"As the fire burned into the night, all that was visible of the upper parts of the building was the flaming, gutted remains of steel-reinforced concrete floors."
Steel reinforced concrete construction is not similar to the WTC's construction. There are also many examples of buildings similar to the building in Madrid collapsing due to a fire.
You are basically stating that it impossible for a steel framed building to collapse from a fire. Perhaps you should inform the regulatory bodies who write fire codes and design specifications and inform them that their work is pointless.
Yes, there are anomolies. Conspiracy or not, however, it seems more logical to me that a building which is known to be collapsible by fire did collapse by fire, rather than a massive plot requiring shaped charges with fireproof wireless explosive blasting caps in shaped charges placed directly against every support column in 3 buildings.
If the UL certified that the building was certified for 2 hours burn time from a typical building fire, why is a surprise that it collapsed from the fire caused by a the fuel from a plane larger than any which existed when the building was constructed? No large steel framed building has ever been hit by a 767 before.
You are incorrect in your assumptions that the weekened steel would deform over time. Steel is not plastic, it has a specific melting temperature, which likely was not exceeded. It does not become softer when approaching the melting point and stronger as it cools. Heating it above its annealing temperature causes crystal/grain growth, undoing the effects of whatever hardening took place during manufacturing, decreasing its tensile strength. It would still likely snap when its reduced tensile strength is exceeded (unless they only loaded the beams to around 10% of their rated strength, at which point it could be annealed long enough for the crystals to grow large enough for it to regain its ductility...which would then shift all of the load to the unaffected columns causing them to exceed their strength rating and catastrophically fail).
I call bullshit on the "people standing at the impact site". Do you have a link to pictures to back that up? I remember watching TV and seeing a whole lot of smoke coming out of both buildings, indicating a fire or massive deployment of smoke machines by the illuminati.
Again. There was a fire. We all saw it on tv. Buildings are known to be vulnerable to collapse by fires, which is why many standards exist. Or it was a huge conspiracy with lots of implausible conditions.
One of the things which most of the conspiracy sites fail to realize is that steel does not need to be melted in order to weaken. ASTM E119 is a testing method, which is used to measure fire resistance. Typically between 1 and 4 hours under typical fire conditions, depending on the design spec. Any large scale office fire could have taken down the WTC or any other building. This is why the fire codes exist. If it were not possible for any office fire to reach the annealing temperature of structural steel (the temperature at which it starts to weaken -- well below the melting point), then ASTM E119 would not exist in the first place. Buildings such as the USX Steel Tower in Pittsburgh would not have their support beams filled with antifreeze for fire safety, they'd just be hollow.
The conspiracy theory requires some relatively ridiculous assumptions. If the pancaking effect was not possible without explosives, then the government would have had to place shaped charges on every support column on every single floor of the WTC. In both buildings. Without any of the 50,000 employees noticing. Why would the government even bother with such a risky operation when it's well known that a fire can collapse a building?
I hate this administration and almost all of its actions, but many of these conspiracy theories defy common sense. I wish people who share my viewpoints would stop making me look like an idiot by association by saying such ridiculous things.
In public schools at least, students are taught to be obedient and to respect all authority. A respect for authority is considered necessary for the "greater good".
Any teaching of liberty or freedom is limited by this factor, so it's somewhat worthless.
You don't want everyone who the latest/fastest chip to feel like they're not getting the absolute "best" available either. Especially when they're probably spending a lot of money on a computer. This is probably why the naming is so odd.
The more realistic scenario is that everything was planned out in another country before the future terrorists came to America. They then come here and live under their own names, get driver's licenses, and are even listed in the white pages. Despite not making any efforts to hide, the CIA fails to find these wanted men for nearly a year.
This is exactly what happened on September 11th. NONE of this spying would have prevented it. FISA was set up in response to the executive branch of the government abusing its powers and spying on political opponents. Hundreds of thousands of patriots have died to protect the freedoms which the constitution gives us. Personally, I am not willing to give them up in favor of a fascist police state just because it has a small chance of dropping our death rate by 0.00001%.
