Searching \ for '[OT] Engineering terrorists?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=engineering+terrorists
Search entire site for: 'Engineering terrorists?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Engineering terrorists?'
2008\04\03@201714 by Shawn Tan

flavicon
face
hey all,

Just something from EE times. Seems like engineers make good field operatives.
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=207001533

--
with metta,
Shawn Tan

Aeste Works (M) Sdn Bhd - Engineering Elegance
http://www.aeste.net

2008\04\03@203609 by Cedric Chang

flavicon
face
As well as excelling in every other profession in the world.....
cc

>
> On Apr 3, 2008, at 6:16 PM, Shawn Tan wrote:
> hey all,
>
> Just something from EE times. Seems like engineers make good field  
> operatives.
> http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;?
> articleID=207001533
>
> --
> with metta,
> Shawn Tan
>
> Aeste Works (M) Sdn Bhd - Engineering Elegance
> http://www.aeste.net
> --

2008\04\04@095342 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Shawn Tan wrote:
> hey all,
>
> Just something from EE times. Seems like engineers make good field operatives.
> http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=207001533
>
>  
Of course. _Somebody_ in each organization needs to know how to ACTUALLY
do something.
Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer. That's why he  was able to
properly calculate  how
much effort was needed to take down the WTC. Of course, he is on the
other side, but if you want to
know how it happened: they got an engineer to do it. No surprise.

--Bob A

2008\04\04@100838 by David VanHorn

picon face
I'd like to see a few engineers in the house, senate, and oval office!

2008\04\04@101817 by Lloyd Sargent

flavicon
face
> Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer.


Lets clarify.

CIVIL ENGINEER

We now return you to your OT...

2008\04\04@104312 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Lloyd Sargent wrote:
>> Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer.
>>    
>
>
> Lets clarify.
>
> CIVIL ENGINEER
>
> We now return you to your OT...
>  
Are you sure about that? I read somewhere that he was taught engineering
in France.
In the US, a civil engineer only makes maps.

--Bob A

2008\04\04@105710 by Eoin Ross

flavicon
face
Civil engineering in NZ defines one that does things involved with building foundations/earthworks/construction etc.

Sounds like you're descibing a surveyor?

>>> spam_OUTengineerTakeThisOuTspamcotse.net 04 Apr 08 10:42:42 >>>
Lloyd Sargent wrote:
>> Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer.
>>    
>
>
> Lets clarify.
>
> CIVIL ENGINEER
>
> We now return you to your OT...
>  
Are you sure about that? I read somewhere that he was taught engineering
in France.
In the US, a civil engineer only makes maps.

--Bob A

2008\04\04@110102 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Apr 4, 2008, at 7:08 AM, David VanHorn wrote:
> I'd like to see a few engineers in the house, senate, and oval office!

Carter was educated as an engineer...

BillW

2008\04\04@112125 by Lloyd Sargent

flavicon
face

On Apr 4, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Bob Axtell wrote:

> Lloyd Sargent wrote:
>>> Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer.
>>>
>> CIVIL ENGINEER
>>
>> We now return you to your OT...
>>
> Are you sure about that? I read somewhere that he was taught  
> engineering
> in France.
> In the US, a civil engineer only makes maps.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

Okay, it is ALLEGED that he has ANYTHING remotely to do with  
engineering. But if it IS engineering, it is civil engineering.

Definition of civil engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_engineering

Basically his family made their fortune in construction and had  
intimate ties to the royal family.

It's good to be friends to the guy that's king!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family

Cheers,

Lloyd






2008\04\04@112334 by William Bross

picon face
Bob Axtell wrote:

{Quote hidden}

wrong Bob!  they only make targets!

Bill

2008\04\04@115834 by Peter Todd

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:08:36AM -0400, David VanHorn wrote:
> I'd like to see a few engineers in the house, senate, and oval office!

They're filled with engineering experts.

The they're designing is law, and we call law engineers lawyers.

