Building collapses with NO explosives.

aggle-rithm said:
They only way they could win was to change the parameters of the games so they had a more conventional enemy to destroy.
Click to expand...

Kind of like how NIST tweaks its numbers to get the fires hot enough, long enough to collapse the bldgs, not that these numbers were realistic.
 
RedIbis said:
Kind of like how NIST tweaks its numbers to get the fires hot enough, long enough to collapse the bldgs, not that these numbers were realistic.
Click to expand...

boy, you wouldn't be just making wild ass accustions with no proof to back that up right?

I mean it must be such common knowledge that there are probably dozens of (if not hundreds) which support your pile o crap. Right?
 
TruthersLie said:
Ah.. using the Profanz method of inductive thinking...

But it still deserves a
<facepalm>
Click to expand...

Just pointing out that "the first time in history" argument works against truthers unless they can show another 110 story building that has been demolished by CD.
 
Profanz said:
Has anyone yet found a steel high rise building that has ever been completely destroyed because of anything other than explosives? And I mean not including the day all the stars were aligned. That day it happened for two different reasons for the first time in history. Removed fireproofing for two, and thermal expansion for a third. What are the chances? I'm going to play Powerball tomorrow. I think it's up to 140. Miracles can happen. Just ask the skeptics around here.
Click to expand...

I have asked truthers to compare the events of 911 to all other high rise buildings that suffered a) significant impact damage and b) multi-floor un-fought office fires, and c) occured in long span floor plan structures.
Fact is that the set of all fires that meet these criteria is essentially zero. The combination of the various insults to all three buildings AND the construction of those buildings, led to their global collapse.

Yes, it is the first time in history that a modern airliner hit a high rise long span office tower and spread thousands of gallons of jet fuel through several floors thus acellerating the progress of the ensueing fires to immediate multifloor large area office fires while at the same time abrading some of the fire insulation on the steel, severing the sprinkler supply, and occuring a thousand feet up requiring FFs to climb at least 76 floors of stairs against the downflow of occupants before they could even begin to address the situation.
It is also the first time in history that a high rise long span office tower with assymettric placement of floor beams was hit by debris of a much higher office tower collapse and also had multiple office fires go unfought. In this case the fires raged for many hours, and the structure was seen to be leaning well prior to collapse.

Given that this was the first time in history for this combination to have arisen I for one would not be suprised IF the final result was also something that has not been seen in the past.

So actually all three collapses happened because all three buildings share a construction technique AND had un fought fires. Witness the fact that the common post and beam constructed buildings in the vicinity all remained in various partial collapse states, even those which also suffered intense fires. It also remains a fact that most of these buildings all had to be torn down themselves and none of them by explosives. Does that not suggest a clue to you?
 
RedIbis said:
Kind of like how NIST tweaks its numbers to get the fires hot enough, long enough to collapse the bldgs, not that these numbers were realistic.
Click to expand...

Actually you have no evidence whatsoever to back up the contention that the temperatures used by NIST are unrealistic. Wheras NIST has a computer analysis that matches the evidence from steel samples taken from the structure itself and lab tests which indicates that the analysis is accurate within a margin of error. To determine the temp of the steel the TM uses such ninsense as "the steel should have conducted all the heat away from the fire floors" which completely ignores the FACT that steel construction requires fires insulation and that steel structural components in other fires HAVE badly distorted and buckled none of which could happen if steel could conduct heat well enough to allow that the non-fire portions of those components radiate the heat as fast as the fire inputted that heat.
You are blissfully unaware of how a science based investigation is conducted and you operate from a political world view that demands that the powerful elite be blamed for events such as this.
 
Profanz said:
No steel high rise building has ever been completely destroyed because of anything other than explosives. This is just a fact.
Click to expand...

Why?

Why do truthers still use the "it never happened before" argument? Don't they see how stupid and self-defeating it is?

No 110-story building had ever been destroyed via controlled demolition before 9/11. So I guess that debunks your theory, right Profanz?

No building had ever been CD'd after having a fire rage within for 7 hours. Great, so that's the WTC7 demolition theory laid to rest then. Glad to know we'll never hear it again.

Or does that "logic" only apply when you're using it?

A jet slamming into an open-floor skyscraper - that scenario has occured TWICE in history and BOTH times it led to collapse. 2-for-2. 100%!!!

And yet truthers will claim with a straight face that history says its impossible.
 
Derail moved to AAH. Some of the posts don't really deserve to be there I'm sorry to say but they were difficult to extricate from the derail.

Please keep it on-topic and civil from this point.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode
 
Gaspode said:
Derail moved to AAH. Some of the posts don't really deserve to be there I'm sorry to say but they were difficult to extricate from the derail.

Please keep it on-topic and civil from this point.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode
Click to expand...

This is exactly why I never get nominated for the Language Award. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom