Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
deafening silence: lessons learned[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: deafening silence: lessons learned
- From: "Josh Plummer" <josh.plummer(--nospam--at)cox.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 07:18:26 -0700
Some lessons learned for you (and for your defenders on the list service):
1) When you post something anonymously, the rest of the member of this list will not take you very seriously.
2) When you post links to a half dozen conspiracy websites, the list will take you even less seriously.
3) When the list ignores a wild posting like this, consider that a blessing. Don’t rattle the bee-hive by posting it again talking about a deafening silence!!
Now, I would have preferred to read some more reasoned responses with less name calling. But, I understand the name calling… you rattled the bee hive and you gave us very little reason to respect you in the first place.
I did visit the Physics 911 website. And I looked at their “What did NOT happen” link. It claimed that aviation fuel burns at less than 500 degree Celsius. I’m not qualified to FULLY refute this. Therefore, I remained silent.
However, I have visited a couple of job sites at petrochemical plants where we were re-building a section of the plant where they’d had a fire. I can tell you that, from my personal experience, the structural steel warps and bends unbelievably when subjected to these petrochem fires. It’s truly shocking the first time you see it. From that experience, I knew that the Physics911 website was a bunch of uneducated filth. To dismiss a completely legitimate theory about what happened so nonchalantly and without giving any references as to where they came up with their “facts” about what temperature fuel burns at, means to me that they’re a bunch of wild conspiracy theorists who aren’t worth my time. I believed the same about you because you deliberately associated yourself with these folks (by linking to their websites).
Now that we know who you are. Now that we know that you are truly an engineer, I regret that the rest of the list maligned you so. However, I point you back to the beginning of this message. If you rattle a bee-hive, don’t be surprised when you get stung. The silence is no longer deafening.
Josh Plummer, SE
I went to the web site you mentioned and found it very interesting but it does not address the concerns presented in the Phsics911 web site. I am not subscribing to the "conspiracy theory" nor do I subscribe to the government published conclusions. I am not looking to trade jabs and insults with anyone in this listserver but I believe there are valid questions as to how structures behave and what can be done to provide future safety in these buildings. I am sorry if there are those that take offense but no offense was intended. I am at a loss to understand why the reaction to my presenting this web site is very emotional instead of analytical. I too feel grief and sorrow for the loss of life that happened and am not trying to downplay the seriousness of it but I thought that discussion of the points brought up in the web site could be enlightening and provide some elements of structural behavior and analysis not presented by the web site. Belittling and name-calling does nothing to further the advancement of the human species.
I was not presuming to present myself
anonymously and did provide my initials for brevity. If it is important to the
list to be completely identified, I am Stephen Macie, licensed Professional
- Prev by Subject: Re: deafening silence! as responded to by Harold Sprague
- Next by Subject: Definition of Pier in ACI 530-02
- Previous by thread: Re: deafening silence! as responded to by Harold Sprague
- Next by thread: Segmented/Perforated Shearwalls