• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

More Lies from Truthers

GregoryUrich

Graduate Poster
GregoryUrich
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
1,316
Some truther came up with this regarding Bazant et al.'s paper "Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers: What did and did not cause it"

BazantMass.jpg


This must be just another lie from the moronic America-haters.
 
According to Bazant, even using your mass numbers, global collapse would have happened in the towers. Or do you disagree with all of Bazant's calculations?

Why not give us your best estimate of what should have happened, with your own calculations?


How's the hunt for the Boeing going?
 
GregoryUrich said:
Some truther came up with this regarding Bazant et al.'s paper "Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers: What did and did not cause it"

[qimg]http://www.cool-places.0catch.com/docs/BazantMass.jpg[/qimg]

This must be just another lie from the moronic America-haters.
Click to expand...

Explain why they are America-haters.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
Did Bazant include the basement floors (I haven't read the paper)?
Click to expand...

He doesn't actually calculate the mass based on his specific mass numbers, but he does give the specific mass at the base. In the rest of the analysis they take all floors into account.
 
Gravy said:
According to Bazant, even using your mass numbers, global collapse would have happened in the towers. Or do you disagree with all of Bazant's calculations?

Why not give us your best estimate of what should have happened, with your own calculations?


How's the hunt for the Boeing going?
Click to expand...

I have a couple of issues with Bazant et al.: mass, crush-down first and the amount of ejected debris. Crush-down first has the biggest effect and I have seen no proof of it yet. It will take me a while to get to the collapse because I'm still working on my article about the mass, which, by the way is still less than 300,000 metric tons.

The Boeing will have to wait too.
 
GregoryUrich said:
Ask Pomeroo. (I don't really think so, I was baiting Pomeroo)
Click to expand...
Some one with facts would present them, you instead are easily distracted from your quest for woo. So you signed up for 9/11 truth, you signed the petition, now what, pray for facts? Why are you guys so fact less?

Sad to know anything you make up about flight 93 is out of the box wrong, like the rest of your stuff, and you still have not caught the math error in your work.
 
GregoryUrich said:
I have a couple of issues with Bazant et al.: mass, crush-down first and the amount of ejected debris. Crush-down first has the biggest effect and I have seen no proof of it yet. It will take me a while to get to the collapse because I'm still working on my article about the mass, which, by the way is still less than 300,000 metric tons.

The Boeing will have to wait too.
Click to expand...
You also have problems with math, physics, and engineering. Pick any mass you want, and the towers still fell due to impact, fire, and failure. You have already signed the truth petition, which means you have preconceived conclusion on 9/11. Sorry, you are unable to prove it, but you lack facts. Just be happy you finally have a group as challenged as you are on physics, math and engineering. You are now in a group who makes it up as they go. Who needs evidence when you guys got the truth. How ironic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom