venger Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Do you believe fire would do this ? A pancake collapse? Seismic data Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venger Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 BUSH INSIDER CLAIMS WTC COLLAPSE BOGUS DEMOLITION MORE LIKELY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenH Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 KenH can easily be answered if he were not so ignorant, he has a jaded and Dickensian view on structural dynamics and eyes for only what he wishes to see.: I don't have any particular views on any sort of structural anything. I simply saw a couple of huge aircraft, loaded with fuel, fly into the towers at alarming speeds. Some time later the buildings fell down because tall thin things that have been hit, and set on fire, by heavy fat things do that. The idea that the aircraft could impact a building but there were also explosives planted which they then set off much later is silly and offensive to the people that died. The idea that such a thing could be kept secret is a joke. All the conspiracy nutters just seem to want to publish lots of videos by other cranks who take incredibly selective tiny bits of information, usually completely out of context, and try to get enough interest for a book deal. If anyone wants to watch videos showing what happened then they just need to look at the video of a big aircraft full of fuel hitting the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venger Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 I don't have any particular views on any sort of structural anything. I simply saw a couple of huge aircraft, loaded with fuel, fly into the towers at alarming speeds. Some time later the buildings fell down because tall thin things that have been hit, and set on fire, by heavy fat things do that. The idea that the aircraft could impact a building but there were also explosives planted which they then set off much later is silly and offensive to the people that died. The idea that such a thing could be kept secret is a joke. All the conspiracy nutters just seem to want to publish lots of videos by other cranks who take incredibly selective tiny bits of information, usually completely out of context, and try to get enough interest for a book deal. If anyone wants to watch videos showing what happened then they just need to look at the video of a big aircraft full of fuel hitting the building. If only it were that simple, have actually looked at some of the links ? Found out anything yourself about what happened REALLY ? Clearly not is my reckoning. There are plenty of people who want the truth exposing about the attacks that lost friends and relatives! Your reasons and explanations are shallow at most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenH Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Your reasons and explanations are shallow at most. It isn't that my explanation is "shallow", it is simply straightforward. We all saw an aircraft hit the building, set on fire, and then fall down. This is what you would expect to happen and this is what did happen. I have viewed many of the videos and so I can say with some certainty that they are produced by people with an agenda, which is usually to make a name for themselves. I particularly noted in an earlier post that one crank, an college professor, said that the hijacked aircraft didn't hit the building. When a very non-paxman interviewer asks him what the families of those on board think about this, he simply says that he doesn't want to be sidetracked by this and instead offers more nonesense. On another video available as "proof" that the pentagon was attacked by a missile we have the author claiming that there is an all-seeing eye on the lawn leading into the attack area which is clear proof that the illuminati are behind the attacks. Most of these videos take bits of information out of context and then use them as "proof". If I was there at the time, I might have looked up and said "wow it looks just like one of those controlled explosions". If I was a fireman this could then be used as "proof" for ever and a day. In fact I have only ever seen a building collapse after being demolished by explosives, so it is my only point of reference. Next time I see one demolished by controlled explosions I might say "Wow that looks just like when the aircarft hit the world trade centre". Does that then mean that the next demolision carried out of a high rise in Sheffield will appear to use explosives but there will be a secret hidden plan to fly an invisible aircraft into the building? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 It isn't that my explanation is "shallow", it is simply straightforward. We all saw an aircraft hit the building, set on fire, and then fall down. This is what you would expect to happen and this is what did happen. Ken, just on this point alone - no-one knows what happens when a fully laden airliner smashes into a steel structure like this because it is unprecedented. I would perhaps expect the building to fall down, but I would expect it to take longer than 10 seconds if each floor is hitting the one below in sequence, as is described during a pancake collapse. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Venger, that 'simulation' that you put so much trust in is no more than a graphic produced for a TV show to show the average viewer how the structure failed. It's not a technical explanation of the entire event. Show me the calculations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sequin Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Artisan, sequin & angle20, you need to understand the structual engineering concept of progressive collapse. It's all quite straight forward really. Really ! well theres a website offering a million dollar reward for any one who can prove explosives wern't used . If its that straight forward what you waiting for ? http://www.reopen911.org/Contest.htm You dont have to be a structural engineer to know that metal doesn't melt or soften to a degree whare it will break into small pieces unless its in a furnace hot fire which this one obviouslly wasn't . If it had been how could this woman have been standing here ? http://rense.com/general66/womantrappe.jpg Bonfire night is coming up soon , throw your Grannys old sofa on a fire and see whats left the next morning after burning all night . Im telling you it will be the metal springs ! There are dozens of people who heard explosions and firemen usually know an explosion when they hear one I would have thought . These buildings didnt just fall down they were pulverized . The glass and concrete so fine it was literally breathed in by the rescue and salvage workers . What kind of energy reduces glass and concrete to that ? Huge chunks of metal weighing tons being thrown 150ft up into the air ! I think some people have tunnel vision they just cant see the bigger picture . Goverments are the good guys we got to believe and trust without question ! How come Bush " saw " the first attack whilst waiting to go into the classroom that morning something that wasnt on tv till the next day ? Thats HAS come from a crackpot nutcase !! Bush himself !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 sequin, I'm not being funny, but you just nicely demonstrated the lack of knowledge of the techincal issues which has brought you to contrive an alternative reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sierra Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 How come Bush " saw " the first attack whilst waiting to go into the classroom that morning something that wasnt on tv till the next day ? Sorry to disagree with you, but the first plane hitting the WTC was on TV that same day. In fact that very morning. I live in California, and I saw it. Repeatedly. Nice one Sierra, just wanted to say that you're account made for interesting reading. Thank you very much. I'm glad you liked it. Sierra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.