reply to post by Gorman91
A biplane and a 747 are both planes. One has a bigger boom. Please don't be ignorant.
Oh the irony, you call me ignorant yet in that short quote you have two huge details completely wrong.
First of all a Boeing 707
which the towers were built to withstand an
impact from is not a biplane
. Second of all a Boeing 767 struck the towers, not a 747.
They clearly did not. Most of the tower fell towards one side, other parts fell the opposing way. Straight down? That's what you get from pancaking,
which comes directly from Mies Van Der Rohe designs.
Go to YouTube, watch a few controlled demolitions video, and compare them to the twin towers and WTC7 falling. Pancaking would result in a slower
collapse than free-fall speed also.
I really don't care about people's claims unless I can see it. I saw a video of firemen int he lobby, without anything wrong. How does the fire reach
ground level? When big thing go boom, elevators fall.
Yeah and you called me ignorant.
. So now consensus doesn't
guarantee correctness? You're all over the place man.
From the video alone it clearly was not only on 6 floors, and it clearly did not all fall at the same time. You can make out the core of the building
staying up while the floors fall. You can also make out the different structural elements. Basically, the floors fell, and without floors to hold them
in place, the mains supports came down after them. You can get the same effect with a shish kabob.
A shish kabob? Try a controlled demolition, WTC7 is not a shish kabob.
You are not an engineer so your opinion on how a building collapses is meaningless to me. And you fail to address the fact that WTC7 as well as both
twin towers fell at free-fall speed, which is impossible if they pancaked as you believe they did. How is that possible according to your perspective?
From the video, it clearly was 6 floors, and I have those six floors as well as which direction of the building they were on covered in my OP, so
since you either didn't read that or mentally blocked it out I will paste it here:
-- The major fires occured in the following areas of the building:
East face- between floors 11 and 12,
North face- on floor 7, and floor 12,
West face- between floors 29 and 30,
South face- obscured entirely by smoke.
This is based off of video evidence which is present in the 'Loose Change Final Cut'
You're adding straws. An elevator shaft going to the main heart of the fire would, indeed, have molten metal in it. That doesn't mean anything was
happening at ground level. Things fall. If anything, that proves that the structural supports were differentiating and separating before the collapse,
making panicking more likely. And like I said, simple thermal laws do not allow anything but a volcano to remain molten days after an event occurs.
Not even termite, not anything. The energy required to fuel such heat comes only from geological sources.
I think you mean "grasping at straws". I don't think you understand the tremendous amount of heat required to produce molten metal. Here is a simple
chart to illustrate that for you: Melting Points
Jet fuel burns in open air at 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Unless the tower was made of Bismuth, Potassium, and Sodium, the original story is a lie.
And like I proved
with evidence from a thermal image and several witness testimonies, molten metal indeed was there and remained there for
You are in denial bro, facts are facts and you seem unable to accept them.
edit on 24-6-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post