Proof to put the 9/11 Truthers to bed in less than 2 mins

#26
#26
Obsessed said:
Yes. Steel does lose some of its strength when heated. But all the beams in both buildings, heated equally, collapsed simultaneously, at the same rate, at free fall speeds?

Those terrorists got real damn lucky, don't you think?
Click to expand...

I know I've given you hell in some of the religious threads but you get a like from me on this.
 
#27
#27
volfan_89 said:
No one should be surprised that steel loses strength when heated. You heat up metal, it gets more bendy, duh. The thing is the buildings didn't 'bend' over, they collapsed in on themselves in an instant.
Click to expand...

Because the steel in a portion of the building lost its tensile strength, because of the massive heat.
So the load was transferred to another beam that was already compromised and you basically have a pancake effect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#29
#29
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Well, considering the damage to the building, luck didn't have a damn thing to do with it. It was inevitable once the damage was sustained.
Click to expand...

They were hit by a plane near the top levels. Yet the whole building sustained enough damage to collapse in on itself the way a timed demolition does?

I'll never remember the documentary since I was young when I saw it, but there was an interview with one of the trade centers engineers who said that a plane hitting the building shouldn't cause it to collapse and that it would be similar to punching a pencil through a screen door.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#30
#30
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Because the steel in a portion of the building lost its tensile strength, because of the massive heat.
So the load was transferred to another beam that was already compromised and you basically have a pancake effect.
Click to expand...

So did the plane that hit the pentagon have a different type of jet fuel? Why did it not burn to 1500 degrees?


Two buildings fall exactly the same-
 
#31
#31
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
I think people in government knew an attack was coming. I don't think they knew exactly what would happen. The able danger operation is very damning though.
Click to expand...

Yep. I think everyone knew an attack was coming. But I don't think anyone could have envisioned hijacking four airliners simultaneously and using them as guided missiles. (probably just tripped the NSA computers with that comment)

Anyway, except for some far fetched ideas that very likely were quickly dismissed, I don't think anyone would have predicted an attack of that magnitude. Nor thought it was possible to pull off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#32
#32
volfan_89 said:
They were hit by a plane near the top levels. Yet the whole building sustained enough damage to collapse in on itself the way a timed demolition does?

I'll never remember the documentary since I was young when I saw it, but there was an interview with one of the trade centers engineers who said that a plane hitting the building shouldn't cause it to collapse and that it would be similar to punching a pencil through a screen door.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, the engineers didn't even figure in the jet fuel for the weight of the plane they were calculating for.

When the plane went into the building it basically severed the main internal structure. The World Trade Center was built using a mesh system, the entire strength was on the outside support system.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    67.6 KB · Views: 3
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#33
#33
Grand Vol said:
Yep. I think everyone knew an attack was coming. But I don't think anyone could have envisioned hijacking four airliners simultaneously and using them as guided missiles. (probably just tripped the NSA computers with that comment)

Anyway, except for some far fetched ideas that very likely were quickly dismissed, I don't think anyone would have predicted an attack of that magnitude. Nor thought it was possible to pull off.
Click to expand...

I tend to believe this may be the case. Although I do also believe that those buildings or any extremely tall building may have charges in the event that their structural integrity is compromised so that they collapse in on themselves and do as little damage as possible to the surrounding building. Have nothing to back this up other than a hunch. Could be completely wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
Obsessed said:
So did the plane that hit the pentagon have a different type of jet fuel? Why did it not burn to 1500 degrees?


Two buildings fall exactly the same-
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. I do know people underestimate the heat of an office fire. Have you ever burned Berber carpet? That stuff goes up extremely hot.

This whole arbitrary 1500 degree number is crazy, if you apply 900 degrees to steel it will lose strength.
 
#35
#35
Grand Vol said:
Yep. I think everyone knew an attack was coming. But I don't think anyone could have envisioned hijacking four airliners simultaneously and using them as guided missiles. (probably just tripped the NSA computers with that comment)

Anyway, except for some far fetched ideas that very likely were quickly dismissed, I don't think anyone would have predicted an attack of that magnitude. Nor thought it was possible to pull off.
Click to expand...

Yep, agree completely.
 
#36
#36
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
If I remember correctly, the engineers didn't even figure in the jet fuel for the weight of the plane they were calculating for.

When the plane went into the building it basically severed the main internal structure. The World Trade Center was built using a mesh system, the entire strength was on the outside support system.
Click to expand...

Again the plane caused enough damage to cause the whole building to collapse in on itself? I could see the upper level maybe but the whole thing at free fall, demolition speeds.
 