- --
peter[:-1]@petertodd.org http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH9k8w3bMhDbI9xWQRArIVAKCFwORcCJVPKRVMpDlVttOCCOFtfQCgrlCI
X0e+BVsGKxAyYql1feA+coU=
=PINK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2008\04\04@124623 by David VanHorn

picon face
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Peter Todd <.....peteKILLspamspam@spam@petertodd.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:08:36AM -0400, David VanHorn wrote:
> > I'd like to see a few engineers in the house, senate, and oval office!
>
> They're filled with engineering experts.
>
> The they're designing is law, and we call law engineers lawyers.

Yeah..

Problem: Potholes in road
Solution:  Potholes now illegal.

2008\04\04@132022 by Peter Todd

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 12:46:13PM -0400, David VanHorn wrote:
{Quote hidden}

I think a lack of cross-training is a common problem in engineers... :)

- --
peter[:-1]@petertodd.org http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH9mG43bMhDbI9xWQRArHlAJsHmipwyXEceK1ClPsmzBUGIeuHmACglke7
/aD2SG3zKDI6MxYUpSqQQG4=
=erQa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2008\04\04@140341 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
>> The they're designing is law, and we call law engineers lawyers.

Now that is a branch of engineering that produces things that contain
even more bugs per line than software engineering!

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2008\04\04@151725 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
>Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer. That's why he  was able to
properly calculate  how much effort was needed to take down the WTC

Wait a second, is it just me or, wouldn't any engineers brain immediately
recognize that the towers would not possibly have come down in seen fashion
(within <15sec into their footprint against the path of most resistance)
for stated reasons (structural damage due to plane impact and weakened
supports because of ensuing fire), and therefore question the official
scapegoat story (Osama and the hijackers)???

Maybe that explains why engineers are now targeted by the system for not
shutting up and playing fascism with the regular mentally disenfranchised?


On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Bob Axtell <.....engineerKILLspamspam.....cotse.net> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2008\04\04@172340 by Cedric Chang

flavicon
face
If Osama took down the towers, it was as much by sheer luck as  
anything else.
cc

{Quote hidden}

>> --

2008\04\04@172448 by piclist

flavicon
face
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008, Tobias Gogolin wrote:
> >Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer. That's why he  was able to
> properly calculate  how much effort was needed to take down the WTC
>
> Wait a second, is it just me or, wouldn't any engineers brain immediately
> recognize that the towers would not possibly have come down in seen fashion
> (within <15sec into their footprint against the path of most resistance)
> for stated reasons (structural damage due to plane impact and weakened
> supports because of ensuing fire), and therefore question the official
> scapegoat story (Osama and the hijackers)???
>
> Maybe that explains why engineers are now targeted by the system for not
> shutting up and playing fascism with the regular mentally disenfranchised?

I doubt Osama did much calculation.  The idea "If we fly large passenger
jets loaded with fuel into important buildings at high speed it will cause
great physical, financial and emotional turmoil" doesn't take a lot of
brainpower to verify as pretty accurate.  I doubt he had any idea what
would actually happen to the buildings, although I bet he hoped they would
come down.

As for the collapse not due to being structually damaged by the planes and
then set on fire, I don't know what else would have caused it.  Earthquake?
Gravity waves?  Again, it seems pretty simple to me.  Big impact, explosion,
and intense fire caused a collapse.  

I don't see much evidence of any attacks on engineers other than the
normal ones.  Geeks vs jocks.  Science vs religion.  And the worst
of all.. ignorant managment vs bright engineers. :-)

--
Ian Smith

2008\04\04@181412 by Rich

picon face
I believe that Pol Pot, communist leader of the Khmer Rouge, was an
engineer.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouterspamspam_OUTvoti.nl>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <@spam@piclistKILLspamspammit.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Engineering terrorists?


{Quote hidden}

> --

2008\04\04@183134 by David VanHorn

picon face
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Rich <KILLspamrgrazia1KILLspamspamrochester.rr.com> wrote:
> I believe that Pol Pot, communist leader of the Khmer Rouge, was an
> engineer.

Well, he was pretty efficient at killing people.
Then again, maybe he wasn't a very good engineer.

Hitler was a painter, I really wish more people had bought his work!

