Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: 9/11 - One Thousand Architects & Engineers Call for New Investigation « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 9

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21581
Offline
#30 : February 24, 2010, 04:53:30 PM


 As far as the towers collapsing in NY, heat does rise.. but the planes didn't hit the very top floor on either building. The structure of the buildings could not withstand the upper floors collapsing.. once the top floors started coming down, it became a chain reaction where the weight of the upper floors collapsing onto each successive lower floor was more than the structure could handle, thus the pancake collapse.


Progressive collapse, in this scenario, explained very well here:

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/466.pdf

...of course what would these cats know.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

NovaBuc

****
Starter

Posts : 842
Offline
#31 : February 24, 2010, 04:28:02 PM

 If you have ever been to the pentagon and seen the area where the plane hit, you'd understand why there isn't that much footage of it. There's not really much around there with camera angles of the face that was hit beyond the security cameras at the Pentagon. They don't take video per se, they snap pictures every so often. Joe has brought up a gas station that had tapes confiscated before, but it does not have a clear view of the impact site. Even if it did, it is likely the footage would not be that useful due to most security cameras of that sort are focused on the business.. not a building about a half mile away ( not to mention we're not talking about high def or even decent standard def cameras in most cases). Simple enough to use Google Maps to see the location of the Pentagon to see there's really not anything in the area that had an angle to see the plane coming in from the river. There's Arlington Cemetary to the west and some parks and the Potomac to the east.

 As far as the towers collapsing in NY, heat does rise.. but the planes didn't hit the very top floor on either building. The structure of the buildings could not withstand the upper floors collapsing.. once the top floors started coming down, it became a chain reaction where the weight of the upper floors collapsing onto each successive lower floor was more than the structure could handle, thus the pancake collapse.

 Probably a waste of time though, people who want to believe something else happened or won't believe what hundreds of eyewitnesses reported about the Pentagon attack will continue to find a reason to believe there had to be something more to the story.

 

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21581
Offline
#32 : February 24, 2010, 04:15:34 PM

What the hell was the "official" explanation for WTC 7 collapsing??

 "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder says. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse. According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

BucsBullsBolts

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4823
Offline
#33 : February 24, 2010, 04:01:16 PM



What the hell was the "official" explanation for WTC 7 collapsing??

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21581
Offline
#34 : February 24, 2010, 03:55:48 PM

Airplane fuel is'nt even a hot enough fire burning fuel to melt steel, theres absolutely no way.

Showing why conspiracy theories live on. Metals in buildings are under stress, that's why they use something strong to build the frame to absorb stress. You do not need to melt steel to make a building collapse, you only need to weaken it past the failure point to make it collapse.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

BucsBullsBolts

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4823
Offline
#35 : February 24, 2010, 03:53:00 PM

It is the Pentagon attacks that are interesting. I mean really, where were the wings or debris?
They made sure you saw pictures of the debris.� The pictures are out there if you look.� Why did they take all of the video tapes from the surrounding area and give two frames that didn't even show a plane?� Doesn't make any sense.

If the plane purported to hit the Pentagon, didn't .... Where is it and the crew and passengers? .... Obviously, if this was a conspiracy of that magnitude,  snuffing out a couple hundred more people wouldn't be that big of a deal but still would be fascinating to know what happened to them.
I never said the plane didn't hit the building.  It did.  I just never understood why the footage was suppressed.

That really wasn't meant as a rebuttal to you, just kind of free form thinking on my part .... it is strange that there was no footage whatsoever of the plane ... if it was the airliner as reported.

