust.
In this case the vertical members supporting the structure were the external walls and a solid core of columns and it seems it was the solid core of columns that were destroyed by explosives. I explain more at http://heiwaco.com/nist.htm and http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm .
He's right.  You're an idiot.  I know people who were there.  I know people who saw the second plane come in and hit the tower.  Since you didn't interview a single eyewitness you have not fucking clue what you are talking about. 

I also know people who died that day and you are a despicable human being for asserting nobody was killed...and you have no evidence to backup that claim either.

Mike
Since it costs 2.72¢ to produce a penny, putting in your 2¢ if really worth 5.44¢.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9964 on: October 03, 2018, 03:52:52 AM »
Heiwa you are retarded.  There was no controlled demolition.  Two planes crashed into the towers.  The planes themselves did not bring down the towers as the towers stood for some time after impact before collapsing, but they were the cause.  The weakened support structure from the gigantic gaping holes as well as the fire were the direct cause of the initial collapse, gravity did the rest.

I bet you think that the WTCs were of a traditional building construction where there are vertical support beams through out the building.  You would be wrong.  The WTCs were of a distinct design where all the load bearing support was provided by exterior walls, which allowed for a relatively open floor plan without the mess of vertical support beams through out the floor.

You can watch the footage.  As the building collapsed, you can see the exterior walls push out as the building dropped down.  As the exterior walls gave way, the floors inside had nothing to hold them up and add to the collapse.
Sorry but you sound like a terrorist. Non structure of any kind can collapse by gravity from top down, i.e. a little top C of a structure drops and crushes the (intact) bottom A of the structure into dust.
In this case the vertical members supporting the structure were the external walls and a solid core of columns and it seems it was the solid core of columns that were destroyed by explosives. I explain more at http://heiwaco.com/nist.htm and http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm .
He's right.  You're an idiot.  I know people who were there.  I know people who saw the second plane come in and hit the tower.  Since you didn't interview a single eyewitness you have not fucking clue what you are talking about. 

I also know people who died that day and you are a despicable human being for asserting nobody was killed...and you have no evidence to backup that claim either.

Mike
Mike!
You know people who where there? You know people who saw the second plane come in?
And you also know people who died that day?
Why don't you present the evidence of your fairy tales? Write a book about it and you!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9965 on: October 03, 2018, 04:05:26 AM »
No structure of any kind can collapse by gravity from top down, i.e. a little top C of a structure drops and crushes the (intact) bottom A of the structure below into dust.
Incorrect because "bottom A of the structure" was not "intact"!
  • A couple of the top floors or A were severely compromised by both the direct impact of the aircraft and by heat severely weakening and bowing the outer walls.

  • The "solid core of columns" was already severely weakened by burning fuel pouring down the lift-wells etc.
Quote from: Heiwa
In this case the vertical members supporting the structure were the external walls and a solid core of columns and it seems it was the solid core of columns that were destroyed by explosives. I explain more at http://heiwaco.com/nist.htm and http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm .
As noted above there is not needed for the solid core of columns to be destroyed by explosives.
And I've read enough of your "explanations" that do little more than show your inability to understand the simplest things,  ;D like rocket science ;)!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9966 on: October 03, 2018, 04:08:01 AM »
<< Stop wasting time and go back to what you do best! Making cups of espresso!  >>
Why don't you present the evidence of your fairy tales?

*

MicroBeta

  • 2490
  • +1/-0
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9967 on: October 03, 2018, 04:47:43 AM »
Heiwa you are retarded.  There was no controlled demolition.  Two planes crashed into the towers.  The planes themselves did not bring down the towers as the towers stood for some time after impact before collapsing, but they were the cause.  The weakened support structure from the gigantic gaping holes as well as the fire were the direct cause of the initial collapse, gravity did the rest.

I bet you think that the WTCs were of a traditional building construction where there are vertical support beams through out the building.  You would be wrong.  The WTCs were of a distinct design where all the load bearing support was provided by exterior walls, which allowed for a relatively open floor plan without the mess of vertical support beams through out the floor.

You can watch the footage.  As the building collapsed, you can see the exterior walls push out as the building dropped down.  As the exterior walls gave way, the floors inside had nothing to hold them up and add to the collapse.
Sorry but you sound like a terrorist. Non structure of any kind can collapse by gravity from top down, i.e. a little top C of a structure drops and crushes the (intact) bottom A of the structure into dust.
In this case the vertical members supporting the structure were the external walls and a solid core of columns and it seems it was the solid core of columns that were destroyed by explosives. I explain more at http://heiwaco.com/nist.htm and http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm .
He's right.  You're an idiot.  I know people who were there.  I know people who saw the second plane come in and hit the tower.  Since you didn't interview a single eyewitness you have not fucking clue what you are talking about. 

