FF to 1:00 and see how easy it is to shape hot metal.
Now also keep in mind that the columns were hit by a freaking giant plane at almost Mach 1 & that they have 20-30 floors on top of them (I think they produce a little more pressure than a guy with a hammer).
Wow...that was hard....a whole 1 minute of trying to look into it by using metallurgical propertires instead of flip flopping crazy CT's and dreaming up aliens digging under the foundations.
Take care ;)
how big was the plant that hit WTC7?
How does WTC7 fit into your theory?
how big was the plant that hit WTC7?
::)
First let me ask you how does it fit YOUR CT? You all started with the towers...when that failed you picked on WTC7.
In regards to WTC7 , the "tiny" towers that crashed next to it + fires (did you forget what you just saw in the youtube video) didn't help....but I guess that doesn't matter.
After you will finally understand that theory is BS you will start complaining about the plane that hit the Pentagon and I'm sure you will find something else to invent a CT on afterwards.
it doesn't.simply b/c a fraction of ppl believe something doesnt make it so, a number of ppl believe the holocaust didnt take place but we all know it did. Millions of phds, scientists, and military personel say the story does make sense so why do you choose to believe the fraction that doesnt?
he's briniging up aliens because, well, it's a common distraction method. Grouping in the thousands of enginners, phds, scientists, and military personell who said the story doesn't make sense, along with plants who spew "aliens did it! aliens did it!" is his bailout.
simply b/c a fraction of ppl believe something doesnt make it so, a number of ppl believe the holocaust didnt take place but we all know it did. Millions of phds, scientists, and military personel say the story does make sense so why do you choose to believe the fraction that doesnt?
simply b/c a fraction of ppl believe something doesnt make it so, a number of ppl believe the holocaust didnt take place but we all know it did. Millions of phds, scientists, and military personel say the story does make sense so why do you choose to believe the fraction that doesnt?
I PROVED it wrong
::)
Oh brother. Internet powers activate.....Form of "video physics expert"
::)
Oh brother. Internet powers activate.....Form of "video physics expert"
FF to 1:00 and see how easy it is to shape hot metal.
Now also keep in mind that the columns were hit by a freaking giant plane at almost Mach 1 & that they have 20-30 floors on top of them (I think they produce a little more pressure than a guy with a hammer).
Wow...that was hard....a whole 1 minute of trying to look into it by using metallurgical propertires instead of flip flopping crazy CT's and dreaming up aliens digging under the foundations.
Take care ;)
OzmO,
You, me, sarah palin, and kean/hamilton all agree on the need for a new 911 investigation.
People like IfbbwannaB believe they know more about the events of the day than Kean and hamilton, who chaired and wrote the official 911 commission narrative. I pity them, to be honest. I think the story has holes, and so does obama, palin, and many other good americans. ifbbwannaB is working to sell us a story that its own authors have said is not accurate. It's a akin to him running a used car lot and selling a vehicle which has been recalled.
So?
What does that have to do with the crazy notion that 9/11 was an inside job?
So?
What does that have to do with the crazy notion that 9/11 was an inside job?
The trade centers fell faster than gravity would naturally pull them down to Earth.ifbb already proved this wrong if im not mistaken
WTF?
ifbb already proved this wrong if im not mistaken
This thread was about a scientific issue. The melting point of steel and just how a 500 ft tall building with only fire damage managed to be reduced to 100 ft of metal, and tons and tons of small dust, in under 10 seconds.what about the 747 fly into it that didnt cause any damage?
This is a scientific issue. Surely we cannot have a conversation on morality and govt, because I think we all realize by now the two are not capable of existing in the same place at the same time ;)
ifbb proved something that NIST could not. Sweet. He should be a scientist or something.what did he prove in that one thread that you wouldnt address anymore after being owned?
what about the 747 fly into it that didnt cause any damage?
no..both planes hit above 70 floors atleast ....The towers were not design to withstand the impact from 757 dreamliners full of fuel.
wtc was made to with-stand jet crashes exactly like what happened.
the base should not have crumbled under...if anything..and i mean anything...the damaged parts and the floors above it should have slid right off
thats plain logic.
