So apparently fire CAN collapse steel-reinforced structures...

[IraHays]

Everyone just keep in mind when dealing with SikoJames. He spends countless hours looking up conspiracy theories, but couldn't spend thirty seconds looking up the spelling of Psycho. That should tell you all you need to know about James.

LOL, Siko = psycho? I thought it was a play off the word "sick"?

[Fidelis]

My mistake, thought id mention the steel box columns.

anyhoo

how do you explain the pulverized concrete

Well, I think that the mass of a 110-story building collapsing on itself would be enough to pulverize concrete.

[Gadsden]

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...AGVOPHQU46.DTL

it was obviously a controlled demolition.

[B_Master_Flash]

scientists terra forming planets for future habitation.

So are you saying there is some terra formation involved?

http://www.entertainmentopia.com/scr...plutonians.jpg
(if you watch aqua teen, lol)

[BullDozer]

It is a FACT that the military is CONSTANTLY doing r&d with weaponry and has advanced technology that they only reveal to the public many years after the fact.

Nobody has a perfect explanation for what happened to the towers.

Nobody.

Except for the ones who carried it out, of course.

For those of you that don't know, Osama Bin Laden is a civil engineer who specializes in building tunnels. It is not only conceivable but probable that having to build long tunnels (in order to hide from Americans) he probably knows a thing or to about the stability of structures and ways to make them reach the breaking point. The fact is that the fire from the flames of the Jets bent the steel bars (which support the structure) causing it to collapse.

[BullDozer]

The guy is right fellas. The US military does have these experimental weapons he speaks of. If you would of noticed supposed natural events that have occured over the last couple of decades, Mt. St. Helens, Hurricane Katrina, the Pacific Tsunami, ect. you know this to be a fact that the US can create a hurricane or earthquake at any location. Also, those black shuttles that only launch during the night at Vandenburg AFB are actually scientists terra forming planets for future habitation.

And the military has UFO's. Really. They've been cooperating with little green men from planet 591c on how to make the saucer or cigar-disk shaped that Nikolai Tesla describes not only run without an on-board fuel source but also without wings and relies totally on electromagnetism to fly. It's supposed to be invisible....but no luck on that yet.

[BullDozer]

I used to be a space shuttle door gunner for one of the terra forming missions. Believe me when I say you don't want to say too much about this, those stories about black helicopters are no joke.

So...about those black helicopters?

[SikoJames]

I wonder if it has anything to do with the plane that flew into it?

have you ever hit concrete with a hammer? it fragments and, yes, ideed du... you know what? you're in the red. You dont matter- even on the internet. GTFO

wow

atleast i know this is coming from someone who has no idea what hes talking about. plane strikes didnt pulverize the concrete throughout the ENTIRE BUILDINGS you jackass. the global collapses did. dont give me your grief if your too dense to figure that out.

How do you explain the pulverized concrete from the (i cant believe im pointing this out) GLOBAL COLLAPSES? The plane strikes just made holes in the buildings. try again

[lordofchaos]

wow

atleast i know this is coming from someone who has no idea what hes talking about. plane strikes didnt pulverize the concrete throughout the ENTIRE BUILDINGS you jackass. the global collapses did. dont give me your grief if your too dense to figure that out.

How do you explain the pulverized concrete from the (i cant believe im pointing this out) GLOBAL COLLAPSES? The plane strikes just made holes in the buildings. try again

well, as I alluded to before, there is this cool thing called potential energy that will convert to kinetic energy if something starts to fall, several thousand tons of concrete and steel supported several hundred feet in the air contains a hell of a lot of potential energy, which will turn into a hell of a lot of kinetic energy, which when it hits the ground, will do lots and lots of work in the form of destroying the things it hits and pulverizing them.

[SikoJames]

well, as I alluded to before, there is this cool thing called potential energy that will convert to kinetic energy if something starts to fall, several thousand tons of concrete and steel supported several hundred feet in the air contains a hell of a lot of potential energy, which will turn into a hell of a lot of kinetic energy, which when it hits the ground, will do lots and lots of work in the form of destroying the things it hits and pulverizing them.

This is being down by kinetic energy?

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...olcano_017.jpg

Debri and dust is being blown up and outward. This doesnt seem to be the result of something that is falling, rather exploding.

[acetylator]

wow

atleast i know this is coming from someone who has no idea what hes talking about. plane strikes didnt pulverize the concrete throughout the ENTIRE BUILDINGS you jackass. the global collapses did. dont give me your grief if your too dense to figure that out.

How do you explain the pulverized concrete from the (i cant believe im pointing this out) GLOBAL COLLAPSES? The plane strikes just made holes in the buildings. try again

and then the building fell and when they do the pancaking effect I explain later would have indeed been able to "pulverize" concrete. Plane strikes don't make a paper punch out of a 747 when it slams into a reinforced structure at a speed excess of 500mph carrying thousands of gallons of fuel (48,445 US gal, they were fully loaded for cross country flight). They explode and are destroyed. Planes are made of light materials- its not a god damned tank.

This is being down by kinetic energy?

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...olcano_017.jpg

Debri and dust is being blown up and outward. This doesnt seem to be the result of something that is falling, rather exploding.

no, the supports were taken down by kinetic energy on impact. Remaining were crippled by the heat of the inferno.

my god you really believe this don't you? Time for physics lab: Slam your hand down on the table next to a piece of paper- it moves doesn't it? You know why? you forced the air out from under your hand and it shoots out the sides. The practical application: Now replace your hand and table with, say, some floors of a building... when they pancake on top of each other air is forced out...and a bunch of other stuff with it.

Force = mass x acceleration, therefore we can deduce that after one floor gave way the following floor would have been subject to a more massive force than it can withstand and also give way... the top of the building continues to accelerate while also picking up mass so each floor is pulverized with a greater force than the floor before it.

Have you ever seen a house demolished? there is A LOT of dust.

I must say, you've so far supplied the weakest arguments that I've yet debated. What is so difficult to believe about 9/11? Are you so blinded by your hate for Bush and country that you are forgoing logic and rational thought to embrace lunacy?

[EDC]

Science: 23423
Conspiracy Theorists: 0

[lordofchaos]

This is being down by kinetic energy?

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...olcano_017.jpg

Debri and dust is being blown up and outward. This doesnt seem to be the result of something that is falling, rather exploding.

You've never taken a physics class in your life have you? There are only 4 types of energy and every thing in the world is done by them.

1. Potential energy, this is the energy that is stored in an object that is resting a distance above the ground, and is exactly equal to the energy required to move it to that location.

2. Chemical energy, this is the energy that is stored in chemicals that can be released in some process (chemical reaction)

3. Heat energy, this is a type of energy that pretty much only comes from another source of energy being transformed, for instance it either takes heat energy or releases heat energy for a chemical reaction, things burning is also a release of chemical energy into heat energy, and a surface heating up from friction is a transfer of kinetic energy into heat energy.

4. Kinetic energy, this is the energy that pretty much does all the work in the world, when something is moving, it has kinetic energy and it is kinetic energy moving it.

So yes, all of that was done by kinetic energy, no matter what theory you believe, it all was done by kinetic energy...


Also for the record, the clouds of things blowing out from the building are from a certain volume of air being compressed as the volume of the space in the tower rapidly decreases due to the collapse looking for a place to escape and having enough kenetic energy when it does escape to take some debris with it....


and that is the end of todays physics lesson...

[97srad750]

LOL, Siko = psycho? I thought it was a play off the word "sick"?

I gave him the benefit of the doubt with Psycho over Sicko. In the end he's shown more than enough that he is out there.

[ironman1964bc]

The Oakland fire was an open air fire, there was no pancake effect, there was no concrete turned to dust, and the supports are still intact. I don't see the comparison to 9/11.

A better comparison is the Madrid fire that burned for almost a day but yet the building didn't collapse. Debunkers like to say that there was a few floors that collapsed and that is true, but there was no complete collapse, no pancake effect, and more importantly, a large crane on the roof still remained after the fire was out.

[NuggzTheNinja]

The Oakland fire was an open air fire, there was no pancake effect, there was no concrete turned to dust, and the supports are still intact. I don't see the comparison to 9/11.

A better comparison is the Madrid fire that burned for almost a day but yet the building didn't collapse. Debunkers like to say that there was a few floors that collapsed and that is true, but there was no complete collapse, no pancake effect, and more importantly, a large crane on the roof still remained after the fire was out.

It's not an exact comparison, but it shows that the fire doesn't need to "melt" the steel, simply reduce its ability to bear weight through heating.

And the Madrid fire didn't involve an airplane being flown into the building. Grasping for straws as usual.

[97srad750]

The Oakland fire was an open air fire, there was no pancake effect, there was no concrete turned to dust, and the supports are still intact. I don't see the comparison to 9/11.

A better comparison is the Madrid fire that burned for almost a day but yet the building didn't collapse. Debunkers like to say that there was a few floors that collapsed and that is true, but there was no complete collapse, no pancake effect, and more importantly, a large crane on the roof still remained after the fire was out.

I must have missed the plane crashing into the Madrid fire, hey but if we are picking I guess you can pick the one that fits your argument.

[Rex2007]

And the Madrid fire didn't involve an airplane being flown into the building. Grasping for straws as usual.

WTC7 didnt have an airplane flown into it either.

Your desperate as usual.

[NuggzTheNinja]

WTC7 didnt have an airplane flown into it either.

Your desperate as usual.

No but it did have pieces of two 110 story structures fall on it.

[97srad750]

WTC7 didnt have an airplane flown into it either.

Your desperate as usual.

It's funny a conspiracy theorist that whole argument is based on grasping straws has the nerve to call people with common sense desperate.