I also know people who died that day and you are a despicable human being for asserting nobody was killed...and you have no evidence to backup that claim either.

Mike
Mike!
You know people who where there? You know people who saw the second plane come in?
And you also know people who died that day?
Why don't you present the evidence of your fairy tales? Write a book about it and you!
I don’t have to write a book because everyone but you already knows the truth. 

You, on the other hand, have no evidence of anything.  You drew conclusions from nothing more than watching videos and looking at pictures.  You interviewed nobody...not one person who was there and yet then created an entire theory that there were no planes and nobody died.  You can’t draw the kinds of conclusions you made from watching the videos and if you weren’t such a crappy engineer you’d know that.   Just another example of your shoddy research.

Hell, AE911 once named you Petitioner of the Month.  They gave you prominent status on their web site and invited you contribute to their submissions for the NIST hearings.  They relied on your supposed credentials and included you as one of their peers; which was their first mistake. 

Once they realized you are a no planer/nobody died on 9/11 conspiracy nut job and an engineering hack they removed you from their petition, removed any mention of you as Petitioner of the Month, removed your profile, and removed any reference you were ever there.  Even your peers want nothing publically to do with your...and calling you their peer is an insult to them.  Not to mention you’ve been banned from more forums than most people are members of.

Don’t bother tell us how you’re on good terms with Gage because if that were true they wouldn’t have dropped you like a bad habit. 
 
Don’t bother telling me to read you stupid web site.  I have, it’s a piece of shit.  We’ve already discussed your crappy static model. 

You’re nothing but a nut-job and a hack that’s looking for 15 minutes of fame by watching internet videos and proclaiming nobody died on 9/11.  Go tell the tens of thousands of family members who lost loved ones on 9/11 that is never happened.  Better yet, go into any firehouse in NYC and tell them there weren’t any planes and nobody died.  See how that works out you.
Since it costs 2.72¢ to produce a penny, putting in your 2¢ if really worth 5.44¢.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9968 on: October 03, 2018, 05:03:44 AM »
No structure of any kind can collapse by gravity from top down, i.e. a little top C of a structure drops and crushes the (intact) bottom A of the structure below into dust.
Incorrect because "bottom A of the structure" was not "intact"!
  • A couple of the top floors or A were severely compromised by both the direct impact of the aircraft and by heat severely weakening and bowing the outer walls.

  • The "solid core of columns" was already severely weakened by burning fuel pouring down the lift-wells etc.
Quote from: Heiwa
In this case the vertical members supporting the structure were the external walls and a solid core of columns and it seems it was the solid core of columns that were destroyed by explosives. I explain more at http://heiwaco.com/nist.htm and http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm .
As noted above there is not needed for the solid core of columns to be destroyed by explosives.
And I've read enough of your "explanations" that do little more than show your inability to understand the simplest things,  ;D like rocket science ;)!

Please - the bottom part A, its walls, its core columns and its floors, is completely intact before something happens above it to top part C. It is only the interface A/C that was a burning inferno as a plane has landed there and exploded in a big fireball thirty minutes earlier.
So while helicopters fly around filming it and people down below on the ground are running around ... suddenly ... plenty TV film crews are ready ... the top C suddenly drops down and ... 15 seconds later bottom A is dust! And ... a little later ... the top C or the other tower also suddenly drops down and ... 15 seconds later its bottom A is also dust!
The (Hollywood) plans of the terrorists worked 100%. GWB shit his pants full, Condolezza Rice went ice skating playing the piano and the real terrorists congratulated themselves. What a show!

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-35
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9969 on: October 03, 2018, 07:24:36 AM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9970 on: October 03, 2018, 09:02:39 AM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.

One and two did, 7 did not. I will add more about this later, as I am running late currently.

Though you sound just like a mainstream sound bite currently.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9971 on: October 03, 2018, 11:28:39 AM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
You are right. There was a central core consisting of plenty vertical columns supporting all the floors. 50% of the weight of the WTC towers was carried by the central core columns. The core itself was mostly elevator shafts and stairways, i.e. air.
But on 911 2001 the complete central core structure became dust because the top C above crushed the intact central core due to some Arabs landing planes up top. Only complete idiots support such nonsense, incl. GWB, Condoleezza, etc. But it works nicely 18 years later.

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-35
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9972 on: October 03, 2018, 12:42:09 PM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.

One and two did, 7 did not. I will add more about this later, as I am running late currently.

Though you sound just like a mainstream sound bite currently.