The towers were not design to withstand the impact from 757 dreamliners full of fuel.
Gravity always pull down. The floors are flat and mass falls vertically.
Your logic is missing.
240 the melting point of steel is not in question it is at what temperature steel would lose enough strength to collapse the building.
Read the NIST reports the information is there.
The towers were not design to withstand the impact from 757 dreamliners full of fuel.
So the WTC's were brought down purposely by the US government because they felt slamming planes into them wouldn't be enough to send America to war?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
snore............
i'm thinking a massive pile of dust and smoking metal with thousands dead, coupled with the trauma of our countries most important buildings wiped off the map miiiiiight be a little more dramatic than 2 giant holes in wtc burning for a couple days and maybe a 2 or 3 hundred deaths.
the latter would be tradgic too don't get me wrong but would it flip that imperialistic "go get em" switch in the heads of many americans as well as the former?
na.
So the WTC's were brought down purposely by the US government because they felt slamming planes into them wouldn't be enough to send America to war?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
snore............
It's overkill. Think it through.
They have to wire the building with explosives in such a way that no one finds out? Impossible on so many levels.
Are you basing this off your own logic?
Logic that implies "dude, there a shit load of fuel in that jet, no way that a quarter mile long building could with stand more than 45 minutes of burning"
The fucking egineers who designed the wtc....go read up on what they said dip shit.
I have.
I also read the NIST report and FEMA report and what the ASCE had to say on the matter.
Here is a little snippet from the NIST faqs.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
1. If the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707 aircraft, why did the impact of individual 767s cause so much damage?
As stated in Section 5.3.2 of NIST NCSTAR 1, a document from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) indicated that the impact of a [single, not multiple] Boeing 707 aircraft was analyzed during the design stage of the WTC towers. However, NIST investigators were unable to locate any documentation of the criteria and method used in the impact analysis and, therefore, were unable to verify the assertion that “… such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building.…”
The capability to conduct rigorous simulations of the aircraft impact, the growth and spread of the ensuing fires, and the effects of fires on the structure is a recent development. Since the approach to structural modeling was developed for the NIST WTC investigation, the technical capability available to the PANYNJ and its consultants and contactors to perform such analyses in the 1960s would have been quite limited in comparison to the capabilities brought to bear in the NIST investigation.
The damage from the impact of a Boeing 767 aircraft (which is about 20 percent bigger than a Boeing 707) into each tower is well documented in NCSTAR 1-2. The massive damage was caused by the large mass of the aircraft, their high speed and momentum, which severed the relatively light steel of the exterior columns on the impact floors. The results of the NIST impact analyses matched well with observations (from photos and videos and analysis of recovered WTC steel) of exterior damage and of the amount and location of debris exiting from the buildings. This agreement supports the premise that the structural damage to the towers was due to the aircraft impact and not to any alternative forces.
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_12_2007.htm
2. Were the basic principles of conservation of momentum and energy satisfied in NIST’s analysis of the structural response of the towers to the aircraft impact and the fires?
Yes. The basic principles of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy were satisfied in these analyses.
In the case of the aircraft impact analyses, which involved a moving aircraft (velocity) and an initially stationary building, the analysis did, indeed, account for conservation of momentum and energy (kinetic energy, strain energy).
After each tower had finished oscillating from the aircraft impact, the subsequent degradation of the structure involved only minute (essentially zero) velocities. Thus, a static analysis of the structural response and collapse initiation was appropriate. Since the velocities were zero and since momentum is equal to mass times velocity, the momentum terms also equaled zero and therefore dropped out of the governing equations. The analyses accounted for conservation of energy.
I could give a crap aout your CT angle.