[Gadsden]

No but it did have pieces of two 110 story structures fall on it.

lol pwned...


oh btw, what made the WTC 1 & 2 fall?

[Rex2007]

No but it did have pieces of two 110 story structures fall on it............

And then what?

[acetylator]

And then what?

well after the gaping 20 floor hole was punctured in the middle of the building a raging fire fueled by diesel fuel for generators further weakened the crippled superstructure...

or were you kidding?

[Rex2007]

It's funny a conspiracy theorist that whole argument is based on grasping straws has the nerve to call people with common sense desperate.

lol the man is trying to compare a collapsed bridge to 3 buildings that were blown to kingdomcome. Thats a desperate attempt to prop up the official story, in my book.

[Rex2007]

well after the gaping 20 floor hole was punctured in the middle of the building a raging fire fueled by diesel fuel for generators further weakened the crippled superstructure...

or were you kidding?

No, but it seems like you are.

Here's a couple of very simple equations for you to consider:

9/11 Truthers perspective:

WTC7 Collapse + Basic Knowledge of Physics = CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

NIST/Official Government perspective:

WTC7 Collapse + As Yet Undiscovered Law of Physics = Structural Failure Caused By Fire

Sorry... I can't make it any simpler than this. If you STILL really and truly don't see it (or don't want to see it) then there's no point in trying to convince you further.

[acetylator]

lol the man is trying compare a collapsed bridge to 3 buildings that were blown to kingdomcome. Thats a desperate attempt to prop up the official story, in my book.

WOW.

It has nothing to do with a bridge and everything to do with the fact that fuel does indeed burn hot enough to weaken metal supports enough to cause collapse- a point of contention in the conspiracy theories "evidence" of the 9/11 set up. That was the OBVIOUS point of this ENTIRE thread.

Is there anything else I can spoon feed to you retards?

No, but it seems like you are.

Here's a couple of very simple equations for you to consider:

9/11 Truthers perspective:

WTC7 Collapse + Basic Knowledge of Physics = CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

NIST/Official Government perspective:

WTC7 Collapse + As Yet Undiscovered Law of Physics = Structural Failure Caused By Fire

Sorry... I can't make it any simpler than this. If you STILL really and truly don't see it (or don't want to see it) then there's no point in trying to convince you further.

I think this thread has proven your inability to fathom the "basic knowledge of physics."

wait... how does a structural failure violate a law of physics? and what basic knowledge of physics makes the "controlled demolition" so obvious? or at least so much more obvious than the gaping hole and raging inferno within the building?

your equations represent nothing but your personal opinion, how does that at all matter?

[NuggzTheNinja]

No, but it seems like you are.

Here's a couple of very simple equations for you to consider:

9/11 Truthers perspective:

WTC7 Collapse + Basic Knowledge of Physics = CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

NIST/Official Government perspective:

WTC7 Collapse + As Yet Undiscovered Law of Physics = Structural Failure Caused By Fire

Sorry... I can't make it any simpler than this. If you STILL really and truly don't see it (or don't want to see it) then there's no point in trying to convince you further.

Haha yeah, I trust the physics you got from some college student's flash movie over scientific fact. Right.

[Itchy Nads]

virtually, not everything.



Video

It's got nothing to do with large pieces of concrete falling 210 stories to the ground though, does it? Because when thousands of tons of concrete walls collapse into one another, all the desks; phones; chairs and other pieces of concrete remain intact.

[Itchy Nads]

It is a FACT that the military is CONSTANTLY doing r&d with weaponry and has advanced technology that they only reveal to the public many years after the fact.

Nobody has a perfect explanation for what happened to the towers.

Nobody.

Except for the ones who carried it out, of course.

Facts usually have sources showing proof.

[ironman1964bc]

It's not an exact comparison, but it shows that the fire doesn't need to "melt" the steel, simply reduce its ability to bear weight through heating.

And the Madrid fire didn't involve an airplane being flown into the building. Grasping for straws as usual.

This is the whole problem with the debunkers arguements. First, it is accepted that fire caused the 9/11 collapses but when other buildings have been shown to have suffered worse fire damage without collapsing, then the debunkers pull out the plane hitting the building arguement. Then, when it is shown that the planes hitting the buildings couldn't have caused the collapse, they pull out the fire arguement again. Then, when it is shown that a pancake collapse would have took approx 40 seconds, the debunkers call you a Bush hater and a conspiracy nut. Then, when eyewitnesses report explosions in WTC 7 BEFORE the towers fell, the debunkers get so mad that they have to hug their Sean Hannity poster to calm down. Then, Lucky Larry says "pull it" which debunkers say refers to firemen when there weren't even any firemen fighting WTC 7. Maybe he meant pull his finger.

Again, I say that the whole 9/11 official story is crazier than any conspiracy nuts explanation.

Another underreported event that day......what the hell was one of the presidential planes doing flying over washington dc right before the pentagon was hit. A plane that is usually stationed in nebraska.