Reply With Quote
There were no "cell phone" calls from the planes. Factually incorrect.
Calls were made from the planes, by systems designed to transmit voice at al ude.
You do know this technology existed back then right? Is this some sort of mystery to you?
The individual elements of this well worn schtick were long ago debunked to anyone with any sense.
"It never happened before" is meaningless, and is ridiculous on its face. "No one ever flew a heavier than air craft before, therefore it didn't happen".
There were no "cell phone" calls from the planes. Factually incorrect.
Calls were made from the planes, by systems designed to transmit voice at al ude.
You do know this technology existed back then right? Is this some sort of mystery to you?
Buildings didn't "fall into their own footprint". Also factually incorrect.
and you are still an idiot, who ran away from his own thread as soon as anyone pressed him on his bull .
BUCK BUCK BUCK BAGOOOOCK!!
For all practical purposes Tower 1 & 2 did. When the structural steel at the fire floors got red hot it lost it's strength and the concrete floors above started pancaking and stacking. Then the combined weight of the floors became too much for the lower structures to handle and the floors literally pancaked on top of each other in layers. Obviously there was a lot of debris ejected but for the most part it was a vertical stack.
Pretty much. But not quite as neat as Dan would like.
The problem that the conspira s miss is that the explosives they think were used produce ejecta that would have scattered shards of stuff for literally miles away. They then retreat to "thermite", and fail to produce evidence for that either.
That's just a dumb theory. Bottom line when steel gets red hot it loses it's physical strength properties. The trusses bowed, tons of weight started collapsing and the central column couldn't hold it and failed.
Eyup. Impact damage, and prolonged fire softening structural steel.
Physics does the rest. As I pointed out to the demolition people, it is a bit like a man holding a 100 pound bag over his head. He can do so, up to the limits of his endurance, but that is what the bottom part of the building did for decades.
Then you had the beginnings of a collapse, and that static force becomes a dynamic one. Drop that same 100 pound bag from 10-12 feet over that same man, and you get that thing imparting over half a ton of force (i.e. "weight") at point of impact, far more than the man can hold up.
Remember "weight" is just a measurement of force.
I gained a whole new appreciation for the energy of motion doing the learnin' for all that.
We've gone through this before RG....it's in your 911 commission report bible.....of course there were cell phone calls made from 911 planes...There were no "cell phone" calls from the planes. Factually incorrect.
Calls were made from the planes, by systems designed to transmit voice at al ude.
You do know this technology existed back then right? Is this some sort of mystery to you?
Really?Buildings didn't "fall into their own footprint". Also factually incorrect.
Other building collapses...
NIST rejected the pancake theory....
There were multiple central columns ....at some point the opposing forces would have slowed down the collapse under your pancake theory....That's just a dumb theory. Bottom line when steel gets red hot it loses it's physical strength properties. The trusses bowed, tons of weight started collapsing and the central column couldn't hold it and failed.
Plus, there was no pancaking from the top in WTC7.....the central trusses collapsed by fire according to the 911 Commission report....
You cannot argue the math so you come with this ? You can go on with your tin foil all day I'm sure but your root argument remains .
The concluded in their own words:
You have to love people that cite something for convenience but reject the other conclusions such asNIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.
It wasn't 'pancake because of the trussing of the exterior columns. It is also the mechanism by which they explain the trajectory of the collapse. Of the other buildings you used you obviously did not look for ones built using the same techniques. You clearly just biased towards 'different.'NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition” theory since there is conclusive evidence that:
the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and;
the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors.
Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST or by the New York City Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department, or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.
In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.
Don't be a sophist piece of .
From LZ's own link
That's the only point I made....everything else is LZ panty-wetting....NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse
Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.
Rg and Fuzzy don't not want you to see this....
Detailed Account of Telephone Calls From September 11th Flights
http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/e...alldetail.html
For example, the slide in the right-hand column for Edward Felt indicates that he used a cell phone.
Eyewitnesses...
Dan Rather....
Windsor tower madrid...burned for 20 consecutive hours..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
