Author Topic: Side by side burning building comparison  (Read 4161 times)

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Side by side burning building comparison
« on: February 12, 2009, 10:16:56 PM »
I don't have an opinion one way or the other but for anyone's that's interested,


Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2009, 10:20:14 PM »
you really have no opinion or you don't want to say?

2ND COMING

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
  • Might is right.
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2009, 10:22:22 PM »

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2009, 10:35:55 PM »
you really have no opinion or you don't want to say?

If I said I think it's interesting, does that mean anything?


What do you think?

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2009, 10:40:26 PM »
If I said I think it's interesting, does that mean anything?


What do you think?
I think there is no freaking way fire brought down wtc7

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2009, 10:46:19 PM »
I think there is no freaking way fire brought down wtc7

One thing that many people havent seen are the missing pieces of wtc7 that were caused by falling debris. The pictures I've seen show a substantial amount of it's ground level missing but since Im not an engineer, I don't know if that was enough to contribute to it falling down.  I tried using Jenga blocks to recreate the collpase but it's just not the same.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2009, 10:49:33 PM »
One thing that many people havent seen are the missing pieces of wtc7 that were caused by falling debris. The pictures I've seen show a substantial amount of it's ground level missing but since Im not an engineer, I don't know if that was enough to contribute to it falling down.  I tried using Jenga blocks to recreate the collpase but it's just not the same.
why would it matter if you're an engineer.  skeptics don't listen to them either.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2009, 10:51:37 PM »
the pic at 51 sec is pretty amazing. that hotel was an inferno. Damn.

gordiano

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17124
  • TEAM "CUTE PENIS", TEAM TRIFLIN' RONNIE COLEMAN
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2009, 11:17:46 PM »
why would it matter if you're an engineer.  skeptics don't listen to them either.

LOL....so true.
HAHA, RON.....

webcake

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16148
  • Not now chief...
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2009, 11:20:20 PM »
Interesting stuff... 8)
No doubt about it...

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2009, 11:39:30 PM »
One thing that many people havent seen are the missing pieces of wtc7 that were caused by falling debris. The pictures I've seen show a substantial amount of it's ground level missing but since Im not an engineer, I don't know if that was enough to contribute to it falling down.  I tried using Jenga blocks to recreate the collpase but it's just not the same.

Silly man   ;)
Of course it wouldn't be the same. Only an extremely well trained and very skilled demolition expert using strategically placed charges could collapse a building of that size right down into it's own footprints.... uh, ...at least until Sept 2001, then fire acquired the same ability too. ...and you are neither.   :P
w

Purge_WTF

  • Guest
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2009, 11:56:58 PM »
  "Never trust a Bush unless it's burning."   ;D

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2009, 12:03:25 AM »
  "Never trust a Bush unless it's burning."   ;D



I have a feeling that line will grow in popularity in the coming years.

I have a friend of mine who lives in Texas, and his last name is Bush.
Six years ago, ...he was enjoying the perks of being named Bush while living in Texas,
...I should give him a call to see how he's been enjoying it over the last couple of years.  I don't think he is.  :'(
w

IFBBwannaB

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4538
  • BAN stick!
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #13 on: February 13, 2009, 04:10:05 AM »
Wow...so from looking at pictures alone you know what is the exact type of metal that was used in both buildings and how much it is weakened by high temps? Damn you guys most be really good experts  ::)

Ohh...did we forget that 2 gigantic buildings crashed next to WTC 7? That surely didn't help him stay standing.

You all only show how little you know, assessing a building collapse by looking at some pictures...wow...simply wow.


In case you missed it :

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/02/09/china.hotel.fire/index.html

A massive fire engulfed a newly constructed, unoccupied luxury hotel in central Beijing on Monday night as crowds watched a nearby fireworks display marking the end of Lunar New Year celebrations.



They probably using new alloys that were designed with 9/11 in mind.

But I want to thank you all for giving me the opportunity to educate the less fortunate ones, I find it to be a great privilege. :-*

IFBBwannaB

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4538
  • BAN stick!
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2009, 07:46:26 AM »
Bump for new physics laws and picture analysis of structures and metals  ;D.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2009, 07:49:58 AM »
lol, haven't figured out why people don't want to waste their time with you IFBB?  I know, it's because you're always right and we're just stupid.  have fun waiting...

