fluff counters are easily countered and yes, duration does matter
This post is in response to the 1st part of shaman_'s post 882 in this thread.
That depends. Consider:
Kevin Ryan says that 2+2=4
Mackey Ryan says that no, 2+2=17
I come in and simply state that Kevin's original answer is right, as it follows the laws of mathematics, where Mackey's clearly didn't. Frequently, Mackey Ryan's "rebuttal" are nothing more then fluff; sometimes even I can see that.
An assertion based on some sound arguments made by the person he is 'rebutting', yes.
NIST's workstation tests were clearly tweaked, as Steven Jones and others have made clear. Don't you think it rather curious that the -physical- models of the WTC steel never collapsed?
Why do you think that?
It wouldn't do much to steel on the few floors of WTC building that had the fires, but perhaps to a weaker structure, such as the Windsor Tower in Madrid, it could produce a gradual partial collapse.
Ah, ok. Anyway, my point on duration making a big difference still stands.
This post is in response to the 1st part of shaman_'s post 882 in this thread.
scott3x said:shaman_ said:That was the statement that Mackey was rebutting! You can’t respond to it with the very comment he was responding to!
Sure I can.
Scott, Imagine that you posted a criticism of some of Mackey’s claims, as a rebuttal I just cut and pasted the original claims that were being criticized. That is what you are doing. That is closer to trolling than discussing.
That depends. Consider:
Kevin Ryan says that 2+2=4
Mackey Ryan says that no, 2+2=17
I come in and simply state that Kevin's original answer is right, as it follows the laws of mathematics, where Mackey's clearly didn't. Frequently, Mackey Ryan's "rebuttal" are nothing more then fluff; sometimes even I can see that.
shaman_ said:scott3x said:Mackey's 'debunking' is nothing of the sort. I see that you don't get the point.
What you have is an assertion based on some comments made by the people he is criticizing.
An assertion based on some sound arguments made by the person he is 'rebutting', yes.
shaman_ said:scott3x said:The point is that flashovers are instant. 120 and 600 seconds, aka 2 and 10 minutes, is way longer then a flashover would take.
Whether you want to call it a flashover or not, NISTs workstation tests noted periods over high temperatures (800+) for much longer than two minutes.
NIST's workstation tests were clearly tweaked, as Steven Jones and others have made clear. Don't you think it rather curious that the -physical- models of the WTC steel never collapsed?
shaman_ said:scott3x said:I can put my finger over the flame of a lighter for an instant and it really doesn't do much. You can torture a man if you put it for longer durations. I really don't want to know what would happen if it was held under someone's finger for 10 minutes. Buildings and the fires needed to 'hurt' them are on a different scale, but the same principle applies; duration can frequently mean quite a bit.
Strange examples.
Why do you think that?
A roaring fire over 800C for twenty minutes can do quite a bit of damage to a building.
It wouldn't do much to steel on the few floors of WTC building that had the fires, but perhaps to a weaker structure, such as the Windsor Tower in Madrid, it could produce a gradual partial collapse.
shaman_ said:scott3x said:shaman said:scott3x said:shaman_ said:Mr. Hoffman here again complains about the “megawatt super-burner,” but the author reminds Mr. Hoffman that the “super-burner” was only active for the first 600 seconds of tests 1, 2, and 4, and the first 120 seconds of tests 3, 5, and 6. Readers may ignore these time periods if desired as they do not affect our conclusions...
I find it hard to believe that it wouldn't affect his conclusions. And who is Ryan including when he states 'our conclusions'?
It’s probably the government because clearly they are paying him to say these things.
Really? Could you please present me the evidence for this?
Sarcasm scott.
Ah, ok. Anyway, my point on duration making a big difference still stands.
Last edited: