Conspiracy theories unexplained

Anything goes in The Snug, the GD's rebellious little brother. An off-topic den of iniquity for non-football/news related musings.

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, sicknote, -DL-, Rio, Gnome, chalks, the pink palermo

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby WCpete on Tue Aug 21, 2018 6:09 pm

Cuenca 'ammer wrote:Global warming makes me laugh..

Hottest Summer on record...

chuffing records only go back about 100 years maximum....

How old is the earth ? Trouble is in American schools they never learn about anything over about 150 years ago..

ask any high school or college kid about the ice age, the iron age, the stone age, the bronze age and they look at you like they are mental..

has the world warmed up due to there being many many more people on it now than when the ice age came around ? my guess would be yes. would those people have warmed the earth merely by being here, I would guess yes.

but Shirley all that extra CO2 will be healthy for plants and trees no ?

:?


But we cut down up to 7 billion trees a year. Also, the thawing of the arctic permafrost is releasing ancient greenhouse gasses at an accelerated rate which the ecosystem isn't equipped to process. In fact, in some areas of the Arctic the ground no longer freezes, even in winter.
WCpete
 
Posts: 14377
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 1:11 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Samba on Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:38 pm

NorthBankAlliance wrote:What is mad is how the vast majority of people think that 2 jet airliners could bring down two skyscrapers in that fashion.Just not possible...

view from the shires wrote:What force is required to collapse a building in a controlled explosion? I don't know the answer, but 200 tonnes of aircraft at 250mph(?) is a pretty big force.

AA11 flew between 429 to 494 mph into the North Tower (1 WTC) and UA175 flew between 537 to 586 mph into the South Tower (2 WTC).
Both were said to be carrying 10,000 U.S. gallons (38,000 L; 8,300 imp gal) of jet fuel on board.
User avatar
Samba
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:36 pm
Location: Wondering when Karren Brady's going to fuck something else up.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby fjthegrey on Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:53 pm

Nobody here is qualified to talk about Global Warming with any authority.

You don't have the relevant levels of 'reasoning'.






There's one for some of the older posters.
User avatar
fjthegrey
 
Posts: 18264
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Once More Unto The Cheese

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Samba on Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:55 pm

NorthBankAlliance wrote:They were built to withstand the force of an aircraft hitting them, a B-52 ploughed into the Empire State Building for example & that didn't collapse...
Yes, they did withstand the force of being hit.
They put it down to the fires weakening the steel structure, but plenty of high rises have had larger & more widespread fires without collapsing...

Since 9/11, at least two steel-framed high-rise buildings have collapsed following blazes — the Plasco Building in Tehran, Iran on January 19, 2017, and the Wilton Paes de Almeida Building in São Paulo, Brazil, on May 1, 2018.
User avatar
Samba
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:36 pm
Location: Wondering when Karren Brady's going to fuck something else up.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Benfleet Pete on Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:13 pm

They were built to withstand the force of an aircraft hitting them, a B-52 ploughed into the Empire State Building for example & that didn't collapse...

They put it down to the fires weakening the steel structure, but plenty of high rises have had larger & more widespread fires without collapsing...


B25 hit the Empire State Building, not a B52. There’s quite a big difference!
User avatar
Benfleet Pete
 
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 10:17 am
Location: See if you can guess.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Mega Ron on Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:17 pm

fjthegrey wrote:Nobody here is qualified to talk about Global Warming with any authority.

You don't have the relevant levels of 'reasoning'.






There's one for some of the older posters.


Where did that fucknut reason the plane went down?
User avatar
Mega Ron
 
Posts: 8963
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Warp's mum

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Mega Ron on Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:18 pm

Hey. Fucknut isn't blocked.

I have a new favourite word on here.
User avatar
Mega Ron
 
Posts: 8963
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Warp's mum

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Crouching Peeky on Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:22 pm

NorthBankAlliance wrote:How both of those buildings can fall from top to bottom as straight as they did, without some sort of controlled demotion is mental, unheard of even...

But they didn't, the south tower collapse started half way down the building from one corner where the plane went in - are you telling me the engineers organised the explosives in the exact position the plane impacted the building?
WTC 7 didn't collapse at freefall speed either. Conspiracy theorists only ever show the footage from the front of the building. There is footage out there that shows the lift shaft and motor room which is on the roof disappear due to the collapse of the back portion of the building some 10 or so seconds before prior to the visible collapse of the front of the building. The back of the buildings structural integrity had been compromised by the collapse of the North and South towers.