2008\04\04@190212 by Enki

picon face
On 4 Apr 2008 at 17:24, RemoveMEpiclistTakeThisOuTspamian.org wrote:

> As for the collapse not due to being structually damaged by the planes and
> then set on fire, I don't know what else would have caused it.  Earthquake?
> Gravity waves?  Again, it seems pretty simple to me.  Big impact, explosion,
> and intense fire caused a collapse.  
>


       It's because you are not an Engineer.

       MJ

2008\04\04@193238 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
Enki wrote:
> On 4 Apr 2008 at 17:24, spamBeGonepiclistspamBeGonespamian.org wrote:
>
>  
>> As for the collapse not due to being structually damaged by the planes and
>> then set on fire, I don't know what else would have caused it.  Earthquake?
>> Gravity waves?  Again, it seems pretty simple to me.  Big impact, explosion,
>> and intense fire caused a collapse.  
>>
>>    
>
>
>        It's because you are not an Engineer.
>
>        MJ
>
>  
Or not a conspiracy nut.

2008\04\04@194630 by Peter Todd

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 08:01:51PM -0300, Enki wrote:
{Quote hidden}

http://www.debunking911.com/ is the best site I've seen debunking 911
conspiracy theories. Their front page photo is of a highly tilted south
tower coming down...

- --
peter[:-1]@petertodd.org http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH9rzB3bMhDbI9xWQRAlq0AJ93UfZ1rTpDp5QuOrKWrY+uHWrJsgCfWe6M
jA3AjgS+S13Dygw7TIO3gvw=
=9B9K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2008\04\04@215605 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
One must quite desperately want to protect ones trust in politicians and the
military industrial complex to overrule so many hints that something was big
time wrong on 911!
And I'm not talking about foreign terrorists...

I am surprised when otherwise pretty intelligent people start believing in
so many firsts...
Like the worlds first 3 steal frame buildings collapsing 'controlled
demolition style' leaving hot spots of molten metal at their base, which
doesn't even happen in cases of controlled demolition! And then they say
that magic jet fuel did it... I mean really they should do their math, even
if all of the energy contained in the provided fuel could have somehow been
aspired to create temperatures hot enough to melt steel, how much of the
steel required to bring down these towers could have been affected?
I recommend to those that can fathom deep skull and bones like conspiracies
to google ore Youtube 'Nuclear WTC' !


On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Peter Todd <RemoveMEpetespamTakeThisOuTpetertodd.org> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2008\04\04@224905 by Rich

picon face
WOW!! And I though only Rosie O'Donnell and her pack of political eccentrics
were the only ones who exceeded the present knowledge of thermodynamics.

{Original Message removed}

2008\04\05@133743 by Peter Todd

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:48:07PM -0400, Rich wrote:
> WOW!! And I though only Rosie O'Donnell and her pack of political eccentrics
> were the only ones who exceeded the present knowledge of thermodynamics.

And the whole point of that http://www.debunking911.com/ was a nice
insanely detailed step by step debunking of all of that stuff...

Actually I thought their debunking of the molten metal hotspots left
well after the collapse was really interesting. Basically, not only can
iron burn in oxygen, which is how cutting torches work after all, but in
the right conditions iron can burn in *air* and be self-sustaining. The
conditions being a lot of rods with enough surface area, yet being well
insulated enough to keep in heat, and a source of air. As the iron
oxidizes, forming iron oxide it literally sucks in more air as the
oxygen is used up by being bound to the iron. The reaction is exothermic
of course, and if the heat loss is low enough it's self-sustaining until
the supply of iron runs out. Since there is no CO(2) that needs to
escape, the ventilation requierments are a fair bit less stringent than
a typical fire. The debunking site doesn't mention it specificly IIRC,
but I guess you'd just have to let the remaining nitrogen content
diffuse outwards, or make-up oxygen diffuse inwards depending on your
point of view.

Iron can't bind to nitrogen correct?

{Quote hidden}

2008\04\05@183134 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
thats what fascist regimes always count on, that the reality is just too
outrageous to buy at the level of what is considered normal citizenry... its
the 'lie big' paradigm!

