D
D-Fence
Guest
osabros said:and luckily the mossad was there to warn the german governmentD-Fence said:
No?
A guy from or rail company found the lonely bag and put it to lost & found, where they opened it.....
9/11 - 5 Year Anniversary
- Thread starter teletubby-warrior
- Start date
No?
A guy from or rail company found the lonely bag and put it to lost & found, where they opened it.....
///M
Well-Known Member
MorroW said:I watched yesterday about 6h videos about Pentagon and why all 3 towers didn't collaps because planes.
And that made my really angri against USA government or whoever is responsible for that. Lot's of innocent people died because some politics needed reason for war.
And soon Buch will come to Estonia to "say thanks for our government for helping in Iraq etc etc". What a huge pile of **
If someone wants to argue about how and why all towers can't collaps only for impact of planes + fire and what a hell happened with Pentagon...feel free to gime me arguments and I will try to destroy those :lol:
MorroW,
guy who thinks 9/11 was USA government terroract
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
...and of course
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons
MorroW
Active Member
///M, give me facts or something specific to argue about.
What about a simple point that WTC towers was build to stand much bigger impacts and fires? Official papers said that steel just heated up and this lead to overstressing. Umm...whatever. Jet fuel burns very, very fast. about 15 minutes after crash all jet fuel has been burnt. What is left is office equipment. There is nothing to burn with so high tepmerature to make any damage at all to so thick steel columns. And even if we remove inner colums completly we still have outer structure what did carry about 40% on all load. This was kind a net and plane size hole does not make it weaker. More abou t fire...dunno about time, but there was firedepartment radio racord where firemen reported that fire is under control. This means there wasn't any huge or dangerosuly hot fires in building any more.
Ok...let's belive there was huge fire. This can not take building down in 10 seconds. (And this is very good argument whoever belives in laws of physics) Both towers fall faster than regural collapsing structure should. And why didn't towers fall in side? No way all inner columns and outher structure can fall directly down if they are still intact.
10 seconds is measured in vacuum (air-free). If you got structure what is collapsing because of weight...then structures down will take time to break and collaps. This is not the case in any WTC towers. (Including that small 47 floor tower 7 or whatever it was). Also, why are all conrete powdered? Any ideas? And why are some HUGE outer structure medal parts found amazingly far from towers in same time than most of inner structure is...just melted or smply "gone"?
Why did people hear explosions near grond floors seconds before towers collaps? Why firefighters describe "boom-boom-boom" effect? Oh, btw, official "pancake" idea is bulls*it.
And one good point before I go to sleep - metal has been used for a long time...never before has no tower just collapsed because of impact or fire. Or fire + impack. Never. And now...in one day, 2 huge and strong towers collaps...and also one small tower without any visible impack or reason at all :lol:
Whatever happened...lot of people died. Many firefighers who risk their life to help others. I work with metals every day and I earn about twise as much local firefigher earn. I don't risk my life for others...I get back home every day 5PM and go to work next day...life, what firefigher can't even dream. They have hard life...and it makes me angry even think if one day I will get 100% proof to blame government for that.
P.S. No more links with stupid money folding tricks or number games. It's not kindergarten
What about a simple point that WTC towers was build to stand much bigger impacts and fires? Official papers said that steel just heated up and this lead to overstressing. Umm...whatever. Jet fuel burns very, very fast. about 15 minutes after crash all jet fuel has been burnt. What is left is office equipment. There is nothing to burn with so high tepmerature to make any damage at all to so thick steel columns. And even if we remove inner colums completly we still have outer structure what did carry about 40% on all load. This was kind a net and plane size hole does not make it weaker. More abou t fire...dunno about time, but there was firedepartment radio racord where firemen reported that fire is under control. This means there wasn't any huge or dangerosuly hot fires in building any more.
Ok...let's belive there was huge fire. This can not take building down in 10 seconds. (And this is very good argument whoever belives in laws of physics) Both towers fall faster than regural collapsing structure should. And why didn't towers fall in side? No way all inner columns and outher structure can fall directly down if they are still intact.
10 seconds is measured in vacuum (air-free). If you got structure what is collapsing because of weight...then structures down will take time to break and collaps. This is not the case in any WTC towers. (Including that small 47 floor tower 7 or whatever it was). Also, why are all conrete powdered? Any ideas? And why are some HUGE outer structure medal parts found amazingly far from towers in same time than most of inner structure is...just melted or smply "gone"?
Why did people hear explosions near grond floors seconds before towers collaps? Why firefighters describe "boom-boom-boom" effect? Oh, btw, official "pancake" idea is bulls*it.
And one good point before I go to sleep - metal has been used for a long time...never before has no tower just collapsed because of impact or fire. Or fire + impack. Never. And now...in one day, 2 huge and strong towers collaps...and also one small tower without any visible impack or reason at all :lol:
Whatever happened...lot of people died. Many firefighers who risk their life to help others. I work with metals every day and I earn about twise as much local firefigher earn. I don't risk my life for others...I get back home every day 5PM and go to work next day...life, what firefigher can't even dream. They have hard life...and it makes me angry even think if one day I will get 100% proof to blame government for that.
P.S. No more links with stupid money folding tricks or number games. It's not kindergarten
MorroW,
I don't know where you got your information, but you are dead wrong. The towers actually stood much longer than most other structures would have because they delayed what's called a progressive collapse by redistributing the weight of the upper floors around the damaged outer wall. Large office towers are designed to stand up to fires that start small and spread so that fire controll systems can start containment and the fireproofing on the steel is not designed to withstand imact explosions. The imact disabled and destroyed the automated firefighting systems on the effected floors so there was no water to cool the steel or dampen the flames. The planes were also loaded with a huge amount of fuel that instantly ignited everything on those floors - I don't know where you got the information about jet fuel buring off in 15 minutes but I want a source on it. Finally you have the removal of the fireproofing material in the blast, exposing the naked steel to massively hot flames far beyond their design tolerance.
The structure of the WTC contained a central core and outter load bearing shell connected with lighter steel trusses that held up the floors and provided stability between the two structures. These lighter members were more suseptable to the heat of the blast and many were destroyed when the aircraft engines ripped through them. The junctions between the trusses and the walls held but the trusses themselves sagged as they lost rigidity in the heat. This put inward stress on the outter walls and outward stress on the inner core. Finall at the tops of the buildings the inner core and outter walls were connected by a heavy "hat structure" that tied them both together and maintained the rigidity and load distribution of the building.
When the inward stress from the sagging floors and the damage of the imact finally snapped the outter supports the heavy upper floors started to fall and peeled back the outter shell as the inner trusses progressively collapsed. It's alot like standing on a coke can - it can hold your weight as long as the force is equally distributed, but flick the side with your finger and the can collapses.
You ask about the powder: there were hundreds of thousands of tonns of drywall in both buildings and the concrete in the central core, combined with furniture, papers and office supplies.
The "Boom boom Boom" was most likely the outter wall breaking under the stress of the sagging floors and the weight from above.
I don't know where you are getting your numbers about the amount of time it took the towers to fall once the progressive collapse started, but there is resistance there, both from the air and the lower floors. Also it wasn't 10 seconds, you have to measure the time from the impact and start of the fire, not from the start of the collapse.
I don't know where you got your information, but you are dead wrong. The towers actually stood much longer than most other structures would have because they delayed what's called a progressive collapse by redistributing the weight of the upper floors around the damaged outer wall. Large office towers are designed to stand up to fires that start small and spread so that fire controll systems can start containment and the fireproofing on the steel is not designed to withstand imact explosions. The imact disabled and destroyed the automated firefighting systems on the effected floors so there was no water to cool the steel or dampen the flames. The planes were also loaded with a huge amount of fuel that instantly ignited everything on those floors - I don't know where you got the information about jet fuel buring off in 15 minutes but I want a source on it. Finally you have the removal of the fireproofing material in the blast, exposing the naked steel to massively hot flames far beyond their design tolerance.
The structure of the WTC contained a central core and outter load bearing shell connected with lighter steel trusses that held up the floors and provided stability between the two structures. These lighter members were more suseptable to the heat of the blast and many were destroyed when the aircraft engines ripped through them. The junctions between the trusses and the walls held but the trusses themselves sagged as they lost rigidity in the heat. This put inward stress on the outter walls and outward stress on the inner core. Finall at the tops of the buildings the inner core and outter walls were connected by a heavy "hat structure" that tied them both together and maintained the rigidity and load distribution of the building.
When the inward stress from the sagging floors and the damage of the imact finally snapped the outter supports the heavy upper floors started to fall and peeled back the outter shell as the inner trusses progressively collapsed. It's alot like standing on a coke can - it can hold your weight as long as the force is equally distributed, but flick the side with your finger and the can collapses.
