Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on February 10, 2007, 11:19:21 PM
-
When a building collapses, it looks like this:
-
Now, when a building is demolished using explosives, something different happens. The concrete and contents are vaporized and ejected as huge rolling clouds of fine dust and debris.
As a result, the building falls straight down, and unlike the buildings above, they lose all their material and become a small pile. You see, instead of turning from 50 stories to 40 stories, it goes from 50 stories to 2 stories:
-
In the picture above, you see a 47-story building in New York city which has been brought down ina controlled demolition. That means, wired explosives went off in an order to remove all structure integrity and collapse the building into its footprint.
See how every building around it is fine, yet it is nearly completely vaporized? That is a sign of very expert use of explosives, to not affect the hearby buildings.
Here you see it before/after. See how 47 stories became 20 feet of debris? Very different from the 4 pics at the top, where collapses occurred. This before/after animation shows a very precise takedown of a building using explosives.
Does anyone disagree?
(http://240fm.com/giff.gif)
-
Tell us more.. ::)
-
Oh god is 240 going to tell us thats what happened on 9-11. I hope not cause it is impossible. We'll wait to see if it is what he is going to say.
-
Show us some pictures of 100+ story buildings collapsing and not 10 story ones and you might have a point. ::)
-
Where were the buildings in the first photographs taken?
They don't look modern, don't like they belong in a country like USA, UK, Germany etc... looks like some Russian/Brazilian slum.
If the buildings in the first pictures are in fact from a country other than the US, are you sure they have the same buulding guidlines, materials etc to validly use them as a comparison to the US collapse?
-
Where were the buildings in the first photographs taken?
They don't look modern, don't like they belong in a country like USA, UK, Germany etc... looks like some Russian/Brazilian slum.
If the buildings in the first pictures are in fact from a country other than the US, are you sure they have the same buulding guidlines, materials etc to validly use them as a comparison to the US collapse?
It could be argued that the steel-reinforced concrete of the modern 47-story building in NYC should have been MORE LIKELY to retain its structural integrity.
I mean, if those buildings don't vaporize, why do the higher quality US buildings do it?
-
Oh god is 240 going to tell us thats what happened on 9-11.
Actually, Keith, the Official story of 9/11 never discussed this particular building (called World Trade Center 7).
However, there is videotape, as well as EMT, military, NYPD, and other groups which testify that there was a 20-second countdown to the takedown, then flashes and bombs. Also the police cleared everyone from the area.
This isn't really a debate, as the govt never said it WASN'T a controlled demolition. All we have is the obvious videotape, and the word of the men on the ground. The crazy talk comes from the people who call it a normal collapse (which would make it look like the first 4 pics in this thread). The evidence - video and testimony - call it a controlled takedown with explosives and a standard countdown.
-
Oh god is 240 going to tell us thats what happened on 9-11. I hope not cause it is impossible. We'll wait to see if it is what he is going to say.
You are not very bright.
-
Actually, Keith, the Official story of 9/11 never discussed this particular building (called World Trade Center 7).
However, there is videotape, as well as EMT, military, NYPD, and other groups which testify that there was a 20-second countdown to the takedown, then flashes and bombs. Also the police cleared everyone from the area.
This isn't really a debate, as the govt never said it WASN'T a controlled demolition. All we have is the obvious videotape, and the word of the men on the ground. The crazy talk comes from the people who call it a normal collapse (which would make it look like the first 4 pics in this thread). The evidence - video and testimony - call it a controlled takedown with explosives and a standard countdown.
Well I guess you will reveal the truth huh? ::) I'm sure glad that you, of all people, are gonna crack this one open. You really need to get a life.
-
Actually, Keith, the Official story of 9/11 never discussed this particular building (called World Trade Center 7).
However, there is videotape, as well as EMT, military, NYPD, and other groups which testify that there was a 20-second countdown to the takedown, then flashes and bombs. Also the police cleared everyone from the area.
This isn't really a debate, as the govt never said it WASN'T a controlled demolition. All we have is the obvious videotape, and the word of the men on the ground. The crazy talk comes from the people who call it a normal collapse (which would make it look like the first 4 pics in this thread). The evidence - video and testimony - call it a controlled takedown with explosives and a standard countdown.
Remember what we learnt by watching X-files: DENY EVERYTHING.
;D
-
Well I guess you will reveal the truth huh? ::) I'm sure glad that you, of all people, are gonna crack this one open. You really need to get a life.
