Post by praetor on Aug 14, 2015 10:50:15 GMT -6
I've been watching, if not catching up to, the 9/11 theories, conspiracy theoris, debates and the likes to understand what happened and it seems there is underlying evidence that something happened, not in the obvious sense...but in the sense that those few that show what happened behind 9/11 is akin to a behind the scenes of an elaborate movie, the planning, the staging, the extras the chosen actors, the timing it took and the expanse of it all, to carry it all out. what really grabbed me is what initialized the whole disaster...the plane hitting the building. I am in no way a scientist, physicist or an engineer of any sort, as a matter of fact i hold no credentials.
but i'm somewhat knowledgable in the basics of some metalurgy. I was training to become a machinist, I trained for three years and didn't finish my apprenticeship because i was offered a City job at the time...but i did accumalate my own machine tools to make my own home machine shop, and have been doing machining as an enthusiast, for 20 years, since then. While training, as an apprentice I've gotten to know metals, how to harden them, test for hardness using the rockwell method and learned of other metals ferrite and non ferrite (all soft metals) and personally feel that Dr. Judy Woods' only credibility is in her methodology of investigation, and would like the same methodology to be used to research the type of planes used in all of the attack (including shanksville), don't just see a plane for what it is, see it for how it's made, put together, and it's structural integrity (you'd be surprised how thin the skin is), then use the same method for sky scrapers, just to get a real understanding of the physics involved, specially when considering these two feats of engineering colliding together.
in the enclosed video, take note of the jagged barriers, what are the obvious difference between the WTC structures and said barriers? can anyone see any other inconsistencies, hopefully obvious?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWuvGoKdWFM
a test: look at your hands, splay your fingers apart, and lay one over the other, to cross fingers leaving "checkered" openings, now imagine trying to push an aluminum can through, never mind your hands being made of flesh, imagine they were steel cross bracings, do you think the can will go right through, the cross bracing are just the fascia structures, this isn't even getting to the center of the structural beams, and all.
and why have all structural models are, for the most part, computer generated? these are what Hollywood and video game creators rely on as their bread and butter, the manipulation of characters and scenery to achieve their ultimate goal, a believable scene undecipherable (and cool), from reality how about building an actual scaled down partial model of both the WTC towers and all structural framing followed by a scale down model of an all aluminum airliner? it doesn't even have to fly, just made in a replica and able to impact scale down partial structure of building. real, true to life modeling to test a hypothesis?
but i'm somewhat knowledgable in the basics of some metalurgy. I was training to become a machinist, I trained for three years and didn't finish my apprenticeship because i was offered a City job at the time...but i did accumalate my own machine tools to make my own home machine shop, and have been doing machining as an enthusiast, for 20 years, since then. While training, as an apprentice I've gotten to know metals, how to harden them, test for hardness using the rockwell method and learned of other metals ferrite and non ferrite (all soft metals) and personally feel that Dr. Judy Woods' only credibility is in her methodology of investigation, and would like the same methodology to be used to research the type of planes used in all of the attack (including shanksville), don't just see a plane for what it is, see it for how it's made, put together, and it's structural integrity (you'd be surprised how thin the skin is), then use the same method for sky scrapers, just to get a real understanding of the physics involved, specially when considering these two feats of engineering colliding together.
in the enclosed video, take note of the jagged barriers, what are the obvious difference between the WTC structures and said barriers? can anyone see any other inconsistencies, hopefully obvious?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWuvGoKdWFM
a test: look at your hands, splay your fingers apart, and lay one over the other, to cross fingers leaving "checkered" openings, now imagine trying to push an aluminum can through, never mind your hands being made of flesh, imagine they were steel cross bracings, do you think the can will go right through, the cross bracing are just the fascia structures, this isn't even getting to the center of the structural beams, and all.
and why have all structural models are, for the most part, computer generated? these are what Hollywood and video game creators rely on as their bread and butter, the manipulation of characters and scenery to achieve their ultimate goal, a believable scene undecipherable (and cool), from reality how about building an actual scaled down partial model of both the WTC towers and all structural framing followed by a scale down model of an all aluminum airliner? it doesn't even have to fly, just made in a replica and able to impact scale down partial structure of building. real, true to life modeling to test a hypothesis?