Reply With Quote
they have mixed....close one.
Why are you arguing that in two threads? Put that in the other one.
they have mixed....close one.
They only mixed because you mixed them with the same lame tidbit that had absolutely nothing to do with what was being talked about before. Congratulations.
The top trusses on the north tower were compromised by having a 747 fly into them.
On the south tower, the trusses were not so compromised; only one corner was taken out. And, as you would expect, the top of the south tower began collapsing at an angle. It fell first because 1) it was hit lower down, requiring the damaged supports to hold up a greater load, and 2) being hit at an angle the way it was introduced a greater moment of inertia than the north tower had (i.e., tendency to topple).
These buildings are designed to hold up static loads. They can handle some wind shear, and depending on where they are built, some seismic events. They are overdesigned so that a fraction of the supports can hold up the load if need be. But once failure occurs and they start in motion, the ballgame is over.
And, no, the collapse of the lower core is not a mystery. Their bases had a insane amount of heavy debris land right around them all at once at near-free fall speed.
Not according to the official pancake theory, but we all know that's bogus.And, no, the collapse of the lower core is not a mystery. Their bases had a insane amount of heavy debris land right around them all at once at near-free fall speed.
Please give me your working theory that incorporates all of the theorlets that you have posted in the past five years.
Lets hear it.
So then it collapsed like a tree...wait a minute...The top trusses on the north tower were compromised by having a 747 fly into them.
I don't know how exactly the pancake theory refutes the idea that the World Trade Center towers 1 and 2 fell in a matter of seconds, but anyway, it is not official, since NIST rejects the pancake theory.
I am getting rather frustrated with your offering up of little snippets of misinformation devoid of common sense. I think you basically don't care what the facts say, and simply will take it on faith that 9/11 is an inside job, because it fits your ideology and worldview.
Yeah, well, I'm getting tired of explaining how the official story to the towers collapse defied the laws of physics, yet all anyone offers me is answers that defy the laws of physics.
One more time for the slow learner's...........
A: Thermite charges place on beams.
B: Thermite residue of melted steel
C: white aluminum oxide. gas caused by Thermite
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.htm
Five months after the collapses molten steel was being pulled from the World Trade Center wreckage.
Conventional fires cannot explain the above, but thermite can.
A thermite reaction generates extraordinarily high temperatures (>2500° C) and provides a credible explanation for the fires, hot spots and molten steel (a by-product of the thermite reaction) found in the collapsed buildings.
http://www.rense.com/general75/thrm.htm
EVIDENCE OF THERMITE
Photographic evidence strongly suggests that the secure computer rooms in both towers contained forms of Thermite, which had been pre-placed to destroy evidence and facilitate the collapse of the immense steel-frame towers while creating a deadly pyrotechnic spectacle.
After examining the photographic and physical evidence, Professor Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University has concluded that the yellow and white glowing metal pouring from the east corner of the 81st floor of the South Tower was, most likely, molten iron created by a Thermite reaction.
One more time for the slow learners...........
A: Beam cut by torch at angle, standard practice.
B: Residue from cutting torch
C: Smoke from fires still burning under debris pile.
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
Rescue workers made extensive use of high-tech wizardry called "lights" they used to be able to see in the dark!
A thermite reaction generating extraordinarily high temperatures (>2500° C) would be melting their faces off of their skulls.
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
EVIDENCE OF ALUMINUM
Photographic evidence strongly suggests that the impact zones in both towers contained forms of aluminum, which had been pre-placed by terrorists in the form of Boeing 757s to melt from the fires caused by jet fuel while creating a deadly pyrotechnic spectacle.
After examining the photographic and physical evidence, every sane person has concluded that the yellow and white glowing metal pouring from the east corner of the 81st floor of the South Tower was, most likely, molten aluminum created by a fire. Professor Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University has concluded that there is archeological evidence that Jesus Christ visited ancient America.
Classic Chump....
Leave it to Chump to make a joke about 9/11 very sad,
The joke is the "truth" movement that can't even string together a workable alternate theory after five and a half years.
Can't wait to hear your new jokes about the 32 dead collage students.
Do you even know how old that pic is that shows the melted Beams? And do you know what day it was when they actually brought torches to ground zero?
What do you know, besides tasteless jokes about a day where many died?
The joke I made was about you and it was in perfecty good taste. You are alive and well and subject to ridicule for making ridiculous posts.Give me proof of the days those pistures were taken.Do you even know how old that pic is that shows the melted Beams? And do you know what day it was they actually brought torches to ground zero?
The joke chump made has nothing to do with 9/11 and all to do with you and dan, mouse.
Man up and answer the question of who is behind 9/11 instead of trying to explain to us what happened that tragic day.
You don't disprove a theory, and that's all we have about 911 6 years later, by trying to prove a alternative theory. You see if you can duplicate the theory under scientific conditions and you must adhere to set laws of physics, which as I have shown, the pancake theory does not.
Yeah, the rescuers climbed over steaming hot debris and just happened to cut that beam in the same angle as a thermite charge. What an idiot.
You haven't shown much of anything, and pancaking isn't a theory of a cause of collapse anymore, so that's a straw man argument these days.
We weren't asking you to prove anything. Just to state your working theory about what you think really happened on 9/11. Why is it so difficult to even speculate when you aren't even asked to prove your theory?
Do you even know what a thermite reaction is? Show me a "thermite charge" that cuts through steel columns at an angle like that. While you're at it, feel free to explain how anyone could attach these magic thermite charges to enough columns to collapse two 110 story skyscrapers without alerting any of the thousands of people that worked in the buildings.
Yeah, the rescuers climbed over steaming hot debris and just happened to cut that beam in the same angle as a thermite charge. What an idiot.
Understood
In response to the le of this thread:
YES.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
