Its sound advice Housey. Sometimes it’s difficult not to bite when dealing with such magnitudes of lunacy.
Remembering 9/11 - 20 years on
- Thread starter Pawnless Endgame
- Start date
Its sound advice Housey. Sometimes it’s difficult not to bite when dealing with such magnitudes of lunacy.
They should have withstood them better - possibly sub-standard work in the first place or sub-standard maintenance contributed to them coming down (as has unfortunately been a story in the US and building collapses). IIRC buildings like this are designed around a failure mode into their own footprint but still a bit odd they all came down in such a fashion but we don't exactly have a lot of similar events to go on as to how often that would happen if you re-ran similar circumstances.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,415
- Location
- Surrey
The users post was a joke that's gone way over your head
Last edited:
https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
The problem was the tens of thousands of gallons of jet fuel. No one imagined during the design that such a plane would be launched in to the buildings at speed, fully laden.
It must be near impossible to make a building totally failure proof. If you hit something with enough force, or burn it with such intensity for long enough, ultimately it will come down. It’s just a structure ultimately - admittedly one with a very big footprint, so not small at all. But we are talking about a 767 with 90,000 gallons of fuel, and a weight of well over 100,000 kg at 400+ mph.
there werent any 747's or thousands of gallons of fuel in building 7
That’s true, but there was a heck of a lot of debris, and fires that raged for hours. The damage weakened some of the main supports which eventually gave way. Firefighters evacuated the building because they could see it was structurally compromised and was continuing to deteriorate until it’s collapse.
Last edited:
They didn't just rage for hours, they were completely uncontrolled.
Bigger fish to fry at that point!
you do realize that the two towers were the first buildings to collapse in history from a burning building. And also Trade Centre 7 was "pulled" after the planes hit.
Its been a setup, and so obvious that it is the case.
New rule, Housey should be piscine but not heard.
I don't believe it was a setup, on what purpose? It is entirely plausible that the buildings collapsed. The reason it looked like a controlled demolition is because the structural steel was Compromised and with the weight of the upper floors,etc coming down on top of destroying the lower floors. It was the first skyscraper to collapse from fire and still remains the only megastructure to have collapsed from fire to this day, it is not the first building to have collapsed from fire.
Too many open questions for the conspiracy brigade to answer.
What if the planes never made it? Would they just have blown the buildings up anyway? Where were the explosives? How come no one ever saw any explosives anywhere? You ever seen a rigged building? People were working in those offices. Was Osama on the pay roll as well, he was in on it alongside the US ‘government’? The plane hits and yet somehow all this explosives remain intact on the exact floors where the plane hits, as that’s where the collapse began (you can see it on film).
Just the concept alone is laughable - there’s so many cogs turning, variables, open points.
What if the planes never made it? Would they just have blown the buildings up anyway? Where were the explosives? How come no one ever saw any explosives anywhere? You ever seen a rigged building? People were working in those offices. Was Osama on the pay roll as well, he was in on it alongside the US ‘government’? The plane hits and yet somehow all this explosives remain intact on the exact floors where the plane hits, as that’s where the collapse began (you can see it on film).
Just the concept alone is laughable - there’s so many cogs turning, variables, open points.
I was only around 10 at the time, I remember coming back from school and seeing my parents watching it on the TV and remember thinking that it was a demolition program and were demolishing tower blocks, however it soon became apparent that wasn't the case. I still remember a clip on the news where an upset lady was being filmed frantically trying to phone someone who was believed to be inside the tower. I remember thinking even at that age it was in poor taste to film it.
Well, to start, the man who owned the trade centers and building 7, admitted on TV that the controlled demolition (pulled) was done because "the building was compromised and dangerous", but how could they control demolition the building a few hours after the planes hit? as a controlled demolition takes weeks to prepare and execute..hmm??
Been debunked time and time again. If the theory is based purely the use of certain words, it’s effectively baseless, because there is no other evidence to support it. This also makes the suggestion that the firefighters or their commanders were also involved. Laughable.
‘In the PBS documentary America Rebuilds,which aired in September 2002, Larry Silverstein, the owner of 7 WTC and leaseholder and insurance policy holder for the remainder of the WTC complex, recalled a discussion with the fire department in which doubts about containing the fires were expressed. Silverstein recalled saying, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it". "They made that decision to pull", he recalled, "and we watched the building collapse." Silverstein issued a statement that it was the firefighting team, not the building, that was to be pulled, contradicting theorists' allegation that "pull" was used in a demolition-related sense’.
To be fair there is a difference between the work involved to do a professional, properly prepared controlled demolition and the bare minimum to rig a building to bring it down if you don't care for the consequences.
Although there is a lot against an intentional rigging it isn't completely unfeasible - there were several empty floors, no one ever questions or gives much thought to workers coming and going, etc.
Not to say that happened but it isn't completely outside of feasible.
Although there is a lot against an intentional rigging it isn't completely unfeasible - there were several empty floors, no one ever questions or gives much thought to workers coming and going, etc.
Not to say that happened but it isn't completely outside of feasible.