Anyhow, you would be bored to death if you where to wait for any building to
collapse because of fire!
Engineers know that rolled metal has something that is called a 'benign mode
of failure'! that is things bend before they fail! that takes energy and
time! Haven't seen other building fires that burned much longer? And now the
worlds first 3 highrises that fail just like controlled demolitions do! And
with so many benefits for the regime; but of course I understand, there are
so many that depend on economic structures (corporations) that are involved
and extract their wellbeing during hard times from the war that was sold!

Who really is interested to understand how all this works should watch the 3
hour documentary 'How Bankers control America' for example on youtube...


On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 3:39 AM, Peter Todd <RemoveMEpetespam_OUTspamKILLspampetertodd.org> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2008\04\05@183316 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
thats what fascist regimes always count on, that the reality is just too
outrageous to buy at the level of what is considered normal citizenry... its
the 'lie big' paradigm!

Anyhow, you would be bored to death if you where to wait for any building to
collapse because of fire!
Engineers know that rolled metal has something that is called a 'benign mode
of failure'! that is things bend before they fail! that takes energy and
time! Haven't seen other building fires that burned much longer? And now the
worlds first 3 highrises that fail just like controlled demolitions do! And
with so many benefits for the regime; but of course I understand, there are
so many that depend on economic structures (corporations) that are involved
and extract their wellbeing during hard times from the war that was sold!

Who really is interested to understand how all this works should watch the 3
hour documentary 'How Bankers control America' for example on youtube...


On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 3:39 AM, Peter Todd <RemoveMEpeteKILLspamspampetertodd.org> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2008\04\05@194241 by Jinx

face picon face
> Iron can't bind to nitrogen correct?

It can under certain circumstances (milling iron powder in an
ammonia or nitrogen atmosphere)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitride

"e.g iron nitride, Fe2N melts with decomposition at 200oC"

so I doubt you'd find much in the WTC environment

2008\04\05@202425 by Jinx

face picon face
> And the whole point of that http://www.debunking911.com/ was a
> nice insanely detailed step by step debunking of all of that stuff...

Just to stir it up up on a sunny Sunday

There has been much attention paid to the WTC and what happened
can be explained in accepted engineering practice and theory

However, I find the official explanation far from convincing of what
occured at the Pentagon. There are so many things which just don't
make sense. Things that could be put to rest quite easily by the
Pentagon

They can't or they won't ? That they released as "proof" some
grainy inconclusive pictures from the gas station across the road
for example. Gas station across the road ? Oh, come on

I've read web sites that claim to prove it really was a 757, but
even they gloss over these things

Here's a long and detailed opinion piece

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/boeing.htm


2008\04\05@212755 by Cedric Chang

flavicon
face
Hi Tobias

How do you feel about Occams razor ?
( Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle  
attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar  
William of Ockham )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

The U.S. is indeed controlled by a facist regime.
see definition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

It really matters very little if the WTC disaster was an exclusive  
Osama Bin Laden production or whether there was U.S. Government  
help.  The net result was that the sheeple population of America fell  
over themselves to give away more of their natural rights to their  
glorious leaders.  I would say the politicians in Washington should  
send a "thank you" letter to Osama.

cc
disclaimer: { the above comments are the opinion of Cedric Chang and  
while he believes that they reflect reality, more mature and  
reflective intellects may take Cedric to task for being too many  
sigmas away from the mean on the bell curve. }

{Quote hidden}

> --

2008\04\05@214705 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
I dont know what Ockham's razor got to do with anything?
Can simplicity be used to explain such a statistical impossibility as 3
world first occurrances in one day within eternity?

To hear Osama mentioned close to the cause of 911 by somebody who may
otherwise be proud of their intelligence is a joke!


On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Cedric Chang <spamBeGoneccspamKILLspamnope9.com> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2008\04\06@010131 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
Not overly pertinent to the larger theme of the thread, but
to some 'subtexts'.

> How do you feel about Occams razor ?
> ( Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a
> principle
> attributed to the 14th-century English logician and
> Franciscan friar
> William of Ockham )
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

When seeking to apply Occams razor to a subject care is
needed to not mistake what it is intended to mean compared
to the many subtle and not so subtle variants that hjave
arisen that can say quite different things. In essence
Occams Razor is the opinion that "If there are a number of
theories that are equally good at apparently explaining an
observation you may as well use the simplest one initially".

- This is only an opinion (although it may be a useful one).
- It does not say that there is any indication that the
theory you choose has a better chance of being right than
others (although it may).

Simplicity is often an indicator of elegance. But sometimes
its mainly just an indicator of simplicity.
__________

> The U.S. is indeed controlled by a facist regime.
> see definition
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

The part of ther articel that is most appropriate [IMHO
[tm]] in this context is

        the term fascist is often a slur, used by adherents
of
       some ideologies to describe their opponents

ie while there are a number of elements of the definition
that match quite well, the difference between the current US
system, notwithstanding it's apparent directions and the
undoubted failings that it does have, and that implemented
by eg Benito Musslini are as day and night respectively.
While there are many in the US who may SEEK to be Fascist,
who wish to be Fascist and who work against the directions
of democracy as a whole, Mussolinis system had none of the
remedies available to the US citizenry at present.
_______________

{Quote hidden}

Some while ago I read through engineering comments on the
'tube and shell' design of theWTC buildings. Included in the
available material was the original designers comments on
how substantially different it was from what had been done
in all but a few cases and gave a good idea of how advanced
they thought the scheme was. I conclude that comparisons
with other types of construction are less apposite than may
be apparent.

I  have not overly concerned myself with the details of the
conspiracy theories*over the WTC events. There are many
capable intelligent people doing that already. I have read
enough to believe that there are grave doubts either way but
that simplistic "it must be right because of these facts
..." explanations are far from certain. I would not be
overly surprised if the government-complicity theories are
correct, but I would be rather less surprised if they are
not. Such things are really beyond the certain
determination  of anyone who is not prepared to make it
their life's mission to find the truth.

But, fwiw, Occam says that, for now, you may as well assume
that OBL & co did it as claimed.



       Russell


[[*Note that conspiracy theories may or may not be correct -
the term is not a perjorative although it is usually used
that way. For example, not too many years ago some
conspiracy theorists started talking about secret
international flights of small long range aircraft between
the US and other nations on top secret government business
which was alleged to involved the transportation of
prosioners to locations where they could be interviewed or
tortured or killed without the protection and limitations of
US law. Such material was "conspiracy theory" of the wildest
sort. It is now public knowledge that the theories were
correct.]]



2008\04\06@051518 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
> On Apr 4, 2008, at 7:08 AM, David VanHorn wrote:
>> I'd like to see a few engineers in the house, senate, and
>> oval office!

> Carter was educated as an engineer...

'Habitat for humanity' seems to have benefited greatly.


       Russell


2008\04\06@051518 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
>> Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer.

> Lets clarify.
> CIVIL ENGINEER

There's no such thing as a civil engineer!


       Russell

2008\04\06@051519 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
> rolled metal has something that is called a 'benign mode
> of failure'!

Not on Google it isn't.
6 hits for that phrase, and none use it as a descriptive
phrase in its own right as implied above.

The closest is arguably this NASA paper related to
transverse matrix cracking in wood composites.

In order to be able to comment with any credibility on the
WTC failure modes you need, at least, to have acquainted
yourself with the nearly unique construction methods used -
common to only a very few other buildings - all also pushing
the limits of conventional design capability. Conspiracy
theories are sometimes correct, but, right or wrong, they
have a more convincing ring when based on a demonstrably
factual foundation.


       Russell.




2008\04\06@090051 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Apptech wrote:

{Quote hidden}

As such, even though it seems on-topic here and is used every so often,
Occam's Razor seems to be part of the non-provables that are not part of
what's on topic on this list. The only "provable" Occam's Razor seems to
provide is that the simpler theory is simpler. Duh :)  The rest is
"unprovable" and mere opinion (Occam's or the Razor's invoker's).

Besides: the "other things being equal" or being "equally good" usually
already contains a lot of opinion. There is rarely a broad consensus that
two not (yet) falsified theories are "equally good" -- and if they're not,
Occam's Razor doesn't apply. It's a principle that one can apply for
oneself subjectively, but not really in an "objective" manner.

