User Controls
Indians successfully stress-test bridge
-
2022-11-02 at 7:28 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Hate to break it to you 3DMAX master but copy/pasting crap you read on the interwebs does not = you knowing what the fuck you are talking about in relation to structural engineering (or anything else for that matter).
Stick to Uber eats girlfirend and night classes for 3Dmax
I didn't copy and paste anything. That's just basic info. the technical shit is actually on some of the pages. I didn't say I was an expert but you're clearly using this trope to mock me. British are such cunts and full of snarky rhetoric feed so that just goes with your nature I suppose.
however, I placed his link in there.
Also 3000 Architect Engineers are saying the same basic shit. You don't have to know shit about drafting or CAD work to know up and close load measurements and the material ratings for -x pressure and weight limits and capability.
I didn't say I was even an expert in CAD design. I just said I understand some of the plugins that come with it that measure limitations and there are tutorials on how to use them which use calculations to inform you at what point will something snap and be catastrophic if you apply the same pressures to a real-life scenario.
also I realize that some steel has flaws. some materials like granite has flaws. there are hairline fractures that may not show up until after they're welded in and are nearly impossible to replace with everything on top of it. so they often go in and mend an existing weld.
one example was the Salesforce Terminal in San Francisco. Nothing wrong with the terminal or the skyscraper but the outdoor man-made green belt was built on a road bridge-like structure for foot traffic and trees and outdoor park space. and several of the steel cross members had fractured. they were just about to open it up and had to remove them and replace them out which was a fucking nightmare and took several years. 2 days from opening the park and it got shut down for several years. things like this will happen. but also if these are weak points, then it's even more likely those weak points would have failed faster and caused a repositioning in the direction of fail which would also slow down the failure by angular-deprivation. causing it to turn and move in a different direction.
I thought you understood basic cad work in your designs of making parts or tools.
Yes these are things I learned and read about. not just pasta-party it into a thread -
2022-11-02 at 7:38 PM UTCA skyscraper 40 stories tall and the size of a city block decides to spontaneously implode in on itself, at free fall speed (recorded on multiple video cameras), but was never hit by a plane. hahaha If you believe that mindless crap, you deserve everything coming to you! But, hey, save your cockamamie bullshit for someone who's buying!
-
2022-11-02 at 8:15 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ A skyscraper 40 stories tall and the size of a city block decides to spontaneously implode in on itself, at free fall speed (recorded on multiple video cameras), but was never hit by a plane. hahaha If you believe that mindless crap, you deserve everything coming to you! But, hey, save your cockamamie bullshit for someone who's buying!
dude it was hit by several of the steel beams from both Twin tower 1 and 2.
several floors got a steel beam shot right into it like it was coming out of a cannon. this is what is truly strange and goes back to the twin towers. the building just falling wouldn't cause beams to be arched up and out as was shown by some of the Architect for 9/11. I think Cage was one of the people who showed this. -
2022-11-02 at 8:27 PM UTC
Originally posted by slide22 I didn't copy and paste anything. That's just basic info.
What you typed has absolutely nothing to do with how and why a building might collapse...You are totally unqualified to make any determination as to the cause of a buildings collapse..regardless of your night school 3dmax classes (fucking lol @ citing that). 100% of the crap conspiracy nuts cite on this subject is copy pasted or garnered from some other conspiracy nut site...who desperately cite 1 or 2 equally nutty engineers who disagree with the THOUSANDS of engineers who have already debunked the nutty theories.
Your info is horseshit based on conspiracy theory and wrong science. -
2022-11-02 at 8:30 PM UTC
-
2022-11-02 at 8:32 PM UTC"A group of engineers and architects is demanding the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) retract and correct a 2008 report that concluded one of three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel supporting it in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911T) " /snip
Get the fuck oudda here... -
2022-11-02 at 8:32 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson What you typed has absolutely nothing to do with how and why a building might collapse…You are totally unqualified to make any determination as to the cause of a buildings collapse..regardless of your night school 3dmax classes (fucking lol @ citing that). 100% of the crap conspiracy nuts cite on this subject is copy pasted or garnered from some other conspiracy nut site…who desperately cite 1 or 2 equally nutty engineers who disagree with the THOUSANDS of engineers who have already debunked the nutty theories.
