Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    15 Jun '17 13:16
    Thus far, a shocking 17 people dead.
    Sickening, given what has emerged from the mishandling and negligence.
    The $11M aesthetic remodeling, "cladding," turned the building into a bonfire, the people trapped inside of a blazing concrete coffin.

    A concrete building is in danger of collapse when temps reach into the 1800° temperature range, so we can assume as bad as this fire raged and appeared to roll unabated, it wasn't hot enough to force a complete failure.
    It's still standing.

    Since steel requires even greater intensity--- in the 2500°-2750° range--- one can only imagine how intensely those small office fires in WTC7 must have been burning to cause its freefall collapse seven hours after they first started.

    Hey!
    Here's a thought.
    We should do some research into the materials which were burning in that tower to see if we could maybe use them to help supply any shortfalls we have in the energy departments.
    If carpet, office chairs and assorted paper were able to achieve nearly 3,000°, surely we should harness that destructive power for something productive for mankind.
  2. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56944
    15 Jun '17 13:22
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Thus far, a shocking 17 people dead.
    Sickening, given what has emerged from the mishandling and negligence.
    The $11M aesthetic remodeling, "cladding," turned the building into a bonfire, the people trapped inside of a blazing concrete coffin.

    A concrete building is in danger of collapse when temps reach into the 1800° temperature range, so we can ass ...[text shortened]... ly 3,000°, surely we should harness that destructive power for something productive for mankind.
    Oh good grief.
    The tower in England was probably engineered by Germans and the WTC was engineered by some Italians uncle Vinny.
  3. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    15 Jun '17 14:32
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    Oh good grief.
    The tower in England was probably engineered by Germans and the WTC was engineered by some Italians uncle Vinny.
    Ha!
    Both constructed around the same time (early '70's).
    Rockefeller was the big push behind the $335M WTC project, which relied on eminent domain to displace 325 shops, 1,000 other adversely affected businesses and ~100 residents.
    SCOTUS declined to review after the Court of Appeals gave Rockefeller the greed, sorry: green light to burn rubber... and burn, they did, to the tune of $900M by the time the, uh, dust settled, so to speak.

    Looks like they should have used concrete instead of steel.

    EDIT: Should be Grenfell, not as the title shows.
  4. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    11590
    15 Jun '17 15:13
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Thus far, a shocking 17 people dead.
    Sickening, given what has emerged from the mishandling and negligence.
    The $11M aesthetic remodeling, "cladding," turned the building into a bonfire, the people trapped inside of a blazing concrete coffin.

    A concrete building is in danger of collapse when temps reach into the 1800° temperature range, so we can ass ...[text shortened]... ly 3,000°, surely we should harness that destructive power for something productive for mankind.
    Hey, here's an idea. Why not create a thread about the tower fire where you simply say your thoughts are with the people who died, and their families?

    You know, rather than just using it to fuel one of your conspiracy theories.
  5. Subscriberkmax87
    Land of Free
    Health and Education
    Joined
    09 Oct '04
    Moves
    82662
    15 Jun '17 15:20
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    ...
    You know, rather than just using it to fuel one of your conspiracy theories.
    The thought police would like to pull you up on your poor choice of pun, which for all intents and purposes makes your post seem a tad hypocritical, given your remonstration of the freeaky ones inappropriate sense of timing in turning a tradgedy into grist for his conspiracy mill.
  6. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52864
    15 Jun '17 15:45
    Originally posted by kmax87
    The thought police would like to pull you up on your poor choice of pun, which for all intents and purposes makes your post seem a tad hypocritical, given your remonstration of the freeaky ones inappropriate sense of timing in turning a tradgedy into grist for his conspiracy mill.
    So you figure using the word 'fuel' should be substituted with 'support'. Would that make you feel better?
  7. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    11590
    15 Jun '17 20:27
    Originally posted by kmax87
    The thought police would like to pull you up on your poor choice of pun, which for all intents and purposes makes your post seem a tad hypocritical, given your remonstration of the freeaky ones inappropriate sense of timing in turning a tradgedy into grist for his conspiracy mill.
    Feel free to replace the unintentional word fuel with one of your liking.

    If you have the vocab.
  8. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    15 Jun '17 20:401 edit
    “This is the richest borough in our country treating its citizens in this way.
    We should call it what it is, it’s corporate manslaughter, that’s what it is
    and there should be arrests made, frankly.”
    --David Lammy (Labour MP)

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2017/jun/15/the-guardian-view-on-grenfell-tower-theresa-may-hurricane-katrina

    "The Guardian view on Grenfell Tower: Theresa May’s Hurricane Katrina.
    The 2005 hurricane that devastated New Orleans exposed failings in leadership and
    a terrible disdain for the lives of the poor. The London fire is doing the same."

    If this disaster had happened in a non-Western society, there would be racist sneering in the UK media.
    Theresa May already has been denounced for being a 'coward' because she, unlike Jeremy Corbyn,
    has so far evaded meeting any survivors of the fire. Theresa May's ideological sympathies
    presumably are with the corporate overlords, not the former tenants of Grenfell Tower.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/15/grenfell-tower-shameful-symbol-state-did-not-care

    "Grenfell Tower is a shameful symbol of a state that didn’t care.
    It is hard to think of a more literal representation of the words ‘poverty trap’ than that burning pyre."