Gerhard

2008\04\06@121430 by Cedric Chang

flavicon
face

> __________
>
>> The U.S. is indeed controlled by a facist regime.
>> see definition
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
>
>
I am dismayed by the fact that you acknowledge there are a number of  
elements of the fascist definition that fit the U.S. governance, and  
then proceed to say it is like night and day.  How does that  
follow ?   It is more like twilight in the long decline of the U.S.  
experiment to announce and protect the rights of individuals.  U.S.  
governance is also socialistic and imperialistic ; notwithstanding  
that those terms may also be considered slurs.  And do remember that  
Germany in the 1930s was a democracy.
IMHO [tm]  has always been a tongue-in-cheek acronym which really  
means IMPCO [tmn].

cc
disclaimer: { the above comments are the opinion of Cedric Chang and  
while he believes that they reflect reality, more mature and  
reflective intellects may take Cedric to task for being too many  
sigmas away from the mean on the bell curve. }


{Quote hidden}

2008\04\06@134324 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Apr 6, 2008, at 2:15 AM, Apptech wrote:
> WTC failure modes

Unprecedented type of attack on uniquely constructed building yields  
never-before-seen failure mode.  This is supposed to make engineers  
highly suspicious?

Actually, I'd like to see "conspiracy theories" added to the list of  
things forbidden to "discuss" on PICList...

BillW

2008\04\06@182505 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
> On Apr 6, 2008, at 2:15 AM, Apptech wrote:
>> WTC failure modes
>
> Unprecedented type of attack on uniquely constructed
> building yields
> never-before-seen failure mode.  This is supposed to make
> engineers
> highly suspicious?

Note that your quoting me in that manner appears to make me
say the opposite of what I did.

But, no, the above should help make engineers less
suspicious. The material about very high temperature steel
being removed from the building weeks after the event may be
better fodder for consideration. Again, one needs a suitable
factual basis before even material like that should be
allowed to arouse more than suspicion. While the material
that I have read says that this is totally unexpected in the
claimed circumstances, I have not heard any opinion from
experts in related areas. While it does seem strange to me
that near molten steep should exist at any stage in the
process, it's not inconceivable that it may have been and
therefore would need expert comment.

> Actually, I'd like to see "conspiracy theories" added to
> the list of
> things forbidden to "discuss" on PICList...

The unfortunate thing about conspiracy theories is that a
certain proportion of them turn out to be partially or
almost correct. While one can indeed get swamped by the
majority rubbish ones, totally excluding them from
consideration leads to loss of data. Which is not always a
bad thing :-). An example of a subsequently confirmed
conspiracy theory is my previously cited CIA "Rendition"
flights all over the world. An example of a rubbish one
which gave it's commercial makers much capital and has done
much harm is the "Apollo Moon landings never happened"
claims. For the latter, competently explain away the still
visible lunar LASER-targetable corner reflectors, still
happily returning visible reflections on demand, before
proceeding to the other claims.


       Russell



2008\04\06@185501 by Rich

picon face
Ha Ha.  I wonder how civil would apply to his ideology?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Apptech" <.....apptechspamRemoveMEparadise.net.nz>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <RemoveMEpiclistspamspamBeGonemit.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2008 5:02 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] Engineering terrorists?


>>> Osama Bin Laden was trained as an engineer.
>
>> Lets clarify.
>> CIVIL ENGINEER
>
> There's no such thing as a civil engineer!
>
>
>        Russell
>
> --

2008\04\08@004942 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
> Unprecedented type of attack on uniquely constructed building yields
never-before-seen failure mode.  This is supposed to make engineers
highly suspicious?

Yes and what about WTC7? There was no airplane attack on that 47 story
building and it went down in the classic controlled demolition style!
You should not need more than one of these wakeup "Aha's" to doubt the whole
official story!
Its a question of honor for engineers to be above the unwitting when it
comes to the manipulation dosed out to the masses!


