Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: **LosseChange::Debunk it??**
From: "Pete Simpson" <Pete.Simpson () clearswift com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:09:10 +0100
Paul, Again I will simply say, refute the data, the principles or the logic. Furthermore 'ad hominem' attacks just diminish your position. -----Original Message----- From: full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk [mailto:full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk] On Behalf Of Paul Schmehl Sent: 17 May 2006 15:58 Cc: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Pete Simpson wrote:
Paul, Of all people you surprise me with this dishonest trick of argument - appeal to authority. Challenge either the data, the principles or the logic.
Oh spare me. "Appeal to authority"? What a joke. You can read the analysis yourself. It's publicly available. Dr. Thomas Eager, a materials and structural engineer at MIT was one of the experts who examined the towers' collapse. Here's some of his thoughts: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html Much, much more here. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
The buildings 1,2 and 7 fell at near free fall time 10 seconds. Any undergraduate should be able to calculate the minimum time for pancake
collapse as at least 90 seconds.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/dyk.html "Each building collapsed in about ten seconds, hitting the ground with an estimated speed of about 125 miles per hour." "The collapse was a near free-fall. With no restraint, the collapse would have taken eight seconds and would have impacted at about 185 miles per hour." My goodness. Looks like your calculations are wrong. [snipped most of the foolishness]
One simple, physically-feasible mechanism for each floor to present no
resistance to the floors falling from above was for each floor to fail
due to explosive charges timed to coincide precisely with the fall of the floor above. This is known as a 'controlled demolition' and when planned and executed correctly results in an orderly destruction, so that the building collapses on its own footprint in near free-fall time, as did the WTC Twin Towers.
Sure, Pete. All we have to believe is that an entire crew of workers, working for weeks, carefully planted explosive charges in the right places, concealing all the evidence of same and ***not being seen by anyone who questioned their presence*** IN BOTH TOWERS, hauling in tons of high explosives and wiring and detonators, etc., etc., drilling through concrete without being noticed and running all these wires out to a hidden location without anyone seeing anything and then waiting for two planes to hit the buildings so they could detonate their charges without anyone noticing what they were up to. I'm surprised that you would be so gullible. -- Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ .edu/ir/security/ Clearswift monitors, controls and protects all its messaging traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy using Clearswift products. Find out more about Clearswift, its solutions and services at http://www.clearswift.com This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Clearswift. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Clearswift by emailing support () clearswift com quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. Clearswift accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the Clearswift domain. This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including computer viruses. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??**, (continued)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** ducki3 (May 16)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** ducki3 (May 16)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Valdis . Kletnieks (May 16)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** bruen (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Paul Schmehl (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** bkfsec (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** c0ntex (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Paul Schmehl (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Paul Schmehl (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Valdis . Kletnieks (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Paul Schmehl (May 17)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Ducki3 (May 18)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** c0ntex (May 18)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Paul Schmehl (May 18)
- Re: **LosseChange::Debunk it??** Ducki3 (May 18)