Sounds like cap86 would rather let murder and insurance fraud go undetected, than look into obvious lies.
cap86, why are you so interested in defending the terrorists' accessories to the crime here? Do you support their cause? If not, can you explain why you want evidence supressed?
-
Sounds like cap86 would rather let murder and insurance fraud go undetected, than look into obvious lies.
cap86, why are you so interested in defending the terrorists' accessories to the crime here? Do you support their cause? If not, can you explain why you want evidence supressed?
Can you post a few calculations to back up your statements? (You once posted a link to a physics page, but give us more juice)
-
Can you post a few calculations to back up your statements? (You once posted a link to a physics page, but give us more juice)
In my own words - a 47-story skyscraper that was NEVER hit with a plane or any parts, converts from standing building to powder and molten steel in 6.5 seconds. When it falls, has the classic kink, streamers, and ejection jets, falls faster than freefall speed (explosion removes oxygen which lets building fall without air resistance). buildings on all sides of it stood just fine. It simply imploded.
Explosives were the only way.
Some good stuff here:
http://www.wtc7.net/
-
Sounds like cap86 would rather let murder and insurance fraud go undetected, than look into obvious lies.
cap86, why are you so interested in defending the terrorists' accessories to the crime here? Do you support their cause? If not, can you explain why you want evidence supressed?
Again, you have no concrete proof. You are no credible source on the topic so your credibility in general on every 911 thread is nonexistent. I have posted numerous scientific pages which you dismiss and then respond with conjecture and bullshit. You have zero concrete facts. You dismiss kh300 who knows more than you and say his facts are wrong. I hate terrorists and think they should be wiped out but it's more than likely that they did what they did and it didn't involve a gov't conspiracy.
What evidence? You have nothing pal. If people heard blasts or explosions, you mean to tell me there was nothing flammable or combustible in that building? Get real.
You weren't there at WTC 7 so you know jack shit about it. Stop there while you're ahead. You know nothing about buildings, structural integrity, collapses. You post jargon of which you have no knowledge and disseminate it in a constructed sentence as fact. You are a HISTORY major, stick to what you know. Keep saying the same old bullshit.
I am more patriotic than you will ever be and don't forget that.
-
fuck patriotism
its irrelevant
look at the friggen gif of the building falling, it imploded ... that doesnt happen without explosives
the owner said they pulled it
people on here have said they remember free talk of the demolition on radio/tv because the building was unsafe
there is no question the building was imploded with explosives
-
Show us some pictures of 100+ story buildings collapsing and not 10 story ones and you might have a point. ::)
You're a genius!!! Pretty much the only difference between a 10 story building and a 100+ story building, is weight and size. So, you think a building the is 90 more stories is going to simply change how it falls based on the height and weight? ::) ::) ::)
-
f**k patriotism
its irrelevant
look at the friggen gif of the building falling, it imploded ... that doesnt happen without explosives
the owner said they pulled it
people on here have said they remember free talk of the demolition on radio/tv because the building was unsafe
there is no question the building was imploded with explosives
You're not even American so you're imput on patriotism has no relevance. You know for a fact what happened? That's all I;m asking. Maybe you should read what KH300 said again, "pulled" does not equal imploded. Hope that helps. Are you a building expert?
-
http://www.jonhs.net/911/wtc7_blowup.htm
-
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html
-
When a building collapses, it looks like this:
those buildings didnt collapse,, they fell over because of a bad foundation.. big difference between a failed structure-wtc's,, and a bad foundation
-
those buildings didnt collapse,, they fell over because of a bad foundation.. big difference between a failed structure-wtc's,, and a bad foundation
Please show me ONE building in history that imploded from failed structure that didn't include explosives.
I'll paypal you 100,000 for each one. Cause there are none. Ever. In history. It's true. HTH.
-
240, I'm still waiting on the facts regarding the structural designs of these buildings and if they are even comparable and usable as evidence for your cause.
E.g.
- What are the circumstances that the buildings collapsed under.
- Under such circumstances, what were the buildings designed to do.
-
how do you plan on paying me?
-
what 240 ment to say was steel framed building ... steel framed building dont do that unless its 911
-
Yawn. This is an asymmetrical collapse. The debris is stil there. The matter does not change from concrete to powder - it simply moves from being part of the building to part of the pile. Just like if you hit it with a wrecking ball.
This building did not implode from structural failure. Re-read it.