On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 10:43 AM, William Chops Westfield <spamBeGonewestfw@spam@spamspam_OUTmac.com>
wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2008\04\08@023936 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Apr 6, 2008, at 3:24 PM, Apptech wrote:
>> On Apr 6, 2008, at 2:15 AM, Apptech wrote:
>>> WTC failure modes
>>
>> Unprecedented type of attack on uniquely constructed building  
>> yields never-before-seen failure mode.  This is supposed to make  
>> engineers highly suspicious?
>
> Note that your quoting me in that manner appears to make me
> say the opposite of what I did.

Oops.  I meant to remove the attribution entirely, since I was  
interjecting a comment into a thread that had a lot of people  
involved.  Sorry.


> the above should help make engineers less suspicious.

Which is what I meant to imply.


> The unfortunate thing about conspiracy theories is that a certain  
> proportion of them turn out to be partially or almost correct.  ...  
> An example of a subsequently confirmed  conspiracy theory is my  
> previously cited CIA "Rendition" flights all over the world.

I never read any of those particular conspiracy theories ahead of  
time.  My general impression is that in the case where part of a  
conspiracy theory is shown to be true, the theorists "conveniently  
forget" some of the more off-the-wall pieces of the theory, pointing  
only to the parts that were shown to be true or partially true.  Do  
you happen to recall enough about the theory vs the subsequent true  
revelations in this case (or any other?)

BillW


2008\04\08@032256 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
>> Unprecedented type of attack on uniquely constructed
>> building yields
> never-before-seen failure mode.  This is supposed to make
> engineers
> highly suspicious?

> Yes and what about WTC7? There was no airplane attack on
> that 47 story
> building and it went down in the classic controlled
> demolition style!
> You should not need more than one of these wakeup "Aha's"
> to doubt the whole
> official story!

> Its a question of honor for engineers to be above the
> unwitting when it
> comes to the manipulation dosed out to the masses!

Something like that.
BUT, that includes not just taking apparent discrepancies
and assuming they are real ones.

Consider as an excellent example the utter rubbish Fox TV
"expose" that proves the Apollo Lunar landings never
occurred. It includes many ' wakeup "Aha's" ' - that doesn't
make it true in any form whatsoever - just shows that while
'wakeup "Aha's" ' may wake one up one should then use one's
wakefulness to investigate and not just run with the now
woken herd.

Are there sufficiently competent "experts" who claim that
the WTC7 destruction was essentially impossible in the
circumstances? Are there other equally competent "experts"
who claim the opposite. [I would be somewhat surprised if
there were not both]. Have they got together to thrash out a
conclusion? Is there a suitably erudite and peer reviewed
report on their conclusions? Why not? / please provide web
reference or email me a copy.

Here is a fairly one sides technical paper that discusses
the energy aspects of the collapse.
MHT format.

PDF        others.servebeer.com/misc/physics911.pdf
MHT        http://others.servebeer.com/misc/physics911.mht

Note that in this unashamedly biased paper it is stated that
the owner of WTC7 acknowledged in a documentary that he had
decided to do a controlled demolition on the badly damaged
building and that this "fact" was not widely subsequently
reported.

Viz: Page 2 of the above -

///    (Occasionally, the media slips up.  One noted
instance is in the case of WTC7 where in a Sept. 2002 PBS
documentary "Rebuilding America, A Year at Ground Zero,"
Larry Silverstein, the leaseholder of the WTC
complex,  admitted that he and the NYFD made the decision to
"pull" the badly damaged WTC7:  i.e., to
bring down the building in a controlled demolition [Ref.
(14)]. To the author's knowledge, the major media
have yet to comment on Silverstein's statement that directly
refutes the FEMA report on the WTC7
collapse).
///

Is this true?
Is it well documented?
Is it counter-claimed as part of the greater conspiracy
claims?

I don't know. But it shows that vast care is needed in
arriving at conclusions and that the obvious may indeed be
far from the actual, but not always in the direction that
one expects.

Gargoyle the following for comments on this

   PBS september 2002 wtc7 controlled demolition

FWIW:
1.    I suggest that Occams Razor indicates that the
preferable theory is that it was a controlled demolition
arranged by the WTC site leaseholder.
2.    Occam's Razor has no monopoly on the truth.