WTC 7 fell as a result of fire and structural damage from the debris from the North Tower.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2018, 04:47:04 PM by NotSoSkeptical »
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-35
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9973 on: October 03, 2018, 12:45:09 PM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
You are right. There was a central core consisting of plenty vertical columns supporting all the floors. 50% of the weight of the WTC towers was carried by the central core columns. The core itself was mostly elevator shafts and stairways, i.e. air.
But on 911 2001 the complete central core structure became dust because the top C above crushed the intact central core due to some Arabs landing planes up top. Only complete idiots support such nonsense, incl. GWB, Condoleezza, etc. But it works nicely 18 years later.

Part C only needed to collapse the one floor directly below the point of collapse, after that point inertia and gravity would continue the collapse in a cascading effect.  This isn't hard.
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

MicroBeta

  • 2490
  • +1/-0
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9974 on: October 03, 2018, 12:49:17 PM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
You are right. There was a central core consisting of plenty vertical columns supporting all the floors. 50% of the weight of the WTC towers was carried by the central core columns. The core itself was mostly elevator shafts and stairways, i.e. air.
But on 911 2001 the complete central core structure became dust because the top C above crushed the intact central core due to some Arabs landing planes up top. Only complete idiots support such nonsense, incl. GWB, Condoleezza, etc. But it works nicely 18 years later.
You’re wrong.  You owe that French company 1 million euros for their patent for demolishing a building using the technique you claim is impossible.  They did it so you do actually owe them € 1M.

You Lose!
Since it costs 2.72¢ to produce a penny, putting in your 2¢ if really worth 5.44¢.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9975 on: October 03, 2018, 03:22:59 PM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.

One and two did, 7 did not. I will add more about this later, as I am running late currently.

Though you sound just like a mainstream sound bite currently.


WTC fell as a result of fire and structural damage from the debris from the North Tower.

This is incorrect...



As to Heiwa's proposal of what can't happen...well there is the verinage demolition technique, but that is used only on buildings with certain dimensional equality in the foot print. Buildings that aren't steel framed typically, and buildings lower than 30 floors.

Also, it is not like they just blow a certain spot and it falls perfectly, they spend months weakening/removing supports and mass.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-35
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9976 on: October 03, 2018, 04:40:41 PM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.

One and two did, 7 did not. I will add more about this later, as I am running late currently.

Though you sound just like a mainstream sound bite currently.


WTC 7 fell as a result of fire and structural damage from the debris from the North Tower.

This is incorrect...


No it is not.  Per a peer reviewed report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, WTC 7 collapsed as a result of unabated fire and a lack of water.  The fires were a result of the North Tower Collapse which also caused structural damage.  The damage from the debris was not considered a factor in its collapse, but were a direct causation of the fires which lead to the collapse.
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9977 on: October 03, 2018, 04:43:35 PM »
No it is not.  Per a peer reviewed report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, WTC 7 collapsed as a result of unabated fire and a lack of water.  The fires were a result of the North Tower Collapse which also caused structural damage.  The damage from the debris was not considered a factor in its collapse, but were a direct causation of the fires which lead to the collapse.

Yes a model they refused to issue the inputs to...so no it was not peer reviewed whatsoever.

Go to the 9/11 thread all these questions have been addressed.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-35
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9978 on: October 03, 2018, 04:56:14 PM »
No it is not.  Per a peer reviewed report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, WTC 7 collapsed as a result of unabated fire and a lack of water.  The fires were a result of the North Tower Collapse which also caused structural damage.  The damage from the debris was not considered a factor in its collapse, but were a direct causation of the fires which lead to the collapse.

Yes a model they refused to issue the inputs to...so no it was not peer reviewed whatsoever.

Go to the 9/11 thread all these questions have been addressed.

The summary was peer reviewed in 2012 by the Journal of Structural Engineering.
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9979 on: October 03, 2018, 04:58:45 PM »

The summary was peer reviewed in 2012 by the Journal of Structural Engineering.

You cannot peer review a computer model without inputs being released.. .
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45084
  • +87/-110
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9980 on: October 03, 2018, 05:06:27 PM »

The summary was peer reviewed in 2012 by the Journal of Structural Engineering.

You cannot peer review a computer model without inputs being released.. .
Just because the inputs haven't been released to the general public doesn't mean that they haven't been shared with other professionals or researchers.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9981 on: October 03, 2018, 05:12:55 PM »

The summary was peer reviewed in 2012 by the Journal of Structural Engineering.

You cannot peer review a computer model without inputs being released.. .
Just because the inputs haven't been released to the general public doesn't mean that they haven't been shared with other professionals or researchers.

They didn't share with anyone, only people that know is NIST. The formal letter released was for "national security"...all this is on the 9/11 thread.

