forestry after 911 - a cartoon

[sweetheart]

[LARED]

1. Compelling, provocative, substantive,

You should send this to the NIST guys. They may finally see the light.

[jschurchin]

2. Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!

All the logging company's are going to go out of business.

[sweetheart]

4. not a splinter of wood to be found, here's another cartoon:

[greyl]

5. and a nice photo:

[The Lone Groover]

6. "Imagine" - There was certainly...

...a lack of critical thought in The White House when they said no one imagined that hijacked planes could be used as weapons.

Or were they lying. Let me think.

No.. they were definitely lying.

Do you agree Greyl?

[greyl]

7. I've posted about that many, many times before.

If you donate to DU, you will become armed with the search function.

[The Lone Groover]

8. So you agree they were lying?

Perhaps we need a new open independent investigation.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greyl]

10. Sorry, but your analysis of that "experiment" lacked critical thought.

I think the imagery ties in quite nicely with your cartoons in this thread, which are similarly lacking in critical thought.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LARED]

12. Ding, ding, ding

We have a winner for the ironic statement of the week

The NIST believer drones are pathetically unscientific,

[sweetheart]

13. sadly the moderators support greyl's harrassment approach

I'm totally unimpressed with the moderation in this thread.

An insulting predator gets a free ride over the DU rules and
i get penalized for pointing it out... what a sham.

And if the moderators need proof that they are violating their own rules
based on the previous post they deleted where i highlighted the rule,
here is where greyl posted this same post on january 29th:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=135380&mesg_id=137596

That was not enough, as he's stalked the disagreement on to a new
thread where it is off-topic and simply there to insult and harass.

[vincent_vega_lives]

14. heat, kitchen, fire.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greyl]

17. Your two threads are sisters.

There's no stalking here.
Both threads of yours were on the same topic: controlled demolition.
Both began with a creative endeavor attempting to illustrate that the towers couldn't have fallen according to the basic so-called OCT explanation.
Neither of them hold up to scrutiny.

[sweetheart]

19. fine, then explain this

show me the physics behind your analysis of this fact:

a 22 ton section of steel was hurled 200 meters from the tower.

Show me your ballistics equations, and explain how much JP4 you need in
the cannon to shoot your 22 ton bullet 200 meters whilst it falls 400.
Since this ejection happens without a backblast plate, your calculations
will show an equal and opposite momentum horizontally.

Show me any diagram of any gun that when given the fuel: a 5x5x4meter volume
of jp4, can eject a 22 ton bullet 200 meters. I challenge any physicst on scientist
on DU to do a little equation for uz. The only physical impossibility here is
people in NIST denial.

I'm ok with all arguments greyl, but your personal insinuations are out of line.

People can judge with their own common sense how a 5x5x5 yard room of gasoline would
do at tossing a 22 ton bullet. Anyone, anyone, bueller? A bunch of cowards.

[greyl]

22. I don't think it's fine to carelessly level baseless accusations.

sweetheart:

I'm ok with all arguments greyl, but your personal insinuations are out of line.

That's a remarkably hypocritical thing to say after posting what you have here.
I made no personal insinuations. My comments were directed at your 2 representations of the tower collapses.

[sweetheart]

25. colonizing discussions

You are here introducing yourself to a cartoon thread with another months
old discussion bullshitting that its relevant and not calling yourself rude,
fine, then take your muddy boots outside and clue up.

[vincent_vega_lives]

26. It wasnt a chemical reaction that launced the section of steel

it was a massive amount of kinetic energy.

Here's some basic physics for ya. Figure the force generated by the upper 20 or so floors of the WTC falling one floor distance.

[sweetheart]

27. ha ha

You actually believe that a downward vector just turns in to a horizontal
vector like that? I mean what odd school of mechanics is that. What about
2 concrete slabs meeting shoots a 22 tonne object out like a bullet?
and if you want to be picky, overcomes the activation intertia of tearing
free from the wheatcheck wall.

Nope, not there, the physics doesn't add up except in prenewtonian, alchemy.

[greyl]

28. With a grasp of the forces involved, comes understanding.

A layman's appeal: Why does a dropped raw egg distribute itself laterally when it lands?

[sweetheart]

29. The egg would only splat at the ground level

47 solid steel colums in the center bearing load and a full grid mesh....
this is not eggshell, and that laymans appeal is just bad metaphor.

All the force vectors you're talking about are vertical.
The 'splash' effect could not have been a factor given
the terminal speed collapse, so you're suggesting an egg went
splat 80 stories in the air when the whole structure fell at
free fall speed...no, those kinetics are simply wrong.

The translation to an upwards vector, as is observed in
the videos of bits flying *up* and out from the structure,
is not ball bearings bouncing on a pan,
the pan is falling at free fall speed.

[greyl]

30. Pieces of it would move laterally why? nt

[sweetheart]

32. Bush science, mate

You can't have it both ways. Either the vertical kinetic energy
is pulverizing the concrete of the floors in a pancake
collapse at free fall speed which suggests that the energy
is being absorbed in to the floors below to continue the
abusurd superfast pancake, transmitting the energy in to
heat, OR you splat an egg 80 floors up, and the structure
only collapses on the top, but you don't get to have both.

What was observed was a free-fall collapse, then all the vertical
energy went pounding down like a pile driver to create all that
heat!!

Plus, none of that talk would conjure up enough horizontal
momentum to hurl a 22 tonne object 200 meters, you're just
coming up with fantasy physics.

See how the fireball explodes out of this demolition just like the WTC,
and observe the large masses of the building that splatted sideways
due to the collapse happens only when something arrests the momentum.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ng5qwtR59A&mode=related&search=

[vincent_vega_lives]

33. Most of the mass is toward the center of the building

the facade columns were ejected violently as the floors/core debris came down with massive force. The descending mass was just a little greater than the volume of the floor below it, enough to shatter the facade columns and send many horizontally.

[sweetheart]

20. BTW, that's not true

The topic of the other thread was not controlled demolition, it was
an experiment in the thermodynamics of steel, an attempt to replicate
the observed phenomena on a small scale.

This thread was a cartoon thread. They are not on the
same subject at all, and you are just excusing yourself
so you can be rude across threads.

I'm sorry, i did not see your cartoon, that thread died a billion years ago.

[greyl]

23. "They are not on the same subject at all?" You can't be serious.

Of course they have notable differences, but the subject they share is the collapse of the twin towers, and an attempt by you to illustrate your notion that the so-called OCT version of the events is ridiculous.

They backfired.

[sweetheart]

24. what about 'cartoon' thread don't you get

Can you keep the pictures of world trade center models and
your commentary about that to the thread of its topic and
not create outlandish conspiracy theories as to why you
felt a cartoon thread was related.

You've created the relationship in your head, that model is
not in this thread, it is not about that experiment.

In your wild definition of logic that justifies your mindrape
behaviour of sticking your thing in to colonize a discussion
from another thread, i object, no matter the moderators are asleep
at the wheel.

[sweetheart]

16. touche

[greyl]

18. See how the debris is falling faster than the rest of the building? nt

[sweetheart]

21. Lovin' that horizontal trajectory

Ya gotta share with me, what it is about office furniture that
compells steel to boil and fly up and outwards with a horizontal acceleration vector.

You kidders, couldn't do physics if it bit ya.

[The Lone Groover]

3. I don't think anyone could have imagined...

...that someone would want to chop down a tree.

[SidDithers]

31. Building demolition post 9/11...

'Cause surely the top 30 floors should have just fallen over like a tree.

Sid