The History of High Rise Collapses, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 17 times

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:31 PM by vkturbo

reply to post by Varemia

www.youtube.com...

Now when you say it was weakened it would have weakened one side yes? then there is no way it would have fallen like this it doesn't add up like i said before.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:31 PM by leo123

Originally posted by dereks
Funny how any high rise building hit by a high speed jet airliner has collapsed, a fact that you totally ignore as it destroys your conspiracy theory....

Complete and total BS.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:35 PM by samkent

If rudimentary psychology is all it takes then the basic argument doesn’t hold water.

As to the foot print debate. Remember the old line “An object in motion tends remain in motion and an object at rest tends to remain at rest”?

A lower floor is basically at rest until the floor above it comes crashing down. There was no horizontal momentum to any of the material. If the upper 10 floors fall the 8 feet of typical ceilings, that’s a lot of energy falling straight down. The floor below will have its supports crush and now you have 11 floors falling another 8 feet. And so on.

The only way to have the building fall substantially outside its footprint would be to crush the supports on one side of a couple of floors. With the rest of the building remaining rigid as well as the one side. Then you can get the horizontal motion needed to get the building to topple over.

And since we all saw videos of plane parts coming out the other side of the buildings, we know opposing sides were compromised. Any compromising of opposing sides means the building cannot topple sideways.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:36 PM by snapperski

reply to post by Varemia

Varemia ive been through all this with you and your crew before,its not a vandetta,it the truth....i find it pointless talking to you and the rest of the same old names,who sit in the 9/11 thread....i refuse to waste my good time explaining simple facts and truths to you or the above names i have mention,you all been proved wrong many times with you supose theorys and your belief in the commission report...i mean honestly even those that wrote the commission report dont belive it and wont stand by it anymore...so get out of here boys...you argue for arguments sake,or you are on the govenment payroll....no one stands so firm to a failed story like you lot do,unless your paid to do so,or you just wanna argue,and if its for arguments sake,then its pretty low,as some us here have lost friends in those towers,so no...we wont let it go...we will never let it go,untill the murders are brought to justice.

oh and one last thing,that all of you never ever answer....why wont they have a independent international inquiry ..(even though they destroyed all the evidence)

thank you and good night.
the Snapperski.

edit on 22-10-2010 by snapperski because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:39 PM by Varemia

reply to post by vkturbo

Then you might enjoy watching this video, which explains a lot:

www.youtube.com...

At 2:00 it starts showing images of the tower's steel very clearly bowing.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:41 PM by dillweed

Hooray Snapperski. I've been lurking around ats for about eight years and just recently decided to throw my two cents in. This group of truth nazis that still hold out for the OS have me puzzled. Why do they waste so much time and space defending what every sane person knows to be lies. They are so arrogant in their refuting of questions that have NOT been answered. As far as the 'footprint' thing goes, what we are saying is that when you look at the buildings go down, they go straight down, don't they? When I see the penthouse on number seven just as the building begins to descend it tells me that that's not natural. When I see pulverized concrete and molten steel, something tells me that that's not natural. When I see a hole in the ground in Shanksville and they tell me that that whole plane, all the passengers, seats and luggage, and titanium jet engines are in that hole, I cannot help but think that's just not natural. So you guys can go on refuting everybody who's still not satisfied with this hot steamy pile of sh#t they call the 'official story'.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:43 PM by Varemia

Originally posted by snapperski
reply to post by Varemia

Varemia ive been through all this with you and your crew before,its not a vandetta,it the truth....i find it pointless talking to you and the rest of the same old names,who sit in the 9/11 thread....i refuse to waste my good time explaining simple facts and truths to you or the above names i have mention,you all been proved wrong many times with you supose theorys and your belief in the commission report...i mean honestly even those that wrote the commission report dont belive it and wont stand by it anymore...so get out of here boys...you argue for arguments sake,or you are on the govenment payroll....no one stands so firm to a failed story like you lot do,unless your paid to do so,or you just wanna argue,and if its for arguments sake,then its pretty low,as some us us here have lost friends in the towers,so no...we wont let it go...we will never let it go,untill the murders are brought to justice.