    "Yet nothing in Theresa May’s visit to the site, where she was accused of avoiding shocked and angry residents,
    suggested she grasps the magnitude of the shock or the sense that this could be a tipping point in national life."

    "Kensington is synonymous with wealth and privilege, even if Londoners knew long before Labour
    unexpectedly captured the seat at the general election that it was home to great deprivation, too."

    As I watched images of the Grenfell Tower fire, I thought of an infamous 1911 fire in an
    overcrowded New York City garment factory, which killed 146 persons (mostly immigrant women).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire

    "The company's owners, Max Blanck and Isaac Harris, who survived the fire by fleeing to
    the building's roof when the fire began, were indicted on charges of first- and second-degree
    manslaughter in mid-April; the pair's trial began on December 4, 1911. ...
    The investigation found that the locks were intended to be locked during working hours based
    on the findings from the fire,[44] but the defense stressed that the prosecution failed to prove
    that the owners knew that. The jury acquitted the two men of first- and second-degree
    manslaughter, but they were found liable of wrongful death during a subsequent civil suit
    in 1913 in which plaintiffs were awarded compensation in the amount of $75 per deceased victim.
    The insurance company paid Blanck and Harris about $60,000 more than the reported
    losses, or about $400 per casualty. In 1913, Blanck was once again arrested for locking
    the door in his factory during working hours. He was fined $20."
  9. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    15 Jun '17 20:481 edit
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    Hey, here's an idea. Why not create a thread about the tower fire where you simply say your thoughts are with the people who died, and their families?

    You know, rather than just using it to fuel one of your conspiracy theories.
    Perhaps you skimmed through the first part of the OP wherein I characterized the senseless deaths as sickening.
    Did I not emote enough to your liking?
    What's the emoji for not giving a rat's ass?
    No matter, I'm sure you get the point and are more than capable of filling in the blanks caused by my lack of social media skills.

    This being the Debate forum, I suspect there would be no takers on the question, "Grenfell Towers: Tragedy or Who Cares?"
    Again, perhaps you thought such a proposition might have some legs?

    The debate part of the situation is exactly as stated in the OP; namely, how is it that a concrete building <30 stories tall which burned without restraint for the better part of a day--- fed on the fuel of its contents--- didn't fall, didn't collapse... and yet a building nearly 50 stories tall, also limited to its contents to fuel its fire, fell after less than eight hours of enduring small pockets of isolated fires?

    Oh.
    But you knew that was the debate which was being offered, didn't you?
    It's almost as though you purposely ignored the point to make an unimportant, self-serving point.
    But you wouldn't do such a small-minded, petty thing, would you?
  10. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    11590
    16 Jun '17 07:33
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Perhaps you skimmed through the first part of the OP wherein I characterized the senseless deaths as sickening.
    Did I not emote enough to your liking?
    What's the emoji for not giving a rat's ass?
    No matter, I'm sure you get the point and are more than capable of filling in the blanks caused by my lack of social media skills.

    This being the Debate fo ...[text shortened]... mportant, self-serving point.
    But you wouldn't do such a small-minded, petty thing, would you?
    In fairness sir, I skim through most of your posts.
  11. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    16 Jun '17 09:40
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    In fairness sir, I skim through most of your posts.
    LifePro Tip: An ivory handle cannot diminish the blade's intention.
  12. SubscriberProper Knob
    Cornovii
    North of the Tamar
    Joined
    02 Feb '07
    Moves
    52708
    16 Jun '17 09:58
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Perhaps you skimmed through the first part of the OP wherein I characterized the senseless deaths as sickening.
    Did I not emote enough to your liking?
    What's the emoji for not giving a rat's ass?
    No matter, I'm sure you get the point and are more than capable of filling in the blanks caused by my lack of social media skills.

    This being the Debate fo ...[text shortened]... mportant, self-serving point.
    But you wouldn't do such a small-minded, petty thing, would you?
    I know the answer to your question, let's see if you can work it out. What do you think the difference is?
  13. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    16 Jun '17 11:35
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    I know the answer to your question, let's see if you can work it out. What do you think the difference is?
    I asked some seven questions; to which are you alluding?
  14. SubscriberProper Knob
    Cornovii
    North of the Tamar
    Joined
    02 Feb '07
    Moves
    52708
    16 Jun '17 12:27
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    I asked some seven questions; to which are you alluding?
    How is it that a concrete building <30 stories tall which burned without restraint for the better part of a day--- fed on the fuel of its contents--- didn't fall, didn't collapse... and yet a building nearly 50 stories tall, also limited to its contents to fuel its fire, fell after less than eight hours of enduring small pockets of isolated fires?
  15. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    16 Jun '17 13:44
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    How is it that a concrete building <30 stories tall which burned without restraint for the better part of a day--- fed on the fuel of its contents--- didn't fall, didn't collapse... and yet a building nearly 50 stories tall, also limited to its contents to fuel its fire, fell after less than eight hours of enduring small pockets of isolated fires?
    I'm all atwitter...
    If you're able to tell how WTC7 fell, you're one step ahead of the US government: they offered nothing.
Back to Top