WTC lease holder admits WTC7 was intentionally demolished !, page 16
Pages: <<  13    14    15    16    17    18    19  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 20-7-2004 @ 01:29 PM by elevatedone
Originally posted by Banshee
Originally posted by Antimyth
Give me just ONE example of a steel building collapsing due to fire.


www.mutualbox.com... (1)
www.haifire.com... (6)

It's out there.
They're not common, but they do happen.


ahhhh once again Ignorance Denied.... way to go banshee, I was just searching for some examples...

you're awesome !!



reply posted on 20-7-2004 @ 01:33 PM by Antimyth
Originally posted by Banshee
Originally posted by Antimyth
Give me just ONE example of a steel building collapsing due to fire.


www.mutualbox.com... (1)

What does this say right here in your article???
"This article will discuss the structural failure, signs to look for that may indicate structural failure, why lightweight steel fails and what happens when lightweight steel fails. We will not discuss fire suppression efforts specific to this incident."
www.haifire.com... (6)

It's out there.
They're not common, but they do happen.


Yeah your right, they're not common, in fact they are very rare to almost none existant EXCEPT on 911, when THREE steel buildings colapsed due to fire.
Your second link provides data about WTC, which if you will take a look at my question I ask for examples OTHER than WTC.
Do you see the fallacy there? How can you use examples of WTC and say that it supports the claim that fire brought down the buildings?
I sure wish i could cut and paste some quotes off the second link you gave cause it basicly strengthens my arguement.


[edit on 20-7-2004 by Antimyth]


reply posted on 20-7-2004 @ 03:01 PM by HowardRoark
Let’s look at the claims so far, shall we?

  • Claim: The owner of the building supposedly admitted that WTC7 was deliberateley demolished.

    Status: Debunked. The term “pull” as used meant to pull the firefighters out of the building.

  • Claim: Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel. Therefore the buildings could not have possibly collapsed due to fire.

    Status: Debunked. Al fires can reach temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees F, hot enough to cause steel to loose almost 50% of its strength. Furthermore, no one has discussed the effect of these temperatures on the light weight concrete floors themselves. Remember that the floor slabs were an integral part of the building structure.

  • Claim: Seismic recordings show evidence of an underground explosion before the buildings collapsed.

    Status: Debunked. The Seismic charts show no such thing.

  • Claim: There is video evidence of bombs going off as the towers fell.

    Status: Debunked. No there isn’t. A grainy video shot through with digital noise is evidence of a poor quality digital camera system only.

  • Claim: The building should not have pancaked

    Status: Debunked. I honestly don’t know what those who make this claim think should have happened. Did they expect the buildings to tip over like a giant tree? TIMMMMMBER!


  • Claim: The building was prewired for demolition when it was built.

    Status: Debunked. (do I even need to go into how silly this is)

  • Claim: The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of an airplane.

    Status: Debunked. Wrong, the buildings were designed to withstand what the designers thought would be the effects of an impact of an airplane. Smaller planes that what actually struck, BTW. Since there was only limited data on the effects of an airplane sticking a high-rise building, they made a number of assumptions.



    And so on, and so on.
    •
    Pages: <<  13    14    15    16    17    18    19  >>    ^^TOP^^



    A Galaxy not so far away ~ Beautiful Pics
      Posted 4 days ago with 5 member flags
    Inspiration Is The Promised Land.
      Posted 6 days ago with 1 member flags