30 Aug 07
Originally posted by ChessJester1) so you think steel holds its strength when heated? well it doesn't.
Iron has a lower melting point than steel, its also not as strong, so it bends easier.
Also, none of the steel supports below the impact were affected by the fire, so how come they offered no resistance to the collapse? If you look at the video, it collapses outwards and at free fall speed, meaning that if the rest of the steel supports were still be ...[text shortened]... se. Afterwards, Engineers went up and inspected the building, stating that "it is very solid."
2) when a structure of that mass gathers enough speed, there's no hope in hell the unheated structure below the fire could stop the fall. think of dropping a large building on top of another from dozens of meters. the kinetic energy is just huge at the time of impact, and the lower building will deform not unlike a cardboard building.
3) buildings are not built identically. there are huge amounts of buildings that have collapsed in fire. and many of those that didn't, get demolished all the same. because the structure has been weakened by the fire and the building is in serious danger of collapsing.
30 Aug 07
Originally posted by jimslyp69here's the footage of the flag "blowing" in the wind. It ain't blowing nowhere, it's jiggling when the astonauts move the pole around.
Now there's another story. Why exactly was that flag blowing in the wind? 😛
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IrI3iQqTdns&mode=related&search=
30 Aug 07
Originally posted by Sam The ShamShadows from 3 different perspectives... no.
they don't have shadows on the moon?
But we all know men went to the moon because the ONLY way to bring back Moon Rocks is for a MAN to go with a SHOVEL and a WHEELBARROW. There is no other way to get Moon rocks.
P-
31 Aug 07
Originally posted by Dr Strangelovehere bloddy here. why does anybody think that there was some sort of conspiracy to what happend that day? i agree that there may have been some secrets kept over the evidence but do you honestly believe that apart from the terrorists there would be any normal human being that would fly planes into buildings not only commiting suicide but also killing all those innocent people?
Newsflash.
The terrorist b@stards dunnit!!
PLEASE PEOPLE< ACCEPT THAT THE US GOV HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!!!!!!!!
31 Aug 07
Originally posted by silly mctallOh yeah, do you know that George Bush's private sec. name is......................Kennedy!
here bloddy here. why does anybody think that there was some sort of conspiracy to what happend that day? i agree that there may have been some secrets kept over the evidence but do you honestly believe that apart from the terrorists there would be any normal human being that would fly planes into buildings not only commiting suicide but also killing al ...[text shortened]... hose innocent people?
PLEASE PEOPLE< ACCEPT THAT THE US GOV HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!!!!!!!!
02 Sep 07
Originally posted by ChessJesterHave you read absolutely nothing about the crashes since they happened? This has been explained ad infinitum.
Iron has a lower melting point than steel, its also not as strong, so it bends easier.
Also, none of the steel supports below the impact were affected by the fire, so how come they offered no resistance to the collapse? If you look at the video, it collapses outwards and at free fall speed, meaning that if the rest of the steel supports were still be ...[text shortened]... se. Afterwards, Engineers went up and inspected the building, stating that "it is very solid."
There's some fundamental differences in building structures here. One is short and wide, built of reinforced concrete to withstand bomb and missile attacks. The others, long and tall.
Of course, I believe the short one should have collapsed in on itself. The others should easily have withstood the impact of a 500 ton missile travelling at 400 km/h or whatever the figures were. Clearly, the CIA were involved or the MIB. After all, the Empire State building didn't fall down when a military plane crashed into it!