9/11 Intercepted

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Why? Odd to you? How is it odd?

CJ

Click here to learn more about this warning.

despite your compelling and eloquent reasoning, i think i'll stick with what i know. which is, the official story is a lie.
i bet you 'watched the second jet hit' on tv. just like me.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by ANOK

 

They have this thing called HEAT! It has a tendency to...at certain temps...to make even the strongest of Tempered Steel or Heavy Iron...do some crazy things such as MELT...OR BEND...OR ESPECIALLY IN A BOLTS CASE...SNAP OFF DUE TO DEGRADING OF SHEAR STRENGTH.

Again though that doesn't answer why the connections didn't fail when the trusses put a pulling force on the columns? Surely if the trusses heated up enough to sag then the connections would also have been heated up.

Again were the connections stronger than the much more massive steel columns? Can you answer that question?

What happened did not happen independent of one beam or one bolt or concrete re-enforcement. One of the HARD TO CLASSIFY LEVELS OF STUPID as far as people seeing windows of levels blow out below a collapsing number of floors as this is PROCLAIMED....LOOK! LOOK! EVIDENCE THAT CHARGES WERE BEING DETONATED!

What has this got to do with what I said? I never mentioned windows.

THIS WAS DUE TO AIR PRESSURE! When air in a building that is in a state of collapse floor by floor downward...This air has no where to go in the time given so it EXPLODES OUTWARD THROUGH THE GLASS!
Split Infinity

Hmmm again I never mentioned anything about the windows, or the squibs you are talking about. And there's no need to shout, my hearing is fine mate.

I asked you how sagging trusses can pull in columns, and on top of that how they could pull in columns and not break the connections first. Don't worry though, no one has yet been able to address that contradiction.

reply to post by Classified Info


The problem is you are not going to convince anyone the OS is correct by arguing nonsense about people making money.

People making money does not change physics.

Understand basic Newtonian physics, and you'll understand why the WTC building could not have collapsed the way they did from fire.

Sagging trusses do not have the energy to pull in columns much more massive than themselves, columns that were designed to hold the weight of the floor assembly many times over (FoS, factors of safety).

IF the trusses could put more force on the columns than they could hold, the connections would have failed first.
The 1" and 5/8" bolts could not take more force than the massive steel columns the trusses were attached to.

This vid is a good demonstration of a sagging floor not pulling in the columns it was attached to. Keep in mind in this demo the floor had weight added, it had load bearing columns removed, and yet the floor did not pull in the columns at the ends. It is also a concrete structure much weaker than a steel structure. The floor wasn't sagging from heat so it is still rigid, putting more force on the columns than a truss sagging from heat would.

reply to post by ANOK


The bottom line is, for both buildings to act in the exact same way, there had to be similar circumstances, almost exact. It is easy to see that the second plane "exploded" and much of the fuel was burnt up in the massive fireball that occured outside the building. The fact that each building fell in the exact same way should be an immediate red flag.

CJ

Originally posted by maxella1

How do you feel about these "evil capitalists" making a profit?

How many times are you going to ask me that? I know that you know that I already answered them because you responded to my reply of them yesterday.