It's not an accident that the bill of rights doesn't make exceptions for periods of war (or anything else).
Most depressed, schizophrenic, and confused people don't actually enjoy being way. Shouldn't you let *them* decide if that's how they want to be? While some of them may not be hurting others, it's cruel to say that they should not be allowed treatment to make their lives less miserable and painful. It's not about fitting in, it's about giving people an opportunity to live normal lives if they want it.
My goods would be cheaper if that store didn't have to pay for internet to do their product ordering. It's just a question of scale. You could argue that the costs for an airdrop would be much larger, but then again, road maintenance costs me a lot more than maintenance on free wifi would.
You either support spending public money spent on items which may not benefit everyone equally (and some not at all), or you don't.
You'd also need to get politicians in office who were willing to remove the exclusive service rights from cable and telephone monopolies. Removing this form of corporate welfare would allow capitalism to work and save the consumers money.
Your argument could easily be applied to public roads. I don't own a car, yet I'm forced to pay for them. I would hope that you are consistent with your viewpoints and are against public roads as well, as they are not "free" either.
It's a question of time really. If Apple is willing to spend the money to put more work hours into it, then it will work better. It's very unlikely it will ever work well though, so they can never really make it an official release quality feature without damaging their image.
If I were Apple I'd hire a bunch of people to work on and maintain the Mac version WINE. It would then work pretty well and be available for people to use, but people wouldn't blame Apple for the applications which crash repeatedly.
Not if the ISP does business outside of your state. Not if the commericial website you're viewing does business outside of its home state
It doesn't even have to. The interstate commerce clause has been used to justify current federal drug laws, which make it illegal to grow your own drugs for personal use. This is justified by an argument which suggests that by growing your own, you're not going to buy from someone else, who just maybe could be buying them from someone in another state.
Anything can be justified by the interstate commerce clause, and the supreme court has set a legal precedent to make it valid by accepting even the poorest arguments.
Your alpha probably didn't draw nearly as much power as a newer pentium based system. I'm guessing your Alpha used 50-100W, while a current dual xeon server requires about 300W+ while active. Other than that, I mostly agree with you.
The cheapo Dell desktops are much quieter than most comparable DIY systems. This is because they use several temp controlled 120mm fans spinning slowly and have gigantic heat sinks sitting near the fans (the CPU heat sink is a heat pipe cube about 4" on each side). Most of the DIY cases I've seen only come with mounting holes for noisier 80mm fans, and it's expensive to buy quiet cpu fans and gpu coolers.
While it's likely auto safety and emergency care will improve, cars have been around for nearly 100 years now and they are still a major factor of death for many people, including the young. We're also running into problems with decreasing marginal returns on safety devices. There are several ways we could evolve to deal with the trauma. Stronger bones and skulls as well as improved recovery to extreme blunt force trauma. Perhaps we will evolve to have faster reflexes to avoid accidents entirely as the majority of all automobile deaths are caused by human error.
Evolution is not entirely dependent on only what happens prior to reproduction. There are a number of other factors. Assisting offspring which shares your genes helps them to reproduce and therefore helps your genes to be passed on. This is why mothers in most species protect and feed their offspring after birth rather than abandoning them in and attempting to reproduce again immediately. If reproduction was the only factor, then offspring would be instinctively abandoned at birth.
You're also correct about people being too poor to afford birth control. If there are genetic factors which cause them to be poor, then these will be passed on, for better or worse. While this might sound like an argument to sterilize the poor people to prevent them from dragging humanity down, it's far more likely that poverty is caused by environmental and situational factors.