TBbuccaneer40

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1690
Offline
#36 : February 24, 2010, 03:52:19 PM


RonDiazlol

****
Starter

Posts : 385
Offline
#37 : February 24, 2010, 03:46:55 PM

Airplane fuel is'nt even a hot enough fire burning fuel to melt steel, theres absolutely no way. Kerosene burns alot hotter than airplane fuel. What happened to Building 7? It wasn't even hit by a plane. Why did BBC announce it's collapse prior to it collapsing? Did they have prior knowledge? Why are the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 the only 3 buildings in history to collapse due to fire damage? Why did each building implode like a controlled demolition?  That is just a fraction of the questions that need to be asked, I could go all day! Do your research before you critcize others who have, quit believing everything the mainstream media tells you.
qft

TBbuccaneer40

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1690
Offline
#38 : February 24, 2010, 03:35:16 PM

Airplane fuel is'nt even a hot enough fire burning fuel to melt steel, theres absolutely no way. Kerosene burns alot hotter than airplane fuel. What happened to Building 7? It wasn't even hit by a plane. Why did BBC announce it's collapse prior to it collapsing? Did they have prior knowledge? Why are the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 the only 3 buildings in history to collapse due to fire damage? Why did each building implode like a controlled demolition?  That is just a fraction of the questions that need to be asked, I could go all day! Do your research before you critcize others who have, quit believing everything the mainstream media tells you.

RonDiazlol

****
Starter

Posts : 385
Offline
#39 : February 24, 2010, 03:20:12 PM

A 747 can carry about 55,000 gallons of fuel. Ignite that at the top floors of a skyscrapper and what do you think is going to happen?
Heat rises, so possiblyy it would burn from the point of contact and up? It certainly would not effect the bottom 80ish floors and surely would not cause those buildings to  free fall in less than 9 seconds each.

RonDiazlol

****
Starter

Posts : 385
Offline
#40 : February 24, 2010, 03:18:12 PM

It is the Pentagon attacks that are interesting. I mean really, where were the wings or debris?
They made sure you saw pictures of the debris.  The pictures are out there if you look.  Why did they take all of the video tapes from the surrounding area and give two frames that didn't even show a plane?  Doesn't make any sense.
Yes, they did show debris, but why wasnt any of it burnt? It looked really staged. For an example, the cable spools were totally unburned. The hole punched in the side of the Pentagon was just too perfect and clean to be a plane. Also the video they finally did release, did not show any sort other view except the final .5 seconds of impact ( which showed nothing but an explosion). There HAS to be other footage from other sources that show the plane incoming, sorta like when we saw the second plane hit one of the towers. There is plenty of things that could be cleared up by releasing some more of the camera footage from other view points. But the FBI quickly confiscated them. Too many questions, and not enough answers by our Govt. Hell we have more footage showing different angles in the Pearl Harbor attacks.

cyberdude557

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11834
Offline
#41 : February 24, 2010, 02:50:17 PM

A 747 can carry about 55,000 gallons of fuel. Ignite that at the top floors of a skyscrapper and what do you think is going to happen?

Bayfisher

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4630
Offline
#42 : February 24, 2010, 02:33:27 PM

It is the Pentagon attacks that are interesting. I mean really, where were the wings or debris?
They made sure you saw pictures of the debris.  The pictures are out there if you look.  Why did they take all of the video tapes from the surrounding area and give two frames that didn't even show a plane?  Doesn't make any sense.

If the plane purported to hit the Pentagon, didn't .... Where is it and the crew and passengers? .... Obviously, if this was a conspiracy of that magnitude,  snuffing out a couple hundred more people wouldn't be that big of a deal but still would be fascinating to know what happened to them.
I never said the plane didn't hit the building.  It did.  I just never understood why the footage was suppressed.

Skull and Bones

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23343
Online
#43 : February 24, 2010, 01:35:24 PM

google "The Hutchinson Effect".


spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7100
Offline
#44 : February 24, 2010, 12:34:16 PM

How many times have we been down this road already?

It's not like anything new has been brought to the table, they just don't believe what happened, happened, and will continue asking for inquiry after inquiry until they get one that agrees with their conclusions.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 9
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: 9/11 - One Thousand Architects & Engineers Call for New Investigation « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools