[MD] loose change

[Stella Lindblom]

Den 2006-10-11 03:44:36 skrev Gene M <boredandunstable at gmail.com>:

> Stella:
>
>> When I first saw the Twin Towers topple, I thought "This is not right.
>> They are not supposed to do that." This was not a "right" as in morally
>> right, but a purely technical "structures don't do that if they are not
>> deliberately helped to do so" kind of right from my experience as an
>> engineer.
>
>
> It seems to me they Were deliberately helped to do that, by, you know, a
> Plane. Somehow it strikes me that a plane to the side is deliberate help  
> in
> toppling a building. I'm prepared to accept that a 747 straight through  
> the
> wall is enough to take a lot of buildings down.

Well, they were 767s, but whatever... There is our difference then. I am  
not prepared to believe that a plane crash could do that kind of damage.  
Especially since the fires couldn't have been hot enough to do such  
structural damage. The towers were built to withstand a crashing 707,  
albeit a smaller plane, but if the impact energy was high enough, the  
crashes would have made the towers sway and fall to the side shortly after  
impact. Not 90 minutes after the fact. And not in 10 seconds (free fall).  
Small things like this makes me wonder what Really happened.

> I have no problem with dissent, or conspiracy theories, I have a problem
> with the Quality of that dissent. Low Quality dissent is worse than none  
> at all, because it makes all the dissenters look like jackasses.

We differ greatly here to, I see. If dissent is morally right, I would say  
that a wide variety of dissent, regardless of quality, is morally right. I  
would say, that any dissent in this case is morally right, because there  
is only Low Quality information to come by. Sometimes we must set out to  
follow our hearts, regardless if we think we have enough facts to support  
our conviction.

/S


-- 
Stella Lindblom
Ransby 126
686 97 LYSVIK
0565-803 88 / 070-692 14 82
www.bonadomo.se