Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 2]
Discussion
Mercury00 said:
How do some people ever manage to get their car serviced? I've just started a new job and my hours match up perfectly with the dealership service department's hours. I'm honestly stuck for ideas. I thought I could leave it on a Friday after work, even though the service department will be closed again, have it serviced on Saturday while I'm working... but then my plan came to a halt when I realised I'd never be able to get it back because they'd be closed on Sunday and then every weekday after I finish work!
Drop it off on your way to work and ick up at lunch?On a days holiday (although this is annoying)
Speak nicely to your boss.
Mercury00 said:
How do some people ever manage to get their car serviced? I've just started a new job and my hours match up perfectly with the dealership service department's hours. I'm honestly stuck for ideas. I thought I could leave it on a Friday after work, even though the service department will be closed again, have it serviced on Saturday while I'm working... but then my plan came to a halt when I realised I'd never be able to get it back because they'd be closed on Sunday and then every weekday after I finish work!
Get it serviced somewhere that will lend you a 'courtesy car', or give you a lift to work.
king pavement.Funny how the collapse down onto the own footprint though. Its like all the supporting columns gave way at once.
Im not one for conspiracy theories but there is a few chin scratching "really???" Moments surrounding 9/11. Forgetting all the major buildings that got hit just take a look on youtube at the collapse of wtc7 and tell me thats not a demolition.
Im not one for conspiracy theories but there is a few chin scratching "really???" Moments surrounding 9/11. Forgetting all the major buildings that got hit just take a look on youtube at the collapse of wtc7 and tell me thats not a demolition.
ghamer said:
Well it's that time of year again and I can't be arsed searching for it so here is something that has/is bugging me.Twin towers 9/11.Why o why when the planes hit near the top,do the bases give way first.Ta.
watch it again, they collapse from around the point of impact firstdazwalsh said:
Funny how the collapse down onto the own footprint though. Its like all the supporting columns gave way at once.
Im not one for conspiracy theories but there is a few chin scratching "really???" Moments surrounding 9/11. Forgetting all the major buildings that got hit just take a look on youtube at the collapse of wtc7 and tell me thats not a demolition.
That's the thing about conspiracy theorists though isn't it - You (I assume) nor I know a single thing about how large buildings 'work' or fail, or indeed anything about the quite unique way they built the WTC - so we don't really know how they should have fallen given the unique way they were destroyed - but we'll look at the footage and think "that doesn't look right to me" - if a normal person was that fussed they'd put their energy and googlefu into researching whether they way they fell was 'right' - whereas a Conspiracy Theorist will start from the view point that it was wrong and spend their energy reading every other crackpot's quarter arsed theories, guesses and downright day dreams which are just based on other crackpots quarter arsed theories, guesses and downright day dreams and put together a mental file of "facts" that prove the CIA staged the largest terrorist attack in history to kill one guy on the 17th floor of the WTC and everything else was just smoke screen. Im not one for conspiracy theories but there is a few chin scratching "really???" Moments surrounding 9/11. Forgetting all the major buildings that got hit just take a look on youtube at the collapse of wtc7 and tell me thats not a demolition.
I've read some wild eyed crazy stuff about 9/11 and all of the 'fact' based ones follow the same pattern - the crackpot will take a dozen or so aspects of the event - take the most outlandish ones as absolute fact - and attempt to disprove the most plausible (and proven) ones as just 'what they want you to think'.
dazwalsh said:
Funny how the collapse down onto the own footprint though. Its like all the supporting columns gave way at once.
I imagined that would be by design, so that in the event of a catastrophic failure they don't also take out the surrounding buildings by falling sideways. I have a vague recollection one of the many documentaries talked about this, I certainly don't know anything about skyscraper design to have figured it out.droopsnoot said:
I imagined that would be by design, so that in the event of a catastrophic failure they don't also take out the surrounding buildings by falling sideways. I have a vague recollection one of the many documentaries talked about this, I certainly don't know anything about skyscraper design to have figured it out.
Right, that's it. This has got to stop. That's twice in 24 hours we've had some common sense inspired posting. It's getting ridiculous now. Can we resume normal service of assumptions and half-arsed retorts please!
droopsnoot said:
dazwalsh said:
Funny how the collapse down onto the own footprint though. Its like all the supporting columns gave way at once.
I imagined that would be by design, so that in the event of a catastrophic failure they don't also take out the surrounding buildings by falling sideways. I have a vague recollection one of the many documentaries talked about this, I certainly don't know anything about skyscraper design to have figured it out.P-Jay said:
Also, although you wouldn't think it from the TV footage showing the top of the buildings with all the smoke and destruction, but by the time the 2 big towers fell 8 buildings were destroyed and a few others damaged, it really was a massive amount of debris once it hit the floor.
It fell that way due to the internal structure. Think of WTC as a series of concrete layers held apart on a series of upright columns. Once the first column failed it placed extra stress on the other uprights which in turn failed - this caused the concrete "layer" to fall on the layer below, placing undue stress on all the uprights at the same time. This results in a chain reaction all the way down, especially as the falling lump gets more and more mass and momentum.TheLordJohn said:
droopsnoot said:
I imagined that would be by design, so that in the event of a catastrophic failure they don't also take out the surrounding buildings by falling sideways. I have a vague recollection one of the many documentaries talked about this, I certainly don't know anything about skyscraper design to have figured it out.
Right, that's it. This has got to stop. That's twice in 24 hours we've had some common sense inspired posting. It's getting ridiculous now. Can we resume normal service of assumptions and half-arsed retorts please!
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff