Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ranxer
point one.
the buildings(both towers!) fell at nearly free fall speed.
I think there would have been some resistance. concrete by itself would have slowed the fall down a few seconds but there was absolutely massive core collumns in there that would have slowed the fall down alot more than that. I have not seen a plausible argument to explain the speed that the buildings came down. again i could understand maybe one building oddly coming down that fast or coming straight down into its footprint but two, no, three buildings? no way, i really can't see how, unless they were controlled demolitions. this fits so neatly into the fact that FEMA swept up the evidence and got rid of it under massive security while keeping other investigators out and the bush admin denied access to investigation.
2) black smoke, very few flames...
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...wtc1hole1.html
photos indicate that the fires were smoldering or going out, not showing a raging inferno. in order for the buildings to come straight down we would have to get the steel structure to melt uniformly across a complete cross section. there is absolutely no way that one section melting or weakening could get the buildings to plunge straight down! i just don't see how this could happen.. besides the fact that the fires didn't seem to be hot enough to melt or weaken the steel enough for a collapse of even one column.
wish i could hang out here and talk more about the info i've been reading but i don't have time.
bottom line for me is that if the buildings came down like the bush admins conspiracy theory describes, a) there would have been much more open investigation. b) those who didn't do thier job protecting the country would have been reprimanded. instead they got promoted.. how does that make sense? |
They fell at free fall speed because concrete cracks.
You have to understand that, as soon as a small part of the concrete collapses, there's a huge amount of force crashing into what's still intact. That concrete wasn't made for such an impact, and gives way too.
In a way it works like controlled demolition. Blow away the bottom, the top goes after it because as soon as it hits the ground it crumbles. It wasn't made to withstand forces like that. When several hundreds of thousands of tons of steel and concrete crash into another structure of steel and concrete which, for the most part, is just pockets of air with a steel skeleton and concrete reinforcement, well, that flimsy thing's not going to resist much.
Also, have you ever seen something burn? If a house keeps burning, at a certain point in time it's going to collapse because the sructure has been weakened sufficiently so that it can't support the weight anymore.
And yes, no major steel structure has collapsed because of fire. That's because the fires were put out in time. If they hadn't, well, you know. Massive, MASSIVE amounts of kerosene can burn hot enough to sufficiently weaken a building's steel structure and cause it to collapse.
Not to mention the fact that some corners were cut during the WTC's construction (faillure to sufficiently insulate the steel girders holding the separate floors up against fire, for instance, or the actual method of construction).
Thing is, the WTC wasn't really up to having a bigass jet crash into it, followed by an hour or so of fire hotter than a thousand degrees celsius, which, although it can't really melt the steel, WILL weaken it incredibly.
I suggest you watch more of the Discovery Channel.
Hybrid Mode