WTC7 was 100 times the mass of that building and fell into a smaller pile. What you see rising from that is dust. What WTC7 sent rolling for miles was not dust- but pulverized concrete.
47 stories of skyscraper becomes 20 feet of metal in 6.5 seconds. The remaining hundreds of tons of building are all instantly converted to powder. Show me this.
-
watch the beginning of this vid- pancaking
8 story building being demoed
like i always say, but never get an answer to- show me a clip of explosions in the wtc's.. remember that was 8 storeys-the wtc's were combined 250-
-
I feel like you're making my point for me.
WTC1/2 and WTC were both controlled demoiltions, but different kinds.
WTC 1/2 started from the top up, very nontraditional. This caused a mushroom effect. after all, they had to have the collapse start where the plane crashed.
WTC7 is a standard collapse, a lot like the woodwards building you posted. Youtube some 40-60 story collapses. You'll see they're very much like WTC7, almost errily. If you look close at the WTC7 pics, you see the classic kink at the top, the jets coming from the top right, the streamers of smoke along the central columns (where more explosives would be used).
Here's the carolina hotel demolition:
&mode=related&search=
They even use the same 20-second countdown with 10-second warnings!
-
See it here - &mode=related&search=
Looks a lot like WTC7, dude. kinks and falls inward into its own footprint.
-
IDENTICAL collapses to WTC7.
Official story = ouch!
-
thanks for proving my point that there is no video of the wtc's having explosions. in the videos you posted there are extremely load and numerous blasts not seen or heard in any wtc video.
-
IDENTICAL collapses to WTC7.
Official story = ouch!
a callapse is a callapse, they will all have similar characteristics.. if i stab someone in the throat- they will bleed, weather its a switchblade knife or a kitchen knife.
and notice they took the sound off the videos? how convenient.. the point im making is in order to have a demolition- you have noise, no way around it. the same thing as everyone who i know that was near the wtc's and the recording ive herd from firemans radios- there was never any noise of explosions.
if this video had sound,, you would hear-boom,boom,boom........ and the wtc video would have nothing.
-
thanks for proving my point that there is no video of the wtc's having explosions. in the videos you posted there are extremely load and numerous blasts not seen or heard in any wtc video.
CNN - very clear explosions, multiples!
MSNBC reporter anticipating WTC 7 collapse
WTC 7 implosion showing squibs
Rescuer: "WTC 7 about to blow up"
WTC rescuers at pay phone hear LOUD explosions
WTC 7 collapse with audible explosions
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3201591890178435982&q=wtc7+explosions&hl=en
You want more? There are dozens!
-
a callapse is a callapse, they will all have similar characteristics.. if i stab someone in the throat- they will bleed, weather its a switchblade knife or a kitchen knife.
and notice they took the sound off the videos? how convenient.. the point im making is in order to have a demolition- you have noise, no way around it. the same thing as everyone who i know that was near the wtc's and the recording ive herd from firemans radios- there was never any noise of explosions.
No, a "callapse" is not a collapse.
In one, everything land in a pile. in a controlled demo, the contents of the building are converted to dust by explosives and ejected in rolling dust clouds of fine concrete.
if this video had sound,, you would hear-boom,boom,boom........ and the wtc video would have nothing.
PLEASE look at the clips I just posted. EXPLOSIONS very clear, dude.
-
You're a genius!!! Pretty much the only difference between a 10 story building and a 100+ story building, is weight and size. So, you think a building the is 90 more stories is going to simply change how it falls based on the height and weight? ::) ::) ::)
Thanks for your brilliant addition to this thread. Don't make a thread about the WTC and then link pictures of 5 story apartment buildings from other countries, eras, years, etc.
-
Thanks for your brilliant addition to this thread. Don't make a thread about the WTC and then link pictures of 5 story apartment buildings from other countries, eras, years, etc.
The point of those buildings was to show the difference between:
1) Building losing structural integrity and falling into piles retaining their mass, and
2) Buildings' contents being completely vaporized with explosives.
People now see the difference. It's an important difference.
-
why did you post all of those videos? they didnt prove shit,, i didnt hear one explosion-let alone hundreds
and for the millionth time, they knew the building was comming down, the firefighters were watching the building and knew it couldnt be saved,, they knew it was going to fall because they are experts at this-not you. they said "pull" which means abandon the fire and move out to safety.
-
why did you post all of those videos? they didnt prove shit,, i didnt hear one explosion-let alone hundreds
Turn up your volume.
it's like 10 seconds long.