You ask about the powder: there were hundreds of thousands of tonns of drywall in both buildings and the concrete in the central core, combined with furniture, papers and office supplies.
The "Boom boom Boom" was most likely the outter wall breaking under the stress of the sagging floors and the weight from above.
I don't know where you are getting your numbers about the amount of time it took the towers to fall once the progressive collapse started, but there is resistance there, both from the air and the lower floors. Also it wasn't 10 seconds, you have to measure the time from the impact and start of the fire, not from the start of the collapse.
zenkidori
Banned For Trolling
I like when retards who have no clue about anything to do with demolitions or engineering form opinions on technical matters.
it's funny.
it's funny.
Peter3hg
Forum Addict
- Joined
- May 3, 2006
- Messages
- 5,949
- Location
- Manchester, UK
- Car(s)
- Audi A3 1.4 TFSI Honda Hornet CB600S
Well he did actually say he works with steel in his job. But I can't believe people actually think this is some conspiracy. It always amazes me people believe these rediculous conspiracy theories and then create "facts" to support the conspiracy.zenkidori said:
BlaRo
Little Nudger
Conspiracy theories have always been a part of every major event, whether it be terrorist attacks or Super Bowl halftime shows. (Janet Jackson was scripted! The Commies are coming!)
I still think Elvis was to blame. For what, I don't know.
I still think Elvis was to blame. For what, I don't know.
zenkidori
Banned For Trolling
So? I know quite a few immigrants that work with steel and can't do basic algebra.peter3hg2 said:
Cobol74
Forum Addict
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2006
- Messages
- 17,506
- Location
- The banana republic of Ukania
- Car(s)
- Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
I am sorry for all the families left with out a mother or father just for going to work. I am sorry for all those brave Firemen and NYC Policemen who lost their lives. I am sorry for the effect this tterrible act has had on the whole world. The guilty should be brought to book.
///M
Well-Known Member
peter3hg2 said:
I'm sorry, but working in steel and having an 'expertise' in how a building is supposed to withstand an impact are two different things. I have read much more material that supports the truth, which is that the towers fell due to the planes hitting them, not because the American government up and decided to slaughter its civilians.
Like I said, give the articles a read. The maddox link was just for laughs. The other ones are quite sound and convincing, much more convincing than some brat who has enough time to come up with a silly movie that has no scientific basis.
Sorry but I had to post this:
To our good friend from Estonia, EU who works with steel - the chief exports of Estonia are: oil shale, peat, phosphorite, clay, limestone, sand, dolomite, arable land, sea mud.
You guys export dirt and mud! What are you going to do when you run out of country to sell off? :lol:
To our good friend from Estonia, EU who works with steel - the chief exports of Estonia are: oil shale, peat, phosphorite, clay, limestone, sand, dolomite, arable land, sea mud.
You guys export dirt and mud! What are you going to do when you run out of country to sell off? :lol:
zenkidori
Banned For Trolling
ROFLPOWER
the german police was warned by mossad about the plan to bomb the trains. it was in the papers and the head of mossad confirmed it.D-Fence said:osabros said:and luckily the mossad was there to warn the german governmentD-Fence said:
No?
A guy from or rail company found the lonely bag and put it to lost & found, where they opened it.....
MorroW
Active Member
First, one major thing to make clear - I have not said it was controlled demolit demolition. It's hard to keep so many mouth shut if you want to set up so huge explosive plan.
****************
About "soft metal" issue. Here is letter from Kevin Ryan.
It's estimated that regural steel will lose around 40% of it's strength in such a fire over a at least 2h time. Now...even if they used regural steel and towers would burn more than 2h, there would still be 60% of strenght in hottest places. Towers should be still standing firmly without any problems.
About 80% of outher structure was 100% ok without any damage at all. Many inner colums didn't see so high temperatures etc. So even if you completly remove some inner colums...nothing will happen.
It's alot like standing on a coke can - it can hold your weight as long as the force is equally distributed, but flick the side with your finger and the can collapses.
Yes, true. Now add inner structure in coke can and there is now way that you can compress is town in 90 degree angle. It will fall in one side - the side you will move your weight. WTC add 7 collapsed directly down - unrealistlic because there was still lot of 100% ok structure down what would have forced upper damaged floors do move in some direction. And that would lead to collaps in that side.
You ask about the powder: there were hundreds of thousands of tonns of drywall in both buildings and the concrete in the central core, combined with furniture, papers and office supplies.
Yes, but still...there was way to much powder, including tiny-tiny pieces of furniture, carpets, PC's etc. If you smash something, you can't get so tiny pieces. For example take hydraulic press. They test concret strenght and they get only quite huge pieces. yes, sure, if we think about falling speed, forces etc, you will get powder...but no way so much.
I don't know where you are getting your numbers about the amount of time it took the towers to fall once the progressive collapse started, but there is resistance there, both from the air and the lower floors. Also it wasn't 10 seconds, you have to measure the time from the impact and start of the fire, not from the start of the collapse.
If we are talking about collapsing time, we don't need to measure fire time or any other reasons. Start counting when upper floor starts to move and stop counting when it's all "powder". Why didn't lower structures slow down collapsing speed? Check 35:30 in this video. This ain't best video about time issue, but I'm to lazy to find better one what I watched.
Yes, I don't have doctor degree ot something about demolitions or engineering. But hell yeah I have clue how things work.
I have born in land where I live and work. Don't make it personal. And btw, I hate racist.
**************************************
Haha, good OT point. Could you gime me link where you get this info? I haven't never hear of that there is mud or sand export And what is "arable land"? My dictionary says it's field (where you can grow vegetable etc. How you can sell it? :shock:
************************************
One more thing - both towers had around 100,000 tons of steel...what has found after collaps are all relatively small pieces. Not long and bended what they should be.
Why towers collaps when this one didn't? This tower burn almost 24h with temperatures high as 1472 degrees. Look at this damage...it's huge. Almost all outher structure is gone. And tower is still standing. And WTC collapsed just with 1h long fire? http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
Why dozens of peole hear explosions before towers collapsed? If bit less than 3000 people were dead due to collaps, why there is so few body parts etc stuff found? And how they can tell us by name those terrorist who hijack planes? Why didn't the famous Oklahoma building collaps after HUGE explosion and massiv damage?
What to watch - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726&q=Loose+Change
What to read - http://www.loosechange911.com/wtc.htm
Ok, I'm now off...time to handle present problems like eating and reading other forums.
****************
About "soft metal" issue. Here is letter from Kevin Ryan.
Code:
We know that the steel components were certified to [b]ASTM E119[/b]. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications.
However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed bits of the building?s steel core to "soften and buckle." Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your findings make clear that "most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250C." To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C. However, this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural collapse.It's estimated that regural steel will lose around 40% of it's strength in such a fire over a at least 2h time. Now...even if they used regural steel and towers would burn more than 2h, there would still be 60% of strenght in hottest places. Towers should be still standing firmly without any problems.
About 80% of outher structure was 100% ok without any damage at all. Many inner colums didn't see so high temperatures etc. So even if you completly remove some inner colums...nothing will happen.
It's alot like standing on a coke can - it can hold your weight as long as the force is equally distributed, but flick the side with your finger and the can collapses.
Yes, true. Now add inner structure in coke can and there is now way that you can compress is town in 90 degree angle. It will fall in one side - the side you will move your weight. WTC add 7 collapsed directly down - unrealistlic because there was still lot of 100% ok structure down what would have forced upper damaged floors do move in some direction. And that would lead to collaps in that side.
You ask about the powder: there were hundreds of thousands of tonns of drywall in both buildings and the concrete in the central core, combined with furniture, papers and office supplies.
Yes, but still...there was way to much powder, including tiny-tiny pieces of furniture, carpets, PC's etc. If you smash something, you can't get so tiny pieces. For example take hydraulic press. They test concret strenght and they get only quite huge pieces. yes, sure, if we think about falling speed, forces etc, you will get powder...but no way so much.
I don't know where you are getting your numbers about the amount of time it took the towers to fall once the progressive collapse started, but there is resistance there, both from the air and the lower floors. Also it wasn't 10 seconds, you have to measure the time from the impact and start of the fire, not from the start of the collapse.
If we are talking about collapsing time, we don't need to measure fire time or any other reasons. Start counting when upper floor starts to move and stop counting when it's all "powder". Why didn't lower structures slow down collapsing speed? Check 35:30 in this video. This ain't best video about time issue, but I'm to lazy to find better one what I watched.
zenkidori said:
Yes, I don't have doctor degree ot something about demolitions or engineering. But hell yeah I have clue how things work.
zenkidori said:
I have born in land where I live and work. Don't make it personal. And btw, I hate racist.
**************************************
Blind_Io said:
Haha, good OT point. Could you gime me link where you get this info? I haven't never hear of that there is mud or sand export
And what is "arable land"? My dictionary says it's field (where you can grow vegetable etc. How you can sell it? :shock: ************************************
One more thing - both towers had around 100,000 tons of steel...what has found after collaps are all relatively small pieces. Not long and bended what they should be.
Why towers collaps when this one didn't? This tower burn almost 24h with temperatures high as 1472 degrees. Look at this damage...it's huge. Almost all outher structure is gone. And tower is still standing. And WTC collapsed just with 1h long fire? http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
Why dozens of peole hear explosions before towers collapsed? If bit less than 3000 people were dead due to collaps, why there is so few body parts etc stuff found? And how they can tell us by name those terrorist who hijack planes? Why didn't the famous Oklahoma building collaps after HUGE explosion and massiv damage?
What to watch - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726&q=Loose+Change
What to read - http://www.loosechange911.com/wtc.htm
Ok, I'm now off...time to handle present problems like eating and reading other forums.
MorroW,
Of course I will provide you with a source: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/en.html
I think the lower floors did slow the collapse, but it was progressive. The upper section only had to start moving a tiny amount and once it did the incredible weight took over. That much weight moving at even a slow speed has incredible inertia. Remember that buildings are ment to withstand lateral forces like wind loading, not crushing weight from above. As the upper floors started to fall they only needed a few feet, or even inches to get up enough inertia to overcome any structure below. If you look at the videos of the collapse the outter walls peel back like a banana as the debris falls through the inner floors collapsing the trusses. The inner core was not designed to stand independently and was also buckled and crushed by the heavy hat structure at the top of the towers - a structure that remained largly intact as is evident by the communications mast still largely intact at Ground Zero.
As for the dust thing again, I'm not sure what you are getting at or what that is supposed to prove, crushing something in a hydraulic press is not the same as the grinding motions that would have been created as bits of debris slid past each other. Obviously there was enough insulation, paper, wallboard, furniture, concrete flooring, and ceiling tiles to create the dramatic cloud of dust - we all saw it.
The CIA World Factbook is a great resource for basic information on almost every country in the world. It's free and online.
Regarding your example of the fire that gutted the appartment building: The construction techniques of that building are much different and used a series of stacked steel "boxes." The WTC was of entirely different construction. Also this building was not impacted by an aircraft that caused initial structural damage and removal of the fire protection coating from the steel beams. Finally this building appears to be 32 stories tall and with a much smaller footprint than the WTC towers. The weight of the upper floors alone are probably five to ten times heavier than this whole building. You are comparing apples and oranges here, and you're not the first. I have had this discussion at least twice before with that same page being cited. If you compare the structural drawings of the two construction techniques you will see that they have almost nothing in common, the very principles upon which they are built are very different.
About Oklahoma: The Federal Building did collapse, and much faster than the WTC - it just left parts of the 3 walls standing because of the way the building was designed - which was also repsonsible for the progressive collapse. Here is a photo of the building before the bombing so I can demonstrate the different construction techiques.
http://img165.imageshack.**/img165/3509/okcbeforewe7.jpg
The yellow lines show the aprox. location of the upper load bearing columns. The green is a main cross member that transfers the downward force of the upper floors to the thicker more widely spaced lower colums. The truck took out the two marked in red, leaving a large section of the main cross beam unsupported, the weight of the upper floors panckaked and fell forward away from the support still offered buy the undamaged sections. The rest of the building maintained it's integrity but enough damage was done to this section to cause a partial progressive collapse. Again you are comparing apples and oranges. Differnt types of construction, different materials, different design, different type of building, different type of damage.
OK, I tried to watch the video, I really did. You can't be serious. There was not one shred of positive proof in there, just a bunch of paranoid connections of chance events. The guy actually starts back in the 1960s, before the towers were even built! Most of that isn't even what I would call evidence. Ok, a manual was issued with the WTC in crosshairs, why do you suppose that is? Because we were going to destroy it ourselves or maybe because the WTC is a symbol of NY and also the reason they were attacked in the first place. As for all of the scenarios of planning terrorist uprisings in Cuba and such, that's part of military planning. The US maintains several war time strategies on every country on Earth, including Estonia, just in case something does go wrong and we have to intervene. This is nothing new, the US and other nations have maintained hypothetical even scenarios since before WWI. Hell I'm sure that France and England have for hundreds of years.
I want solid forensic proof that there were explosives, drone aircraft or something. You need to produce hard evidence, not conjecture and speculation.