Last edited:
#37
#37
volfan_89 said:
Again the plane cause enough damage to cause the whole building to collapse in on itself? I could see the upper level maybe but the whole thing at free fall, demolition speeds.
Click to expand...

Again, that's a lot of weight falling. It would be a pancake effect. With one floor and the numerous floors on top of it falling on the rest of the structure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#39
#39
Obsessed said:
So did the plane that hit the pentagon have a different type of jet fuel? Why did it not burn to 1500 degrees?


Two buildings fall exactly the same-
Click to expand...

You're not taking construction into account. The Pentagon is not under the same stress a high rise would be under. While I'm not a construction engineer, I do know the design wouldn't lend itself to the same vertical stresses the WTC would have when it was on fire.
 
#40
#40
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Again, that's a lot of weight falling. It would be a pancake effect. With one floor and the numerous floors on top of it falling on the rest of the structure.
Click to expand...

Maybe but it's as if each floor was vaporized before even being hit by the floor above it. You know steel so I'll give you that, but it didn't bend like a piece of steel losing strength it collapsed all at once.
 
#41
#41
volfan_89 said:
Again the plane caused enough damage to cause the whole building to collapse in on itself? I could see the upper level maybe but the whole thing at free fall, demolition speeds.
Click to expand...

Look up the floor load theory...

It didn't start at free fall speeds, but when thousands and later hundreds of thousands of tons of material is plopped onto a floor that's not capable of handling it, you are going to get a progressively faster destruction rate.
 
#43
#43
volfan_89 said:
Maybe but it's as if each floor was vaporized before even being hit by the floor above it. You know steel so I'll give you that, but it didn't bend like a piece of steel losing strength it collapsed all at once.
Click to expand...

If you look at the close up video of the north tower, when it collapsed, you can see it fell intact. That's a lot of weight to hold for the rest of the structure. Somethings got to give, in this case, it was the remaining structure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#44
#44
Grand Vol said:
Look up the floor load theory...

It didn't start at free fall speeds, but when thousands and later hundreds of thousands of tons of material is plopped onto a floor that's not capable of handling it, you are going to get a progressively faster destruction rate.
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#45
#45
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
If you look at the close up video of the north tower, when it collapsed, you can see it fell intact. That's a lot of weight to hold for the rest of the structure. Somethings got to give, in this case, it was the remaining structure.
Click to expand...

And plus, the inner core was laterally supported by the outer structure (if I understand that correctly) which gave it the strength to hold the building "up." Once the floors gave way, there was nothing to support the outer or inner structure which collapsed since there was nothing to support it laterally.

Allegedly, the inner core was still standing for some time after the towers collapsed. But of course, one couldn't see that from the debris cloud.
 
#46
#46
Grand Vol said:
And plus, the inner core was laterally supported by the outer structure (if I understand that correctly) which gave it the strength to hold the building "up." Once the floors gave way, there was nothing to support the outer or inner structure which collapsed since there was nothing to support it laterally.

Allegedly, the inner core was still standing for some time after the towers collapsed. But of course, one couldn't see that from the debris cloud.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that's exactly how I understand it.

When it comes to 9/11, the well was poisoned day one by the Alex jones types looking to garner attention from a national tragedy.

I do however want to read the missing 28 pages from the 9/11 report that allegedly implicates the Saudis.
 
#47
#47
We never landed on the moon, there was no holocaust, 9/11 was conspired by government. There will always be nutbags in the world that will seek out to discredit anything. I just shake my head at them and walk away
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#48
#48
SDV said:
We never landed on the moon, there was no holocaust, 9/11 was conspired by government. There will always be nutbags in the world that will seek out to discredit anything. I just shake my head at them and walk away
Click to expand...

I remember watching a YouTube video that was sent to me that basically said a nuclear bomb was under the WTC, and that's what caused the collapse. Yes, there are some wackos out there sir.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#49
#49
SDV said:
We never landed on the moon, there was no holocaust, 9/11 was conspired by government. There will always be nutbags in the world that will seek out to discredit anything. I just shake my head at them and walk away
Click to expand...

It's human nature to question things, seek out the truth and not take things at face value. Some do carry it to extremes though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#50
#50
volfan_89 said:
It's human nature to question things, seek out the truth and not take things at face value. Some do carry it to extremes though.
Click to expand...

It is in fact human nature. Yet we see some go to extremes to try to prove unicorns exist in relation to 9/11. However, I go back to DTH's comment from page 1:

Do you honestly think the US Government could have pulled this off without anyone talking about it and with such secrecy it makes the Manhattan Project pale in comparison?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top