Where were you? - September 11, 2001

#254
#254
VolStrom said:
Show me the calculations of what the floors were designed to support. When you drop a hammer on a piece of paper guess what happens?
Click to expand...
Look, I'm not going to convince you. You can believe your narrative, and I can question the narrative.
 
#255
#255
ajvol01 said:
Do you think the NIST simulation of one column failing causing a domino effect makes sense?
Click to expand...
My God man, anyone with half a brain knows what happened here. Argue that it was a conspiracy all you want but it won't change the facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#260
#260
VolStrom said:
I thought you were intelligent, I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
I already explained to you clearly that the lower floors would have had less physical damage and thermal damager, meaning that the lower floors strength and integrity would have been much higher than the damaged floors above. The most likely scenario in the two WTC towers that were hit by airplanes should have been maybe the top sections falling off and about 60-70 floors still remaining standing because of the lack of structural damage. But to have not just those two buildings, but a 3rd building later that afternoon fall completely in its footprint is a lot to explain without the use of demolition agents helping along the way.
 
#261
#261
VolStrom said:
Yup, two airplanes crashed into the two world trade center towers to conspire to take down WTC #7. Does it sound reasonable now?
Click to expand...
Look at what you just typed and you tell me who is out in left field... because WT7 did fall, based on the narrative, because of the other two towers collapsing and a few fires.
 
#262
#262
Rasputin_Vol said:
I already explained to you clearly that the lower floors would have had less physical damage and thermal damager, meaning that the lower floors strength and integrity would have been much higher than the damaged floors above. The most likely scenario in the two WTC towers that were hit by airplanes should have been maybe the top sections falling off and about 60-70 floors still remaining standing because of the lack of structural damage. But to have not just those two buildings, but a 3rd building later that afternoon fall completely in its footprint is a lot to explain without the use of demolition agents helping along the way.
Click to expand...
Where did you get your structural engineering degree. You sound like one of the talking heads on CNN that became an expert watching TV.
 
#264
#264
VolStrom said:
Where did you get your structural engineering degree. You sound like one of the talking heads on CNN that became an expert watching TV.
Click to expand...
I don't have a structural engineering degree, but I did take several materials science classes and labs while I was a mechanical engineer major. I'm not claiming to be a structural engineering expert, but I do understand the simple freshman/sophomore year principles taught about yielding, critical failure and kinetic and potential energy.
 
#265
#265
VolStrom said:
And yes it caught on fire and burned for hours am I wrong?
Click to expand...
WT7 burned for hours. WTC 1 and 2 only burned for an hour or so.

And either way, just because a building is on fire, that doesn't mean it is going to catastrophically fail... or even more incredibly, catastrophically fail in a uniform direction within its footprint.
 
#266
#266
Rasputin_Vol said:
I don't have a structural engineering degree, but I did take several materials science classes and labs while I was a mechanical engineer major. I'm not claiming to be a structural engineering expert, but I do understand the simple freshman/sophomore year principles taught about yielding, critical failure and kinetic and potential energy.
Click to expand...
So fess up, do you really think that anything other than the airplanes that crashed into the world trade center took down any building there?
 
#267
#267
VolStrom said:
So fess up, do you really think that anything other than the airplanes that crashed into the world trade center took down any building there?
Click to expand...
All I'm saying is that I am not buying the narrative that is being told. The odds of three buildings failing in the same unique pattern and in a uniform manner based on asymmetrical damage are low.

That is all I'm saying.
 
#268
#268
Rasputin_Vol said:
All I'm saying is that I am not buying the narrative that is being told. The odds of three buildings failing in the same unique pattern and in a uniform manner based on asymmetrical damage are low.

That is all I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Three identically made buildings that all fell after burning is a narrative? Believe what you want, but I'm telling you that there was no orchestrated conspiracy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mr.checkerboards, Rickyvol77 and AM64
#269
#269
VolStrom said:
Three identically made buildings that all fell after burning is a narrative? Believe what you want, but I'm telling you that there was no orchestrated conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Two were identical. WTC 7 was different.

But even still. All three were not damaged identically.
 
#275
#275
SpaceCoastVol said:
Not this again....

Peaceful Islamic Clerics did something and two buildings fell down.
Click to expand...
Ackchyually 3 buildings fell
DpQ9YJl.png
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top