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 Nutter
reply to post by psikeyhackr
Actually as a Civil/Structural/Forensics Engineer, I can say with confidence that once collapse initiation started, there was nothing to stop it. So, that part of the OS I can truelly believe. It's collapse initiation that I have a question about (I would have said a "problem with", but, there ARE things that the common person doesn't realize that could have happened). My question is: If the NIST is so sure, then why are they hiding information?
Originally posted by backinblack
It would be more believable though if it didn't happen to 3 buildings in ONE DAY...
Originally posted by Danbones
I wonder what the actual odds of that happening are
Originally posted by Nutter
reply to post by psikeyhackr
Actually as a Civil/Structural/Forensics Engineer, I can say with confidence that once collapse initiation started, there was nothing to stop it. So, that part of the OS I can truelly believe. It's collapse initiation that I have a question about (I would have said a "problem with", but, there ARE things that the common person doesn't realize that could have happened). My question is: If the NIST is so sure, then why are they hiding information?
Originally posted by Nutter
Actually as a Civil/Structural/Forensics Engineer, I can say with confidence that once collapse initiation started, there was nothing to stop it. So, that part of the OS I can truelly believe. It's collapse initiation that I have a question about
Originally posted by roboe
reply to post by Cassius666
wtc.nist.gov...
Complete with input from some of the usual truthers. I particularly enjoyed the 121-page brick courtesy of Judy Wood.
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I would expect engineers to conclude that it came down far too fast for the building to have crushed itself.
Why aren't all of the civil engineers demanding distribution of steel information?
Why have we never seen a layout of how the horizontal beams in the core were connected?
If the top of the north tower did start to fall why didn't it inevitably get progressively more off and eventually fall down the side?
I would expect engineers to conclude that it came down far too fast for the building to have crushed itself.
Originally posted by Nutter
Look up a French demolition technique called the Verinage Technique. Basically it uses the top portion of a building to demolish the bottom portion. What I've noticed about the technique is that it usually uses the same amount of top building to destroy the bottom.
Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I would expect engineers to conclude that it came down far too fast for the building to have crushed itself.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr
If the top of the north tower did start to fall why didn't it inevitably get progressively more off and eventually fall down the side?
Because things fall down - straight line as quick as possible unless acted upon.