We're just evolving differently
on
An Alternate Human
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
We haven't stopped it, we've only altered the rules. Finding food and escaping predators is no longer much of an evolutionary influence. There are quite a few new things which can cause us to fail to reproduce. Humans will likely evolve in time to become less susceptible to cancer and asthma caused by air pollution, more likely to survive car crash trauma, be more tolerant of lead and mercury, and less likely to suffer negative effects such as heart disease from overconsumption of food. Women whose genetics prevent birth control from working well are currently far more likely to reproduce than others, so we will likely see some tolerance in the general population (although the medications will likely change at a much faster rate than we can evolve around). This is all just speculation though, I'm not a biologist.
As far as Premise 1 goes, I can't remember a single Microsoft OS release which shipped on time.
I think as far as the allowance of XP installs on OSX hardware is concerned, they may have realized that it can only benefit them. Many people have just 1 or 2 applications which are not available for OSX that they need but not very often. Examples are Quickbooks and many games. Previously, these tiny things provided a barrier to purchasing Macs, which prevented them from getting a larger market share, which in turn reinforced the problem by causing software vendors to not provide Mac support.
Apple will probably come around to realizing that they shouldn't support PCs outright, but instead tolerate it to be pirated for home use. The people who will pirate it most likely wouldn't have immediately purchased a mac, but will eventually turn into customers. One example of where this has worked is the case of Photoshop. Many teenagers learned how to use Photoshop on pirated versions, which they could not afford to purchase due to its $600+ price tag. As they aged, a number of them became graphic designers and demanded the companies they work for buy Photoshop, since they had already learned how to use it. Microsoft has also done this to a degree in order to gain near 100% market share on shipped PC desktops. They could not have signed contracts to force vendors to ship Windows on every PC if they hadn't already created significant demand by allowing people to pirate previous versions.
Slashdot Mirror
From your link:
"As the fire burned into the night, all that was visible of the upper parts of the building was the flaming, gutted remains of steel-reinforced concrete floors."
Steel reinforced concrete construction is not similar to the WTC's construction. There are also many examples of buildings similar to the building in Madrid collapsing due to a fire.
You are basically stating that it impossible for a steel framed building to collapse from a fire. Perhaps you should inform the regulatory bodies who write fire codes and design specifications and inform them that their work is pointless.
Yes, there are anomolies. Conspiracy or not, however, it seems more logical to me that a building which is known to be collapsible by fire did collapse by fire, rather than a massive plot requiring shaped charges with fireproof wireless explosive blasting caps in shaped charges placed directly against every support column in 3 buildings.
Steel frame building collapses: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2004-01/27/con tent_301145.htm
http://www.china.org.cn/english/2003/Nov/79742.htm
Can you find examples of "this type of steel frame building" with raging fires which didn't collapse? All of the examples of buildings which had fires but did not collapse that I've seen so far were instead concrete and steel frames.
If the UL certified that the building was certified for 2 hours burn time from a typical building fire, why is a surprise that it collapsed from the fire caused by a the fuel from a plane larger than any which existed when the building was constructed? No large steel framed building has ever been hit by a 767 before.
You are incorrect in your assumptions that the weekened steel would deform over time. Steel is not plastic, it has a specific melting temperature, which likely was not exceeded. It does not become softer when approaching the melting point and stronger as it cools. Heating it above its annealing temperature causes crystal/grain growth, undoing the effects of whatever hardening took place during manufacturing, decreasing its tensile strength. It would still likely snap when its reduced tensile strength is exceeded (unless they only loaded the beams to around 10% of their rated strength, at which point it could be annealed long enough for the crystals to grow large enough for it to regain its ductility...which would then shift all of the load to the unaffected columns causing them to exceed their strength rating and catastrophically fail).
I call bullshit on the "people standing at the impact site". Do you have a link to pictures to back that up? I remember watching TV and seeing a whole lot of smoke coming out of both buildings, indicating a fire or massive deployment of smoke machines by the illuminati.
Again. There was a fire. We all saw it on tv. Buildings are known to be vulnerable to collapse by fires, which is why many standards exist. Or it was a huge conspiracy with lots of implausible conditions.
One of the things which most of the conspiracy sites fail to realize is that steel does not need to be melted in order to weaken. ASTM E119 is a testing method, which is used to measure fire resistance. Typically between 1 and 4 hours under typical fire conditions, depending on the design spec. Any large scale office fire could have taken down the WTC or any other building. This is why the fire codes exist. If it were not possible for any office fire to reach the annealing temperature of structural steel (the temperature at which it starts to weaken -- well below the melting point), then ASTM E119 would not exist in the first place. Buildings such as the USX Steel Tower in Pittsburgh would not have their support beams filled with antifreeze for fire safety, they'd just be hollow.
The conspiracy theory requires some relatively ridiculous assumptions. If the pancaking effect was not possible without explosives, then the government would have had to place shaped charges on every support column on every single floor of the WTC. In both buildings. Without any of the 50,000 employees noticing. Why would the government even bother with such a risky operation when it's well known that a fire can collapse a building?
I hate this administration and almost all of its actions, but many of these conspiracy theories defy common sense. I wish people who share my viewpoints would stop making me look like an idiot by association by saying such ridiculous things.
In public schools at least, students are taught to be obedient and to respect all authority. A respect for authority is considered necessary for the "greater good". Any teaching of liberty or freedom is limited by this factor, so it's somewhat worthless.
Well when the power is out, then there won't be any more interference.
..assuming you only want to communicate with people inside of the power outage...
With all that extra bandwidth, these ham radio types can just do their thing over the internet.
3D televison won't be affordable until 4D television is available
You don't want everyone who the latest/fastest chip to feel like they're not getting the absolute "best" available either. Especially when they're probably spending a lot of money on a computer. This is probably why the naming is so odd.
Always use a spell checker on whatever you write in a business context. Especially your resume.
How is multi-billion dollar pork project which does absolutely nothing to prevent us from modern threats "conservative"?
The more realistic scenario is that everything was planned out in another country before the future terrorists came to America. They then come here and live under their own names, get driver's licenses, and are even listed in the white pages. Despite not making any efforts to hide, the CIA fails to find these wanted men for nearly a year.
This is exactly what happened on September 11th. NONE of this spying would have prevented it. FISA was set up in response to the executive branch of the government abusing its powers and spying on political opponents. Hundreds of thousands of patriots have died to protect the freedoms which the constitution gives us. Personally, I am not willing to give them up in favor of a fascist police state just because it has a small chance of dropping our death rate by 0.00001%.
It's not an accident that the bill of rights doesn't make exceptions for periods of war (or anything else).
Yes why not? After the previous administration proved, we give it all to the Chinese anyway...
Or the administration before that, which gave it all Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran...
Most depressed, schizophrenic, and confused people don't actually enjoy being way. Shouldn't you let *them* decide if that's how they want to be? While some of them may not be hurting others, it's cruel to say that they should not be allowed treatment to make their lives less miserable and painful. It's not about fitting in, it's about giving people an opportunity to live normal lives if they want it.
There are some downsides to that approach. This month's Scientific American has a great article on it.
My goods would be cheaper if that store didn't have to pay for internet to do their product ordering. It's just a question of scale. You could argue that the costs for an airdrop would be much larger, but then again, road maintenance costs me a lot more than maintenance on free wifi would.
You either support spending public money spent on items which may not benefit everyone equally (and some not at all), or you don't.
You'd also need to get politicians in office who were willing to remove the exclusive service rights from cable and telephone monopolies. Removing this form of corporate welfare would allow capitalism to work and save the consumers money.
Your argument could easily be applied to public roads. I don't own a car, yet I'm forced to pay for them. I would hope that you are consistent with your viewpoints and are against public roads as well, as they are not "free" either.
It's a question of time really. If Apple is willing to spend the money to put more work hours into it, then it will work better. It's very unlikely it will ever work well though, so they can never really make it an official release quality feature without damaging their image.
If I were Apple I'd hire a bunch of people to work on and maintain the Mac version WINE. It would then work pretty well and be available for people to use, but people wouldn't blame Apple for the applications which crash repeatedly.
