Gravity defying buildings? :D

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Since some of our resident Truthers still insist that gravity wasn't the cause of WTC1, 2 & 7 falling to the ground & that they were brought down by "explosives", it's only logical that they would defy gravity, atleast in Trutherland.

Sir Issac Newton would be laughing in his grave about that issue. There's no way that anything on Earth would defy gravity, let alone 2 110 & a 47 story buildings.

So I ask our resident Truthers: Can a building defy gravity?

 

[Myriad]

All buildings defy gravity, for as long as they remain standing.

But, gravity never stops acting on them. So when something happens to a building that sufficiently compromises its ability to continue to defy gravity, it falls down.

The problem with some Truthers is that the only thing they can imagine that would compromise a building's ability to continue to defy gravity is explosive demolition. This is kind of like claiming that because the normal function of people's legs is to allow them to stand upright against gravity, any time a person falls down it must mean someone has cut their legs off.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Scott Jurgenson]

All buildings defy gravity, for as long as they remain standing.

But, gravity never stops acting on them. So when something happens to a building that sufficiently compromises its ability to continue to defy gravity, it falls down.

The problem with some Truthers is that the only thing they can imagine that would compromise a building's ability to continue to defy gravity is explosive demolition. This is kind of like claiming that because the normal function of people's legs is to allow them to stand upright against gravity, any time a person falls down it must mean someone has cut their legs off.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Truther logic is unreal. I really am just waiting for one well put together argument, with a timeline, and accusations. Not just discrepancies in the story and anomalies.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

All buildings defy gravity, for as long as they remain standing.

But, gravity never stops acting on them. So when something happens to a building that sufficiently compromises its ability to continue to defy gravity, it falls down.

The problem with some Truthers is that the only thing they can imagine that would compromise a building's ability to continue to defy gravity is explosive demolition. This is kind of like claiming that because the normal function of people's legs is to allow them to stand upright against gravity, any time a person falls down it must mean someone has cut their legs off.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Right! And Truthers just don't get it because they never understood Newton's Law. They just assume that "explosives" were used & that gravity had no effect on them when they were comprimised by the fires & damage from the planes.

 

[Sabretooth]

I am always thoroughly amazed and dumbfounded by the average CTer's lack of even basic physics knowledge.

I mean, we're only talking about a high school level of education.

I won't even get into a CTer's lack of reading comprehension and their inability to understand the definition of the words "fact", "logic", and "evidence".

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I am always thoroughly amazed and dumbfounded by the average CTer's lack of even basic physics knowledge.

I mean, we're only talking about a high school level of education.

I won't even get into a CTer's lack of reading comprehension and their inability to understand the definition of the words "fact", "logic", and "evidence".

The words "fact", "logic", and "evidence" are like crosses to them, since they do seem to act like vampires more than people.

They suck out people for their money & their wisdom & for what? So they can act all paranoid & delusional because a few nutcases said that it looked like an "Inside Job".

 

[Sabretooth]

The words "fact", "logic", and "evidence" are like crosses to them, since they do seem to act like vampires more than people.

They suck out people for their money & their wisdom & for what? So they can act all paranoid & delusional because a few nutcases said that it looked like an "Inside Job".

I tend to imagine a truther as a 5 year old girl sitting in a corner with her fingers in her ears and yelling that they can't hear you.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I tend to imagine a truther as a 5 year old girl sitting in a corner with her fingers in her ears and yelling that they can't hear you.

Kind of like this little girl :

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...a=X&ei=8019TO_gJcminAed8MWdCw&ved=0CB4Q9QEwBA

 

[Sabretooth]

Kind of like this little girl :

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...a=X&ei=8019TO_gJcminAed8MWdCw&ved=0CB4Q9QEwBA

There couldn't be a more perfect simile.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

There couldn't be a more perfect simile.

I just love it when people make fun of or laugh at the Truthers. Gets my blood rushing! LOL!

 

[Bell]

All buildings defy gravity, for as long as they remain standing.

But, gravity never stops acting on them. So when something happens to a building that sufficiently compromises its ability to continue to defy gravity, it falls down.

The problem with some Truthers is that the only thing they can imagine that would compromise a building's ability to continue to defy gravity is explosive demolition. This is kind of like claiming that because the normal function of people's legs is to allow them to stand upright against gravity, any time a person falls down it must mean someone has cut their legs off.

Respectfully,
Myriad

I think of buildings always wanting to fall down. It's the engineers that stop them from doing so

 

[bardamu]

Since some of our resident Truthers still insist that gravity wasn't the cause of WTC1, 2 & 7 falling to the ground & that they were brought down by "explosives", it's only logical that they would defy gravity, atleast in Trutherland.

Sir Issac Newton would be laughing in his grave about that issue. There's no way that anything on Earth would defy gravity, let alone 2 110 & a 47 story buildings.

So I ask our resident Truthers: Can a building defy gravity?

If a building can't defy gravity, why don't all buildings collapse at freefall acceleration as soon as the scaffolding is removed?

 

[leftysergeant]

If a building can't defy gravity, why don't all buildings collapse at freefall acceleration as soon as the scaffolding is removed?

A building is just a scaffolding with a shell. So why would it fall down?

BTW, becareful, when you take down the external scaffolding, which bolts you undo first.

 

[BigAl]

If a building can't defy gravity, why don't all buildings collapse at freefall acceleration as soon as the scaffolding is removed?

Scaffolding doesn't hold up the building.

 

[Sabretooth]

Scaffolding doesn't hold up the building.

That's what they want you to think!

 

[dafydd]

Scaffolding doesn't hold up the building.

Think about it bardamu,your penny will drop eventually.

 

[Bell]

If a building can't defy gravity, why don't all buildings collapse at freefall acceleration as soon as the scaffolding is removed?

Do you have any clue as to why scaffolding is used?

 

[Sabretooth]

Do you have any clue as to why scaffolding is used?

To spray on the super-ultra-nano-micro-thermite?

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

If a building can't defy gravity, why don't all buildings collapse at freefall acceleration as soon as the scaffolding is removed?

You have alot to learn about building construction little one. In order for a building to achieve free fall, it must be going 120 mph. You find us a video of all 3 WTC buildings falling 120 mph, then you might get us interested.

 

[bardamu]

Removing the scaffolding is a convenient metaphor representing completion of the building. As it happens, according to 9/11 Chewy Defense, no multi-storey building could ever be completed. The ground floor would be crushed as gravity sends the first floor to the ground.

So we still have no answer to the question: if a building can't defy gravity, why do the vast majority of buildings not collapse?