Of course I will provide you with a source: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/en.html
I think the lower floors did slow the collapse, but it was progressive. The upper section only had to start moving a tiny amount and once it did the incredible weight took over. That much weight moving at even a slow speed has incredible inertia. Remember that buildings are ment to withstand lateral forces like wind loading, not crushing weight from above. As the upper floors started to fall they only needed a few feet, or even inches to get up enough inertia to overcome any structure below. If you look at the videos of the collapse the outter walls peel back like a banana as the debris falls through the inner floors collapsing the trusses. The inner core was not designed to stand independently and was also buckled and crushed by the heavy hat structure at the top of the towers - a structure that remained largly intact as is evident by the communications mast still largely intact at Ground Zero.
As for the dust thing again, I'm not sure what you are getting at or what that is supposed to prove, crushing something in a hydraulic press is not the same as the grinding motions that would have been created as bits of debris slid past each other. Obviously there was enough insulation, paper, wallboard, furniture, concrete flooring, and ceiling tiles to create the dramatic cloud of dust - we all saw it.
The CIA World Factbook is a great resource for basic information on almost every country in the world. It's free and online.
Regarding your example of the fire that gutted the appartment building: The construction techniques of that building are much different and used a series of stacked steel "boxes." The WTC was of entirely different construction. Also this building was not impacted by an aircraft that caused initial structural damage and removal of the fire protection coating from the steel beams. Finally this building appears to be 32 stories tall and with a much smaller footprint than the WTC towers. The weight of the upper floors alone are probably five to ten times heavier than this whole building. You are comparing apples and oranges here, and you're not the first. I have had this discussion at least twice before with that same page being cited. If you compare the structural drawings of the two construction techniques you will see that they have almost nothing in common, the very principles upon which they are built are very different.
About Oklahoma: The Federal Building did collapse, and much faster than the WTC - it just left parts of the 3 walls standing because of the way the building was designed - which was also repsonsible for the progressive collapse. Here is a photo of the building before the bombing so I can demonstrate the different construction techiques.
http://img165.imageshack.**/img165/3509/okcbeforewe7.jpg
The yellow lines show the aprox. location of the upper load bearing columns. The green is a main cross member that transfers the downward force of the upper floors to the thicker more widely spaced lower colums. The truck took out the two marked in red, leaving a large section of the main cross beam unsupported, the weight of the upper floors panckaked and fell forward away from the support still offered buy the undamaged sections. The rest of the building maintained it's integrity but enough damage was done to this section to cause a partial progressive collapse. Again you are comparing apples and oranges. Differnt types of construction, different materials, different design, different type of building, different type of damage.
OK, I tried to watch the video, I really did. You can't be serious. There was not one shred of positive proof in there, just a bunch of paranoid connections of chance events. The guy actually starts back in the 1960s, before the towers were even built! Most of that isn't even what I would call evidence. Ok, a manual was issued with the WTC in crosshairs, why do you suppose that is? Because we were going to destroy it ourselves or maybe because the WTC is a symbol of NY and also the reason they were attacked in the first place. As for all of the scenarios of planning terrorist uprisings in Cuba and such, that's part of military planning. The US maintains several war time strategies on every country on Earth, including Estonia, just in case something does go wrong and we have to intervene. This is nothing new, the US and other nations have maintained hypothetical even scenarios since before WWI. Hell I'm sure that France and England have for hundreds of years.
I want solid forensic proof that there were explosives, drone aircraft or something. You need to produce hard evidence, not conjecture and speculation.
zenkidori
Banned For Trolling
no actually, you don't.
you probably don't know english well enough to know that there was nothing personal or even remotely racist in that post. way to not get it at all, good job.
zenkidori said:
I actually happen to know that Morrow learned Mechanical Engineering in the most respected university in the capital of estonia. I can't be sure that everything he says is accurate but he might have a clue.
Being also born in Estonia makes me a little bit offended by the fact that our primary export is mud.
Of course no country in the world is as good as the USA but we're not riding horses either.
And just because English isn't his native language doesn't make him an idiot. Most young estonians can speak Estonian, English, German, Russian and Finnish.
How many foreign languages do you speak?
Estonians are not idiots, thats all I'm saying![/quote]
I in no way intended to belittle Estonia, I just knew very little about the country so I looked it up. I just thought it was interesting to share because I had never heard of soil being used as an export before. I think it's better than $.05 blow-molded plastic Happy Meal toys from whatever country that is trying to do to Taiwan what Taiwan did to Japan.