oh and one last thing,that all of you never ever answer....why wont they have a independent international inquiry ..(even though they destroyed all the evidence)

thank you and good night.
the Snapperski.
edit on 22-10-2010 by snapperski because: (no reason given)

*sigh* So your argument is that there's no point in arguing because we don't agree with you. "supposedly" the arguments I've made have all been debunked, yet somehow I haven't seen it. "Supposedly" I just accept all the reports about 9/11 from the government as truth. Another outright lie. I repetitively post that I think something probably was up on 9/11, even related to the collapse because of "convenient" jumps in video footage that take out parts of the tower that I wanted to see before the collapse.

Yet somehow, I get the idea that you haven't been reading my arguments. You just chalk me up as an OS supporter and ignore me.

Remove bias when observing an idea. Otherwise you are being ignorant to what the truth could be.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:46 PM by Varemia

Originally posted by dillweed
Hooray Snapperski. I've been lurking around ats for about eight years and just recently decided to throw my two cents in. This group of truth nazis that still hold out for the OS have me puzzled. Why do they waste so much time and space defending what every sane person knows to be lies. They are so arrogant in their refuting of questions that have NOT been answered. As far as the 'footprint' thing goes, what we are saying is that when you look at the buildings go down, they go straight down, don't they? When I see the penthouse on number seven just as the building begins to descend it tells me that that's not natural. When I see pulverized concrete and molten steel, something tells me that that's not natural. When I see a hole in the ground in Shanksville and they tell me that that whole plane, all the passengers, seats and luggage, and titanium jet engines are in that hole, I cannot help but think that's just not natural. So you guys can go on refuting everybody who's still not satisfied with this hot steamy pile of sh#t they call the 'official story'.

That's an argument from ignorance. A fallacy, since you have no points there that are supported by proof of foul-play. You are assuming that you are right. Look up the word assume. It will be informative.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:46 PM by vkturbo

reply to post by Varemia

See with structural engineers they can only speculate on the damage as noone could see it all pefectly noone can really say what truley affected it now I know there is footage of the second plane hitting and then flames coming out from the other side but that is mearly what an explosion does. If you throw a flash bang in a small room what happens to all the windows. So as i said it is temperatures that steel can take there looked like there was next to no real damage to the tower in the video footage.

I have just thought of an idea to show if this would have really happened or not think I might make a model from paper or cardboard with just the outside girders and cut where planes would have hit and have a certain weight on top of it will keep you all posted as i think this is something that no one has done either is it?

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:51 PM by Varemia

Originally posted by vkturbo
reply to post by Varemia

See with structural engineers they can only speculate on the damage as noone could see it all pefectly noone can really say what truley affected it now I know there is footage of the second plane hitting and then flames coming out from the other side but that is mearly what an explosion does. If you throw a flash bang in a small room what happens to all the windows. So as i said it is temperatures that steel can take there looked like there was next to no real damage to the tower in the video footage.

I have just thought of an idea to show if this would have really happened or not think I might make a model from paper or cardboard with just the outside girders and cut where planes would have hit and have a certain weight on top of it will keep you all posted as i think this is something that no one has done either is it?

First of all, holy jeez use some punctuation! Second of all... paper and cardboard do not compare... You say no one could see what was going on inside the towers, then how did you come to your conclusions that what happened was impossible?

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:54 PM by dillweed

You're right, it is ignorance because the truth, for now is unavailable. But I stand by what I have said, that the official story that you defend is a bag of sh%t. That's the fact Jack. When I hear one thing you defend ring true I'll be the first to let you know.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 01:59 PM by Varemia

Originally posted by dillweed
You're right, it is ignorance because the truth, for now is unavailable. But I stand by what I have said, that the official story that you defend is a bag of sh%t. That's the fact Jack. When I hear one thing you defend ring true I'll be the first to let you know.