Your info is horseshit based on conspiracy theory and wrong science.
Oh so only your sources are valid, heard -
2022-11-02 at 8:35 PM UTCJiggaboo thinks Epstein killed himself.
-
2022-11-02 at 8:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by I Live In Your Crawlspace Secretly4 Oh so only your sources are valid, heard
I'll take 1000+ structural engineers opinion over 3 crazy structural engineers opinion every day of the week...as well as common sense.
If the gov wanted the building destroyed they wouldn't have to cover it up...all they'd have to say was "Yeah we evacuated and brought it down because it was posing a risk to first responders"...
Zero need to create a denial cover up -
2022-11-02 at 8:38 PM UTC
-
2022-11-02 at 8:45 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson I'll take 1000+ structural engineers opinion over 3 crazy structural engineers opinion every day of the week…as well as common sense.
If the gov wanted the building destroyed they wouldn't have to cover it up…all they'd have to say was "Yeah we evacuated and brought it down because it was posing a risk to first responders"…
Zero need to create a denial cover up
Nah man that would have been sus, pretty sure saying they blew up a building with people in it, to save fireman lives doesn't make much sense . But more power to you bud -
2022-11-02 at 8:49 PM UTC
Originally posted by I Live In Your Crawlspace Secretly4 Nah man that would have been sus, pretty sure saying they blew up a building with people in it, to save fireman lives doesn't make much sense . But more power to you bud
there were no causalities in Building 7...civilian or responders..it had been evacuated long before it fell.
It was just an empty building...again zero reason to lie about bringing it down if indeed they did bring it down...a "it posed a risk" is a perfectly reasonable explanation. -
2022-11-02 at 8:54 PM UTCDon't go editing a facepalm in , you yellow bellyThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2022-11-02 at 8:55 PM UTC
-
2022-11-02 at 8:57 PM UTCOkay I can see you want to get into an argument, have fun with that
-
2022-11-02 at 8:59 PM UTC
-
2022-11-02 at 9:12 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson there were no causalities in Building 7…civilian or responders..it had been evacuated long before it fell.
It was just an empty building…again zero reason to lie about bringing it down if indeed they did bring it down…a "it posed a risk" is a perfectly reasonable explanation.
It was two city blocks from impact... -
2022-11-03 at 12:21 AM UTC
Originally posted by slide22 dude it was hit by several of the steel beams from both Twin tower 1 and 2.
Not true at all. There is no such evidence. There is evidence of sporadic fires on one side of the tower, but not nearly enough to take down a 40-story, steel-reinforced, block-wide, built to withstand a hit by a passenger plane, building. And even IF a few support columns managed to hit it on the one side, which there is zero evidence of, that STILL wouldn't be enough to bring the entire building down in one single mass at free fall speed. Just ain't never gonna happen. Also, the penthouse, which is located in the center of the building, is filmed sinking into the building seconds before the actual collapse. You'd need explosive detonations for that to happen. There's no other way. The BBC also reported live that WTC7 had fallen just minutes before it actually fell. . No, WTC7 was indeed a controlled demolition, and therefore we know the other two towers were as well. Bush's approval rating was in the toilet, and they had their "7 nations in 7 years plan", so they murdered over 3,000 Americans to fix everything, and they got clean away with it. -
2022-11-03 at 1:55 AM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson I'll take 1000+ structural engineers opinion over 3 crazy structural engineers opinion every day of the week…as well as common sense.
If the gov wanted the building destroyed they wouldn't have to cover it up…all they'd have to say was "Yeah we evacuated and brought it down because it was posing a risk to first responders"…
Zero need to create a denial cover up
Talk about me in a sarcastic tone "that makes you qualified" yet who are you? -
2022-11-03 at 2:04 AM UTCSo I'm just focusing on 1 and 2 and asking how?
As far pentagon goes why no defence missile?
The only side to not get upgraded with Kevlar and reinforcement. 80 plus civilians and 55 navy/army sacrificed by mic, conflict of interest of a proxy war based off of a false WMD and contract deals, ignore Sauds payed for it