Many researchers have tried to get them being denied. I wonder why, helps support the fairy tale.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9982 on: October 03, 2018, 05:46:32 PM »
"researchers"   ;)

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9983 on: October 03, 2018, 05:57:22 PM »
"researchers"   ;)

Researchers, scientist, organizations etc have all tried to get the inputs for their "model" to no avail...

ACTUAL HONEST research wanting to be peer reviewed puts everything in the open and lets their peers scrutinize it.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9984 on: October 03, 2018, 06:39:06 PM »
OMG, you are not their fucking peer!

You are just a nut on the net.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11242
  • +9/-7
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9985 on: October 03, 2018, 06:41:01 PM »
OMG, you are not their fucking peer!

You are just a nut on the net.

Read the damn post, I never said I tried to get it...such a dishonest fuck
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9986 on: October 03, 2018, 06:49:00 PM »

Many researchers have tried to get them being denied.

Who?

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9987 on: October 03, 2018, 11:54:13 PM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
You are right. There was a central core consisting of plenty vertical columns supporting all the floors. 50% of the weight of the WTC towers was carried by the central core columns. The core itself was mostly elevator shafts and stairways, i.e. air.
But on 911 2001 the complete central core structure became dust because the top C above crushed the intact central core due to some Arabs landing planes up top. Only complete idiots support such nonsense, incl. GWB, Condoleezza, etc. But it works nicely 18 years later.

Part C only needed to collapse the one floor directly below the point of collapse, after that point inertia and gravity would continue the collapse in a cascading effect.  This isn't hard.

No, by dropping top part C the distance between two floors on the intact bottom part A the result will just be an elastic bounce (apart from some local deformations at interface C/A).
There is no way that any small/weak top C of any structure can crush the intact bottom part A (C~A/10) of same structure by gravity.

There is a French company that destroys buildings by gravity by destroying and weaken load carrying members (walls) at the bottom of the building, i.e. the top part is >70% of the building. Only in such case the big top can crush the little bottom part.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9988 on: October 04, 2018, 12:34:19 AM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
You are right. There was a central core consisting of plenty vertical columns supporting all the floors. 50% of the weight of the WTC towers was carried by the central core columns. The core itself was mostly elevator shafts and stairways, i.e. air.
But on 911 2001 the complete central core structure became dust because the top C above crushed the intact central core due to some Arabs landing planes up top. Only complete idiots support such nonsense, incl. GWB, Condoleezza, etc. But it works nicely 18 years later.

Part C only needed to collapse the one floor directly below the point of collapse, after that point inertia and gravity would continue the collapse in a cascading effect.  This isn't hard.

No, by dropping top part C the distance between two floors on the intact bottom part A the result will just be an elastic bounce (apart from some local deformations at interface C/A).
Rubbish! Concrete and heat weakened high tensile structural steel won't result in any elastic bounce.

Quote from: Heiwa
There is no way that any small/weak top C of any structure can crush the intact bottom part A (C~A/10) of same structure by gravity.
Incorrect. The top section is hardly small and weak!
On WTC 1 the impact was near the centre and between the 93rd and 99th floors of 110 floors and
on WTC 2 the impact was near a corner and between the 72nd and 85th floors.
So there were at least 11 floors above on WTC 1 and over 25 floors above on WTC 2.

Those top section would have tremendous kinetic energy by the time they hit the lower sections.
 
Quote from: Heiwa
There is a French company that destroys buildings by gravity by destroying and weaken load carrying members (walls) at the bottom of the building, i.e. the top part is >70% of the building. Only in such case the big top can crush the little bottom part.
So? That depends entirely on:
1) How much the lower structure was weakened by the heat in central load bearing section.

2) How far the top section falls through destroyed floors.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9989 on: October 04, 2018, 04:43:30 AM »
WTC had a Central core.  The internal columns were centralized, they were not through out the floor of the building.
You are right. There was a central core consisting of plenty vertical columns supporting all the floors. 50% of the weight of the WTC towers was carried by the central core columns. The core itself was mostly elevator shafts and stairways, i.e. air.
But on 911 2001 the complete central core structure became dust because the top C above crushed the intact central core due to some Arabs landing planes up top. Only complete idiots support such nonsense, incl. GWB, Condoleezza, etc. But it works nicely 18 years later.

Part C only needed to collapse the one floor directly below the point of collapse, after that point inertia and gravity would continue the collapse in a cascading effect.  This isn't hard.

No, by dropping top part C the distance between two floors on the intact bottom part A the result will just be an elastic bounce (apart from some local deformations at interface C/A).
Rubbish! Concrete and heat weakened high tensile structural steel won't result in any elastic bounce.

All vertical structural members are steel columns and they are intact and at room temperature in lower part A. So when top C drops on bottom A, bottom A acts as a spring, deforms elastically and bounces back top C. I explain it at http://heiwaco.com/tower.htm