It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


can somebody answer this?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 09:53 AM
if, as the collapse of the 3 world trade centers is supposed to show, its apparently very, very easy for a whole building to collapse not to long after after a big/small fire or a plane/no plane hitting it, what official recommendations have been made for protecting existing and future buildings to ensure this cannot happen again? after all, if tall buildings are so vulnerable then this should be a very high priority and new laws brought in for future constructions.

if you work/live in a tower block, have you considered this? if not, why not? if so, what did you do about it?

posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 10:49 AM
Only just started reading this, apparantly a few suggestions, nut none have been implemented yet.


posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 07:35 PM
Totally unique construction. No one even seems to agree exactly how they actually supported themselves. That's why there's so much speculation. And it's the blanket answer for everything: why they fell so quick after being hit and just as the fires were dying out, and also why no one else need worry. Keep on producing and stimulting the conomy in confidence. the towers were unique. And bldg 7 too. It never happened before and will never happen again.

posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 07:48 PM

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Totally unique construction.

Not true.

At the time the Twin Towers were built, the design approach of moving the support columns to the perimeter and the core, thereby creating large expanses of unobstructed floor space, was relatively new, and unique for a skyscraper. However, that approach is commonplace in contemporary skyscrapers.

And that does make you wonder doesn't it. Apparently the government isn't really concerned about finding out what really happened structually and preventing it from happening again.

What recommendations have been made to prevent a similar structual implosion?

[edit on 21-2-2007 by In nothing we trust]

posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 03:35 AM
Sorry, I wasn't suggesting that as truth, well maybe, but more as a parodied simplification the general official story. It's all fine folks, just another anomaly of 9/11. To admit anything else would admit
a) plane crashes and fires don't collapse buildings so something else was at work
b) a plane crash and fire will easily collapse a building in a matter of minutes and we all panic. It could happen again.
So they say it's unique. but stillremarkbly contentious. Has this been sortedout? Where the support was? 47 core collumns,outer trusses? What gives? I've been outta the loop a while.

new topics

top topics

log in