It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
"The Captain may, by simply moving an electric switch, instantly close the doors throughtout and make the vessel practically unsinkable."
And this one, credited to the Vice President of the White Star line when reports of the Titanic's sinking reached New York...
"We place absolute confidence in the Titanic. We believe the boat is unsinkable"
You might want to read your own sources.
In addition, you might want to reread my post and see the word "virtually".
Why was Titanic said to be unsinkable and where did the story come from?
The Titanic was described in the popular press as "practically unsinkable." This was not unusual as for decades, ships had watertight compartments to limit flooding in case of an accident and the press used this phrase as a matter of routine for many years. After the Titanic sank, the story of her loss was turned into a modern fable and the original description—"practically unsinkable”—became just "unsinkable" in order to sharpen the moral of the story. No educated person in 1912 believed that the Titanic was truly unsinkable, but it was difficult to imagine an accident severe enough to send her to the bottom.
Pronunciation: \ˈprak-ti-k(ə-)lē\
Function: adverb
Date: 1571
1 : in a practical manner
2 : almost, nearly
Swampy doesn't understand the physics involved in the WTC collapses, so when an Engineer says the towers could withstand a plane crash he has no idea WHY that would be true, and put it into context with the rest of the physics, and because it goes against the official story he tries to use unrelated physics to justify what he believes.
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by Nutter
Trying to goad me into playing your game. Its not going to happen. White Star Line advertised its ship as being unsinkable and Capt EJ Smith (who just might know a little about the subject) said that with modern shipbuilding, it was inconceivable that a ship would founder.
Originally posted by thedman
WTC was designed to survive a hit by jet airliner moving slow (> 200 mph)
with minimal fuel.
The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact. 4
Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building, Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the impact of a Boeing 707.
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there."
Originally posted by ANOK
Yes YAWN, I'm sorry you're tired of hearing it, how do you think we feel? Personally I feel like I'm debating a person with an extremely short memory.
Originally posted by thedman
Nobody considered post crash fires and effects on building.
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there."
Originally posted by scott3x
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by scott3x
Yes, yes, yes, the WTC was designed to handle being hit by a plane...
And the Titanic was designed to be virtually unsinkable...
No one, to my knowledge, has created a furor, saying that the ice burg couldn't have taken down the Titanic. And while they may have -stated- that the Titanic was "virtually unsinkable", I have certainly not seen any studies, before its sinking, or since, providing evidence that no iceburg could sink it. The story is far different when it comes to the Twin Towers and the effect that a plane crashing into them would have.
New York State Governor Nelson Rockefeller and his brother David were the moving force behind the building of the Twin Towers. As a matter of fact, the Towers were called David and Nelson. Following in the footsteps of their tightwad grandfather John D., they insisted on the cheapest job possible.
The project managers Austin Tobin and Guy Tozzoli fired the world renowned architectural firm of Skidmore, Owens and Merrill and hired an inexperienced architect from Japan named Minoru Yamasaki.
Then they put the steel for the building out for bids. The job was so colossal that only the top steel makers in the U.S. bid the job. They were: U.S. Steel and Bethlehem Steel. U.S. steel submitted a bid of 122 million dollars and Bethlehem Steel submitted a bid for 118 million dollars. Both bids were REJECTED as being too costly....Then they put the bid out again and ALL the independent steel erectors were encouraged to bid. Only one small company bid and their bid was 20 MILLIONS dollars.
Originally posted by The_Zomar
No plane hit building 7
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
No, just WTC1. From what FDNY had to say, WTC1 messed up WTC7 pretty good.
And other than that there is zero evidence of any structural damage to WTC7...
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
No, just WTC1. From what FDNY had to say, WTC1 messed up WTC7 pretty good.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Btw there were also people there who saw the damage and said it DIDN'T justify a collapse. NYPD Craig Bartmer is one.