It just happens to be a subject that has interested me greatly since it happened and I find the conspiracy theories about it to be hugely annoying.

If you have a spare hour and a half, watch this and then come back to me with your theories

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ml6r7cuKe8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Crouching Peeky
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:59 am
Location: A galaxy far, far away

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Bend it like Repka on Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:12 am

HalfTimePie wrote: and go all bendy (I do not know the technical term for bendy).


Don't bring me into this. I had nothing to do with it.
User avatar
Bend it like Repka
 
Posts: 10439
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Shaking my head in despair at it all.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Hammers Dad on Wed Aug 22, 2018 9:35 am

fjthegrey wrote:Nobody here is qualified to talk about Global Warming with any authority.

You don't have the relevant levels of 'reasoning'.






There's one for some of the older posters.

Precisely.
You need to be a scientist to understand anything outside football
User avatar
Hammers Dad
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Loving being the boss....

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby sendô on Wed Aug 22, 2018 10:30 am

Bend it like Repka wrote:Don't bring me into this. I had nothing to do with it.

Do you have an alibi who can verify that?
User avatar
sendô
 
Posts: 26566
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: in the pessimistically optimistic camp.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby HalfTimePie on Wed Aug 22, 2018 11:56 am

Bend it like Repka wrote:
Don't bring me into this. I had nothing to do with it.


So where were you on the day of the attacks? :think:
User avatar
HalfTimePie
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:39 am
Location: Essex

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Slacking student on Wed Aug 22, 2018 12:13 pm

As someone who studied Materials Science at undergraduate and metallurgy at doctoral level the WTC steel/controlled explosion conspiracy fascinates me.

It's just a clear case of the steel buckling at temperatures elevated above what it was designed for.

It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.


The quote above is from this paper on the subject that I think is open access so anyone can read. It clearly explains there was no explosion just a materials failure due to exceptional circumstances.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/1 ... 0003-1.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0 ... .html#ref4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Slacking student
 
Posts: 1971
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 5:00 pm

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Bend it like Repka on Wed Aug 22, 2018 2:08 pm

HalfTimePie wrote:So where were you on the day of the attacks? :think:


I definitely did not shoot the delicious plump breasted pigeon, sir.
User avatar
Bend it like Repka
 
Posts: 10439
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Shaking my head in despair at it all.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby HalfTimePie on Wed Aug 22, 2018 2:20 pm

Bend it like Repka wrote:
I definitely did not shoot the delicious plump breasted pigeon, sir.


I have a speckly reason to believe otherwise private
User avatar
HalfTimePie
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:39 am
Location: Essex

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Samba on Wed Aug 22, 2018 7:25 pm

Bend it like Repka wrote:I definitely did not shoot the delicious plump breasted pigeon, sir.

HalfTimePie wrote:I have a speckly reason to believe otherwise private

I don't care if he's been rogering the Duke of York with a prize-winning leek! He shot my pigeon!!!
User avatar
Samba
 
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:36 pm
Location: Wondering when Karren Brady's going to fuck something else up.

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby cockney hammer on Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:36 pm

latest podcast from howard http://theunexplained.tv/
User avatar
cockney hammer
Resident badge expert
 
Posts: 104108
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 1:52 pm
Location: http://boleynbadges.com

Re: Conspiracy theories

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Fri Aug 24, 2018 3:07 pm

Every day we have a bright blue sky here, I get the "The reason it is so blue here and better than the states is we don't have chemtrails...."

does my nut in....


besides we get maybe 3 flights a day possibly four so we hardly even get contrails...

:hush: :hush:

I have read up on it, of course you get one side or another's "argument" but I don't honestly see that the aeroplanes are constantly leaving a dangerous trail of chemicals to poison us all..

but there's cleverer people than me on here.

thoughts ??
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 25760
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Conspiracy theories unexplained

Postby cockney hammer on Sat Aug 25, 2018 6:43 pm

User avatar
cockney hammer
Resident badge expert
 
Posts: 104108
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 1:52 pm
Location: http://boleynbadges.com

Re: Conspiracy theories unexplained

Postby cockney hammer on Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:12 pm

User avatar
cockney hammer
Resident badge expert
 
Posts: 104108
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 1:52 pm
Location: http://boleynbadges.com

PreviousNext

Return to The Snug

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deanoo, Essex bill, EssexIron and 9 guests