Not if the ISP does business outside of your state. Not if the commericial website you're viewing does business outside of its home state
It doesn't even have to. The interstate commerce clause has been used to justify current federal drug laws, which make it illegal to grow your own drugs for personal use. This is justified by an argument which suggests that by growing your own, you're not going to buy from someone else, who just maybe could be buying them from someone in another state.
Anything can be justified by the interstate commerce clause, and the supreme court has set a legal precedent to make it valid by accepting even the poorest arguments.
Your alpha probably didn't draw nearly as much power as a newer pentium based system. I'm guessing your Alpha used 50-100W, while a current dual xeon server requires about 300W+ while active. Other than that, I mostly agree with you.
The cheapo Dell desktops are much quieter than most comparable DIY systems. This is because they use several temp controlled 120mm fans spinning slowly and have gigantic heat sinks sitting near the fans (the CPU heat sink is a heat pipe cube about 4" on each side). Most of the DIY cases I've seen only come with mounting holes for noisier 80mm fans, and it's expensive to buy quiet cpu fans and gpu coolers.
While it's likely auto safety and emergency care will improve, cars have been around for nearly 100 years now and they are still a major factor of death for many people, including the young. We're also running into problems with decreasing marginal returns on safety devices. There are several ways we could evolve to deal with the trauma. Stronger bones and skulls as well as improved recovery to extreme blunt force trauma. Perhaps we will evolve to have faster reflexes to avoid accidents entirely as the majority of all automobile deaths are caused by human error.
Evolution is not entirely dependent on only what happens prior to reproduction. There are a number of other factors. Assisting offspring which shares your genes helps them to reproduce and therefore helps your genes to be passed on. This is why mothers in most species protect and feed their offspring after birth rather than abandoning them in and attempting to reproduce again immediately. If reproduction was the only factor, then offspring would be instinctively abandoned at birth.
You're also correct about people being too poor to afford birth control. If there are genetic factors which cause them to be poor, then these will be passed on, for better or worse. While this might sound like an argument to sterilize the poor people to prevent them from dragging humanity down, it's far more likely that poverty is caused by environmental and situational factors.
We haven't stopped it, we've only altered the rules. Finding food and escaping predators is no longer much of an evolutionary influence. There are quite a few new things which can cause us to fail to reproduce. Humans will likely evolve in time to become less susceptible to cancer and asthma caused by air pollution, more likely to survive car crash trauma, be more tolerant of lead and mercury, and less likely to suffer negative effects such as heart disease from overconsumption of food. Women whose genetics prevent birth control from working well are currently far more likely to reproduce than others, so we will likely see some tolerance in the general population (although the medications will likely change at a much faster rate than we can evolve around). This is all just speculation though, I'm not a biologist.
Your home just isn't old enough. The building my apartment was in was built in the 1880s, so the electrical wiring is not original.
As far as Premise 1 goes, I can't remember a single Microsoft OS release which shipped on time. I think as far as the allowance of XP installs on OSX hardware is concerned, they may have realized that it can only benefit them. Many people have just 1 or 2 applications which are not available for OSX that they need but not very often. Examples are Quickbooks and many games. Previously, these tiny things provided a barrier to purchasing Macs, which prevented them from getting a larger market share, which in turn reinforced the problem by causing software vendors to not provide Mac support.
Apple will probably come around to realizing that they shouldn't support PCs outright, but instead tolerate it to be pirated for home use. The people who will pirate it most likely wouldn't have immediately purchased a mac, but will eventually turn into customers. One example of where this has worked is the case of Photoshop. Many teenagers learned how to use Photoshop on pirated versions, which they could not afford to purchase due to its $600+ price tag. As they aged, a number of them became graphic designers and demanded the companies they work for buy Photoshop, since they had already learned how to use it. Microsoft has also done this to a degree in order to gain near 100% market share on shipped PC desktops. They could not have signed contracts to force vendors to ship Windows on every PC if they hadn't already created significant demand by allowing people to pirate previous versions.