       Russell



2008\04\08@104446 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Tobias Gogolin wrote:
>> Unprecedented type of attack on uniquely constructed building yields
>>    
> never-before-seen failure mode.  This is supposed to make engineers
> highly suspicious?
>
> Yes and what about WTC7? There was no airplane attack on that 47 story
> building and it went down in the classic controlled demolition style!
>  
It was my opinion several years ago that the owner of building 7 decided
to demolish BLDG7
once it was seen that BLDG7 would have no economic value without the
main structures,
and did this himself.

--Bob A

2008\04\08@163845 by James Newton

face picon face
I was once very concerned with the facts about WTC7

Now, I have seen a large body of evidence that convinces me the building WAS
hit very hard by one of the towers on the side opposite the standard
pictures you are shown and was about to come down with or with out any
fires. The fires were also NOT minor, but from the outside, may have
appeared to be so.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm is a very good site with most of the
facts.

--
James.

{Original Message removed}

2008\04\08@201411 by Paul Hutchinson

picon face
Good reference James, another one I like for the Larry Silverstein "Pull it"
quote is:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/larrysilverstein%27s%22pullit%22quote

I expect there will be an increase in the conspiracy theories about WTC 7
over the next few months. The draft of the NIST WTC 7 report is due out this
July and the final report should come this fall. Once the report is out, it
will be much harder to get people on board with the conspiracy theories. Of
course the 9/11 conspiracy theorists will never go away, recently I stumbled
across a new conspiracy theory for the President Lincoln assassination,
sigh.

Paul Hutch

> {Original Message removed}

2008\04\08@211146 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
> Of
> course the 9/11 conspiracy theorists will never go away,
> recently I stumbled
> across a new conspiracy theory for the President Lincoln
> assassination,
> sigh.

Great caution is required as a certain percentage of
conspiracy theories are true. How much this matters depends
on the percentage and the importance of the subject. For
example, the Lincoln assassination theory PROBABLY has no
great relevance to day to day life or our future regardless
of its truth.

I have several times cited the CIA "Rendition" conspiracy
theory of a few years back.

   Conspiracy theory:    The CIA are operating a small
fleet of long range jet aircraft and ferrying prisoners all
over the world to countries where the limitations placed by
US law do not apply and where due process relates mainly to
being due to be processed. This process is being carried out
with the full or partial knowledge of other governments who
are not directly involved but who let the aircraft concern
transit their airspace invisibly to the normal aviation
system and with no records kept.
   Comment:   Sounds like one of the more far out ones
about US government activity.

   Status:    True essentially as claimed as was
subsequently publicly proven and generally acknowledged.

One Swallow doth not a summer make, and the occasional
positive proof does not give merit to the many many many
spurious claims that people make. But keeping a weather eye
on the claims that would matter most if true is probably
advisable. Now, take the IPCC ... :-)




       Russell

2008\04\08@212506 by John Gardner

picon face
Russell -

You're wasting your time in Lotus Land  :)

Not that I blame you ...

Jack

On 4/8/08, Apptech <TakeThisOuTapptechspamspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2008\04\08@223139 by Tobias Gogolin

picon face
Im frightened by the prevalence of people that take any shortcut to thinking
for themselves, people that overcome their doubts because of  brown peer
pressure, and people that buy into the stereotypes projected by the
liberally corporate media that has replaced government that paints humans
brave enough to speak up with scarewords like 'conspiracy loons' and then
takes you to lala land with false moonlandings alien ufo coverups, etc. ...
The average beer bozo then is distracted enough to take the bait and go on
about Lincoln, Kennedy and you name it whatever far from the issue at hand!
Fascism!

Hey I reviewed it again today who can argue it more bullet prove and
impartial then 'Architects and Engineers for 911 truth' with "How The Towers
Fell"

Watch it if you are ready to know the Matrix!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3118021782753292874



On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:38 PM, James Newton <jamesnewtonEraseMEspammassmind.org>
wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> {Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2008 , 2009 only
- Today
- New search...