How exactly will Taiwan torpedo the dam?

In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...

You assumed the dam, as built, is one big structure of a certain
cross-section, that the amount of concrete used on the dam *project* is
the same as that just used on the dam (as opposed to the other dam
structures, locks, roads, powerhouses), et cetera.

I used the only numbers I had available. You have offered exactly--zip in
terms of actual numbers.

I did mention that the dam didn't have as big a cross-section as you
think, with approximate thicknesses. You chose to ignore that, so it's
your problem, not mine.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
. com...
In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...

You assumed the dam, as built, is one big structure of a certain
cross-section, that the amount of concrete used on the dam *project*
is
the same as that just used on the dam (as opposed to the other dam
structures, locks, roads, powerhouses), et cetera.

I used the only numbers I had available. You have offered exactly--zip
in
terms of actual numbers.

I did mention that the dam didn't have as big a cross-section as you
think, with approximate thicknesses. You chose to ignore that, so it's
your problem, not mine.

You have not provided any specific numbers, period. You carped that it was,
"...being about twice..." the cross sectional depth of the Rhine dams--OK,
where did you get that from? I told you that I thought you were a bit shy in
that estimate, and gave you the reasoning behind why I thought so. You did
not respond with any actual measurement--you just carped again.What are the
exact measurements at that point, since you seem to be so offended by the
use of the rough calcs I gave you? In other words, where is the beef, Chad?

Brooks


--
cirby at cfl.rr.com