What has wrung false yet about my statements? I only use information that I can see or can derive from what I'm seeing. Calling something crap doesn't make it so. A rose by any other name still smells as sweet. (to use a corny reference lol)

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 02:10 PM by v3_exceed

reply to post by snapperski

Exactly correct...
It really isn't worth replying to them except to laugh at their complete fealty to the OS.

..Ex

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 02:24 PM by snapperski

Originally posted by snapperski
reply to post by Varemia

why wont they have a independent international inquiry ..(even though they destroyed all the evidence)

i will give you credit,as you do put your work in,and do your research,BUT you avoid question very well,but please explain the reason from my above quote...

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 02:25 PM by vkturbo

reply to post by Varemia

cheers for showing that haven't seen that video before ok yes most of what said would deem that to be true with the steel.

But here is a question for you obviously you have looked into a few other things than what i have any idea what the floors weighed only ask as the clips that held the floor structure together they would have failed before the girders did as about 1 inch of weld will hold around 1 tonne.Not sure on the rivets what their snapping tensile strength.

There are still a few things i see there that aren't really covered though and some of the descriptions that was given on that youtube video.

As for my stance on what happened there is video footage showing an explosion from the building before the plane hit on both accounts.

There was a really good dvd called 9-11 in plane site was a few things in there to be answered yet.

edit on 22-10-2010 by vkturbo because: added pieces and made it easier to read

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 02:36 PM by OnTheFelt

reply to post by Varemia

*sigh* So your argument is that there's no point in arguing because we don't agree with you. "supposedly" the arguments I've made have all been debunked, yet somehow I haven't seen it. "Supposedly" I just accept all the reports about 9/11 from the government as truth. Another outright lie. I repetitively post that I think something probably was up on 9/11, even related to the collapse because of "convenient" jumps in video footage that take out parts of the tower that I wanted to see before the collapse.

Quite the contrary, and that's the whole point, for the amount of time you professional debunkers have put in to your so called "research" into 9/11, you'd have to be a complete and utter moron not to find enough inconsistencies to warrant a new investigation.

Of course either that or the real truth which is you have an ulterior motive......Hmmm I wonder what that could be.

PSYOPS 101 anyone? So, kindly GFY!

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 02:37 PM by v3_exceed

Originally posted by samkent
If rudimentary psychology is all it takes then the basic argument doesn’t hold water.

As to the foot print debate. Remember the old line “An object in motion tends remain in motion and an object at rest tends to remain at rest”?

Actually what your (mis) quoting is the principal of inertia, but you have the general idea of it.
Another really cool thing about science are seismograms. These are the recordings of the vibrations in intensity and duration with the buildings falling. (see link) The really cool part, is no amount of banter ... *cough ... de_r_ks ...cough* ... can refute the science behind FREE FALL SPEEDS. (or very close to)
So we can all say what we would like to in this thread, or in other threads but we cannot change that these building came down far faster than could possibly have happened in a pancake collapse.

..Ex

Link

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 02:48 PM by Varemia

reply to post by OnTheFelt

I'm no professional. I just have free time on my hands. I also urge truthers to look for footage of the first 20 floors of the collapse for like 20-60 seconds prior to collapse. I guarantee you that all the videos you'll find have been edited or "glitched."

Now, to get back on topic, the history of high rises still has nothing to do with the circumstances of 9/11, since no airliner has ever hit a steel tube-in-tube design high-rise before.

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 03:06 PM by snapperski

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by OnTheFelt

Now, to get back on topic, the history of high rises still has nothing to do with the circumstances of 9/11, since no airliner has ever hit a steel tube-in-tube design high-rise before.

yes,3 massive steel framed structures encased in concrete fell at free fall speed,from fire damage....for the first time in history...and both tower one and two,fell exactly the same way,AND then wt7 drops straight down in quite possibly the most blatant demolitions job in history....Hmmmm 3 massive miracles in one day..

can we say the odds of that happening is astronomical.

and i'm still waiting on your opinion why they wont allow a independent international inquiry ??
you always avoid that question,so does weedwacker,and alfie

reply posted on 22-10-2010 @ 03:28 PM by okbmd

reply to post by snapperski