From: Howard Engelskirchen (howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM)
Date: Mon Apr 16 2007 - 23:58:58 EDT
Hi Allin, Since no doubt you did not find my Lego physics disquieting, try this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003 Howard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allin Cottrell" <cottrell@WFU.EDU> To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 8:15 PM Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Just how corrupt are the Bush Republicans? > On Sun, 1 Apr 2007, Howard Engelskirchen wrote: > > > Hi Allin, > > > > I have thought the focus on conspiracy was always a diversion > > from getting sensible information about a mass homicide. Why > > was the crime scene not subject to a really searching forensic > > examination? > > That's a good question. I don't know the answer. > > > But put that aside. Since you have explored the issues can you > > please explain to me how these three buildings fell to their > > footprint... > > Baically, no, I don't claim to have the expertise. If you have an > hour to spare you could listen to the podcast on the Popular > Mechanics site and see what you think. > > I will say one thing that I gathered from that site. It seems the > World Trade (WT) towers were of a unique construction, unlike > other Manhattan skyscrapers. They were build around a central > core, with tubular steel supports on the outside of the building, > and with 60-foot unsupported steel beams connecting these two > structural elements. Most skyscrapers have more of a steel grid > structure, and more dispersed columns. > > The WT design choice was explained partly in architectural terms > (the need to minimize weight per floor, given the unusual height > of these things) and partly on financial grounds (the desire to > maximize rentable square footage per floor, and hence not to have > columns protruding through the floors other than at the core). > > I gather -- though, once again, I can't claim to confirm this -- > that this structural pattern helps explain the rapid catastrophic > collapse. I also gather that some experts, on first seeing video > of the collapse, thought it "looked like" controlled demolition, > but on learning about the structures did _not_ claim that it > actually was such. Finally, I gather that various conspiracy > sites cited these experts' first impressions without adding their > subsequent disclaimers. > > Allin.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:17 EDT