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2009, 07:50:17 AM »
Silly man   ;)
Of course it wouldn't be the same. Only an extremely well trained and very skilled demolition expert using strategically placed charges could collapse a building of that size right down into it's own footprints.... uh, ...at least until Sept 2001, then fire acquired the same ability too. ...and you are neither.   :P

I guess all the idiots in WTC 7 must have either missed or ignored the massive barrel charges being placed around the building, the man hours involved, the wiring, the tons of people coming and going or the few who did not work there...yeah ok.
L

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #17 on: February 13, 2009, 07:57:07 AM »
I guess all the idiots in WTC 7 must have either missed or ignored the massive barrel charges being placed around the building, the man hours involved, the wiring, the tons of people coming and going or the few who did not work there...yeah ok.
brilliant ::)

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #18 on: February 13, 2009, 08:04:19 AM »
Ignoring facts does just like the folks in WTC7 ignored the super secret demo guys as they wireed the building right. Hugo u have no idea what the hell ur talking about. Ur not an engineer, nor a demo expert. U cut and paste from CT websites that fit into ur bizarre world view. Explain to me in detail how they got the demo into the building, how they wired it without anybody noticing, including the NYPD,and who "they" are. U can't because thats the beauty of a CT, it can never really be proven.
L

Mr. Magoo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9808
  • THE most mistaken identity on getbig
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2009, 08:05:05 AM »
Wow...so from looking at pictures alone you know what is the exact type of metal that was used in both buildings and how much it is weakened by high temps? Damn you guys most be really good experts  ::)

Ohh...did we forget that 2 gigantic buildings crashed next to WTC 7? That surely didn't help him stay standing.

You all only show how little you know, assessing a building collapse by looking at some pictures...wow...simply wow.


In case you missed it :

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/02/09/china.hotel.fire/index.html

A massive fire engulfed a newly constructed, unoccupied luxury hotel in central Beijing on Monday night as crowds watched a nearby fireworks display marking the end of Lunar New Year celebrations.



They probably using new alloys that were designed with 9/11 in mind.

But I want to thank you all for giving me the opportunity to educate the less fortunate ones, I find it to be a great privilege. :-*

I actually conducted a science experiment with help of many engineers and scientists that are 9-11 skeptics a few years ago. Burning jet fuel couldn't make the steel collaspe, it wouldn't get hot enough. However, unless you all dont know already, the mob (gambino family) had the contract of installing the insulation in both world trade centers, and they figured out they could save a ton of money by not putting any fire protection in the corners. This might explain it more.

I use to be interested in that sort of thing.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2009, 08:09:26 AM »
Ignoring facts does just like the folks in WTC7 ignored the super secret demo guys as they wireed the building right. Hugo u have no idea what the hell ur talking about. Ur not an engineer, nor a demo expert. U cut and paste from CT websites that fit into ur bizarre world view. Explain to me in detail how they got the demo into the building, how they wired it without anybody noticing, including the NYPD,and who "they" are. U can't because thats the beauty of a CT, it can never really be proven.
ignoring your bullshit explosives senerio.

Cap

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6366
  • Trueprotein.com 5% discount code= CSP111
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #21 on: February 13, 2009, 08:10:48 AM »
I actually conducted a sience experiment with help of many engineers and scientists that are 9-11 skeptics a few years ago. Burning jet fuel couldn't make the steel collaspe, it wouldn't get hot enough. However, unless you all dont know already, the mob (gambino family) had the contract of installing the insulation in both world trade centers, and they figured out they could save a ton of money by not putting any fire protection in the corners. This might explain it more.

I use to be interested in that sort of thing.
From what I understand from firemen I know who have looked at the design of the towers said they were flawed.
Squishy face retard

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #22 on: February 13, 2009, 08:11:55 AM »
U guys said it was demolished...I have no idea but i'm not gonna say little green men did it. Jag said it was well placed explosives..ok demo experts..how did they pull it off?
L

Hereford

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4028
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #23 on: February 13, 2009, 08:15:02 AM »
I thought she said GWB did it?

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Side by side burning building comparison
« Reply #24 on: February 13, 2009, 08:27:44 AM »
U guys said it was demolished...I have no idea but i'm not gonna say little green men did it. Jag said it was well placed explosives..ok demo experts..how did they pull it off?
you don't know how controlled demolitions are done ::)