According to 240 Hurricane Katrina and the Giants victory over the patriots in the super bowl two years ago was an inside job also.
pathetic that you resort to making such shit up.
240, do you still entertain the idea that the planes were a sophisticated hologram?
FF to 1:00 and see how easy it is to shape hot metal.
Now also keep in mind that the columns were hit by a freaking giant plane at almost Mach 1 & that they have 20-30 floors on top of them (I think they produce a little more pressure than a guy with a hammer).
Wow...that was hard....a whole 1 minute of trying to look into it by using metallurgical propertires instead of flip flopping crazy CT's and dreaming up aliens digging under the foundations.
Take care ;)
MACH 1...um...Don't you think you are EXAGGERATING WAAAAAAY TOO MUCH?? Mach one is about 750+ MPH the plane was traveling at 450 according to the scientist and FAA. A far cry from MACH !. Nonetheless I will agree that a plane crashing into the building, which it was designed to handle multiple times over, will NOT cause it to fall down. And since plane fuel DOES NOT explode it would not have caused those fireballs. Also enough people rushing out of the building spoke of explosions happening all over the building...even the firemen spoke of avalanches of explosions racing through the building.
Cruise speed of a 757 is 530mile=0.8Mach, I assume it was going full throttle and diving into the building.
I don't know the exact speed it hit the building but I remember hearing close to Mach 1 for the one that hit the Pentagon.
I don't know the exact speed it hit the building but I remember hearing close to Mach 1 for the one that hit the Pentagon.
ozmo,can you find that clip 240 if im not mistaken he was referring to the plane being a missle not literally saying a missle hit the pentagon.
it wwill vaporize. first time ever, sure.
and that 911 commissioner who said 'the missile that hit the pentagon' in an interview, well, he must have been a lib.
can you find that clip 240 if im not mistaken he was referring to the plane being a missle not literally saying a missle hit the pentagon.
I see.so no clip? find me a clip of rummy saying that to plz.
And when Rummy said to CNN that we shot down the plane over Penn, was "shot down" code for something else too? ;)
The two of us spending hours debating it on a message board is kinda lame. People believe what they want on that topic. A black box did come out on the pentagon, and i thought the flight data showed it mathematically didn't drop below 180 feet.If there is none please quit spouting your ct about here then and just let it go.
it's irrelevant, anyway. You tell me the govt and mainstream media (nbc and obama) spits lies 24/7 in 2009, yet the govt and media (bush and nbc) told us the truth about things in 2001. I gotcha.... ???
Go eat a sandwich and enjoy your night homie. You have a lot of anger. you shoulda been here 3 or 4 years ago when it was all the rage to debate 911 topics. Now, there are plenty of resources, analysis, info and disinfo out there. You have hundreds of military ppl calling it a big lie. They know more than either of us, and they're hurting their reputations by standing up against the story.
So anyway, enjoy your evening tony. we're just wasting time debating a historical event that happened almost a decade ago. what's the point?
If there is none please quit spouting your ct about here then and just let it go.
yawn. you were the one repeatedly asking me for videos.I couldnt have asked for a vid if you hadnt made a comment in a arguement you yourself believe is pointless.
you may have noticed i rarely chime into 911 threads, until some cawklover says "240 thinks aliens had sex with WTC7" or some other ignorant shit.
yawn. you were the one repeatedly asking me for videos.
you may have noticed i rarely chime into 911 threads, until some cawklover says "240 thinks aliens had sex with WTC7" or some other ignorant shit.
ozmo,
it wwill vaporize. first time ever, sure.
and that 911 commissioner who said 'the missile that hit the pentagon' in an interview, well, he must have been a lib.
yawn. you were the one repeatedly asking me for videos.
you may have noticed i rarely chime into 911 threads, until some cawklover says "240 thinks aliens had sex with WTC7" or some other ignorant shit.
I entertain many ideas. I like to think about what it would feel like to experience a few of the Victoria Secret girls holding a D s'ing contest, with me as the judge.