Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Huh? ...... Original Message ....... On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 18:26:42 -0400 Walt Johnson <walt@waltjohnson.com> wrote: >So it really was an earthquake engineered by the ghost of the Ayatollah >which caused us to get even with Sadamm? > >B. D. Colen wrote: > >>Hey there, Walt, climb out of your black helicopter...:-) >>You actually ought to find that PBS show somewhere; it's fascinating, >>impressive, and quite moving. What they claim happened is, as others have >>pointed out, the central core of the building wasn't protected from the >>intense heat; a series of support girders weren't anchored at either end, >>but were simply resting in place. Apparently as the intense heat built up in >>the area surrounding the crash and explosion, the girders began to sag in >>the middle, and since they weren't welded at the ends, they collapsed >>downward, causing floor upon floor to collapse, all the way down - which is >>said to explain the fact that the towers went straight down as they did. >> >>I'm afraid that this really is a story about exploding cigars, rather than >>anything unusually sinister. >> >>Now, if you want to start talking about the incredible "coincidence" that >>there was an "exercise" going on on the morning of 9/11, and that the >>"exercise" explains why it took so damn long for planes to scramble, that's >>a discussion worth having - but probably off-line or over on the Forum, and >>not here. >> >> >> >>On 6/23/06 3:51 PM, "Walt Johnson" <walt@waltjohnson.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>>Henning >>> >>>You can logic chop it to death but try to explain it. Both towers within >>>minutes and from different impacts? Try an unsimplistic analysis on us >>>just for kicks but lay off the earthquakes and other very unrelated >>>events. Any time there is a disaster the nut cases float to the top and >>>scream government cover-up. There is a world of difference between a >>>successful cover-up and spoon feeding the population their morning dose >>>of stupid cereal. But given the list of failed cover up just in my >>>lifetime could we be faulted for mistrusting the official line? >>> >>>Walt >>> >>>Henning Wulff wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>>In a message dated 6/23/06 4:36:53 AM, lug-request@leica-users.org >>>>>writes: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I was amazed at how fast they both came down. Plane crash or no, there >>>>>> is something not quite kosher about the twin and simultaneous >>>>>>collapse. >>>>>> >>>>>> Walt >>>>>> ----------------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>The architect in charge of construction admitted on TV that they >>>>>failed to >>>>>encase the center utilities column, in concrete. They used drywall. >>>>>The plane >>>>>shot right through the entire building. There was nothing to stop it. >>>>>Yep, they >>>>>cut corners and there was no municipal or state law to compel them to >>>>>spend >>>>>the money and take the time to do the job right. >>>>> >>>>>Bob >>>>> >>>>> >>>>As an architect I have to say that is both a silly and definitely a >>>>simplistic analysis. >>>> >>>>The towers were not designed for such an impact, and certainly had no >>>>reason to be. >>>> >>>>You can never design any building to withstand all disasters. You can >>>>not design it both because the depth of knowledge does not exist nor >>>>does the imagination exist, the technology and construction methods do >>>>not exist, and, most importantly, you cannot afford to by orders of >>>>magnitude. >>>> >>>>If a serious earthquake hits the central US (and it will, just like it >>>>has in the past) tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of >>>>lives will be lost. If an earthquake of the magnitude of the '64 >>>>Alaska quake hit Vancouver (and it will), tens of thousands of lives >>>>will be lost. >>>> >>>>These are disasters we can imagine, and that will happen. We don't >>>>know when, but they will. We have the technology to prepare for them >>>>and to design for them, but the standards don't force the construction >>>>of buildings that will truly resist these disasters, because a) we >>>>cannot afford them - again, we are talking of orders of magnitude, not >>>>2x or 5x the cost- and b) everything around them, the whole >>>>infrastructure, is gone so to have a building withstand them is almost >>>>pointless. >>>> >>>>We make choices, based on our knowledge, technologies, economic >>>>abilities and lifespan timelines. These are not irrational choices, >>>>but it does mean that every once in a while something bites us. We >>>>learn a bit each time, but just as we have to stop searching for the >>>>perfect lens, and go out and shoot, we also have to build, live, and >>>>get on with life. We definitely have to get over the 'what if' >>>>syndrome at some point. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Leica Users Group. >>>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Leica Users Group. >>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information ___ Sent from handheld device. Please forgive any typos or spelling errors.