It's loud as hell.
-
and for the millionth time, they knew the building was comming down,
How did they know to deliver a perfect 20-second countdown? ;)
-
Turn up your volume.
it's like 10 seconds long.
It's loud as hell.
this is all you got? haha
convenient angle that shows nothing..but that could the second plane hitting,, that could have been nothing but they edited the sound... if im a firefighter and i hear two bombs going off- do i say "hey guys make some phone calls". plus i didnt hear or see the building falling after that, and 2 explosions wouldn't bring down 250 stories of building anyways
and they did a countdown? they had this whole thing planned out, then they gave t all away by doing a countdown. lol.
did they show they guy pressing the button too? show me evidence of this "countdown"
-
kh300,
did you watch the clips? bombs before the collapse show up in a few of them.
You didn't watch them.
CNN - very clear explosions, multiples!
MSNBC reporter anticipating WTC 7 collapse
WTC 7 implosion showing squibs
Rescuer: "WTC 7 about to blow up"
WTC rescuers at pay phone hear LOUD explosions
WTC 7 collapse with audible explosions
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3201591890178435982&q=wtc7+explosions&hl=en
-
Thanks for your brilliant addition to this thread. Don't make a thread about the WTC and then link pictures of 5 story apartment buildings from other countries, eras, years, etc.
Jesus, you show your brilliance with every post. <sigh>
-
Jesus, you show your brilliance with every post. <sigh>
Another glorious contribution from the retard who doesn't even realize his avatar pic isn't showing. I should expect you to know about building demolitions to boot? ::)
-
My avatar shows every time to me. I log out, still there, use a different browser, still there.
Oh well. Maybe I'll go make the comparison of a stink beetle and how they interact with mole hills when a tornado blows through town.
-
Another glorious contribution from the retard who doesn't even realize his avatar pic isn't showing.
I can see his avatar. 2 stickmen fighting.
-
In my own words - a 47-story skyscraper that was NEVER hit with a plane or any parts, converts from standing building to powder and molten steel in 6.5 seconds. When it falls, has the classic kink, streamers, and ejection jets, falls faster than freefall speed (explosion removes oxygen which lets building fall without air resistance). buildings on all sides of it stood just fine. It simply imploded.
Explosives were the only way.
Some good stuff here:
http://www.wtc7.net/
no one has yet given an explaination for this other than, 'no, it wasnt a controlled demo, it just wasnt, your wrong' ::)
i dont support alot of the 9/11 CT stuff but theres no doubt in my mind that wtc7 was a controlled demolition. its clear as day
-
Yes, correct. They have no alternative theory other than "you're crazy".
The thing is, they can't think past the fact the govt would mislead them. Hell, in the case of WTC7, the govt wouldn't even talk about it! They knew it would be such an obvious lie. However, thru suggestion, these clowns here just absorb the assumption.
WTC7 was a controlled demo. Once you accept that, you work out the logistics and see 9/11 foreknowledge and cooperation was required. Then it gets scary!
-
I can't read all this shit. But from what I see 240 is saying the WTC were controlled explosions. Well how do you explain setting up these controlled explosions. Have you ever seen what it take sto do that. Many many floors have to be prepped. Are you telling me NO ONE saw any of this going on. And if they did it it would have taken months so that they could hide what they are doing from the people that work there. Also, these explosives work on radio frequencies. WHich means anything from a cell phone to a radio could possibly set them off. How did they control that. Are you telling me NO ONE in the WTC building used their phones for a month or so. It takes many small charges throughout the building to do what you say. Many Many pops would have been heard. I have seen three major buildings blow-up. Two in Vegas and one here.
-
I can't read all this shit. But from what I see 240 is saying the WTC were controlled explosions. Well how do you explain setting up these controlled explosions. Have you ever seen what it take sto do that. Many many floors have to be prepped. Are you telling me NO ONE saw any of this going on. And if they did it it would have taken months so that they could hide what they are doing from the people that work there. Also, these explosives work on radio frequencies. WHich means anything from a cell phone to a radio could possibly set them off. How did they control that. Are you telling me NO ONE in the WTC building used their phones for a month or so. It takes many small charges throughout the building to do what you say. Many Many pops would have been heard. I have seen three major buildings blow-up. Two in Vegas and one here.
He still hasn't answered my simple question regarding if the structure of these buildings are comparable.
He won't, he decides not to believe in truth and reality.