The Keebler Elves: Part II
I posted earlier on "scholar" Judy Woods talking with Jim Fetzer about the simlarities between the damage to the World Trade Center caused by an airplane crashing into it, and Keebler elves building a house in a tree. She mentioned that she made this comparison during a presentation at an engineering conference. For those who may have thought she was joking, here is the powerpoint.
It would be interesting to see what the response of her professional colleagues was. Hopefully she waited until after drinks were served.
For an idea of the work real structural engineers do, read this paper by Zdenek Bazant, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Northwestern University. My favorite bit, of this rather technical paper:
As generally accepted by structural engineering and structural mechanics experts (though not by some laymen and fanatics seeking to detect a conspiracy), the failure scenario, broadly proposed by Bazant (2001), and Bazant and Zhou (2002), on the basis of simplifed analysis, and supported by very realistic, meticulous and illuminating computer simulations and exhaustive investigations by S. Shyam Sunder's team at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST, 2005), may be summarized as follows:
Update: A video lecture by Professor Bazant on this subject, for those of you who don't like reading.
posted by James B. @ 9:40 AM
10 comments
10 Comments:
What is your point?
It's indisputable that the Keebler elves are Neocons, part of the PNAC, the NWO (not the wrestling one), the illuminata, and the tripartate commission.
I'm not suprised they are involved in the 9/11 cover up. They've been putting mind control drugs in their delicious baked goods for decades, since Bush's grandfather was on the board of a company that invested heavily in Keebler.
Plus, as a rule, you should never trust an elf.
Holy fuck is she ever UGLY.
I mean, I know that has nothing to do with credibility. But like....DAMN. She looks like her face caught fire and someone put it out with a fistfull of rusty chains.
Bazant and Zhou and the rest of them need to be willing to defend their work mano a mano with other experts and they are not.
WHAT experts? If one or two experts came out and said "hey, listen, this doesn't really make sense because..." I'm sure both Bazant and Zhou would gladly discuss their methods and conclusions. But there haven't been ANY experts challanging their conclusions. You don't seriously expect them to debate their findings with someone like Alex Jones or Dylan Avery do you?
They are hiding behind "papers."
Holy Toledo, I think I just found an entry candidate for Conspiracy Theorists Say the Darndest Things
Bazant and Zhou and the rest of them need to be willing to defend their work mano a mano with other experts
Mano-a-mano, eh? Heh, I'm getting this great mental image of a tag-team mach between 4 old proffesors.
"The slide rule! Use the slide-rule!"
"OHHHH, Bazant clobbers Jones with a textbook! He's down for the count! Let's see that in slow motion...."
"Therefore, no further analysis has been necessary to prove that the WTC towers had to fall the way they did."
It should have said:
"Therefore, no further analysis has been necessary to prove that the WTC towers had to fall the way they did, because only a complete fucking lunatic would believe any of the myriad of idiotic conspiracy theories."
You guys on this blog know it needs defending; thats why you're here but you have to just surmise that the official version was thorough and honest because . . . just because. It runs through all of your commentary that you are mostly just trusting these people, even after 5 years of lies.
Wow, how wrong can you be before you shut your yap (or stop tapping your keyboard if you want to get technical)?
Again, lies don't prove other "lies.
We don't believe the story just because the government tells us (the collapse of the buildings and such is just basic physics).
Ever wonder what it was like in one of the World Trade Towers when disaster struck. There's nothing like a good old strictly engineering take from the National Institue of Standards and Technology: "The floor an occupant was on when WTC1 was attacked (distance to safety) increased the probability of encountering an environmental cue (smoke, damage, fire, etc.). Additionally, being on a higher floor predicted greater evacuation initiation delay times and encountering environmental cues, which predicted higher normalized stairwell travel time. Independently, interrupting evacuation for any reason increased the normalized stairwell travel time."
Like hey man, did like you know, get any cookies from the elves, man I mean, at least we could ask the elves some questions, you know.
The official story disregards physics. WHat do y'all think about that??
Well, it doesn't, but you can continue to delude yourself on matters numerous and varied.
Post a Comment
<< Home