http://www.infowars.com/beijing-skyscraper-fire-the-silence-is-deafening/ This one in Beijing was 50 stories. taller than WTC, no collapse and it was also engulfed.
This case is proven. The towers were designed and built crappy.
(1) This is the Pit, not GD.
(2) Using logic on gonzomax (at least on this subject) is a waste of time
Nice. give us a link that 404s.
So here is a link to that fire by a reputable news organization, the BBC.
While it did not completely collapse, so say it did not fall is stretching the truth to nearly its breaking point.
Oh, and from Wiki
Looks collapsed to me.
Well, you said “our 3” which, unless you were speaking in code, included the two primary towers.
And, no, I take neither you nor your infantile illogic seriously. If anything, I’m impressed “our 3” stayed upright as long as they did - long enough for mass evacuations of the people under the crash zones in the two primaries, and long enough for an evacuation of WTC7.
OMFG, the conspiracy is bigger than we thought. Maybe WTC 7 was just a cover for Madrid!!!
With the advent of reinforced cockpit doors, the chances of hijacking a plane and turning it into a missile* and thus replicating another WTC are petty low. So one could argue it isn’t really necessary to expend money per NIST’s recommendations (e. g., better exits, redundant sprinkler systems, and more robust fire insulation on the steel structure). One would hope that each idea could stand on their own merits rather than a “just-in-case hijacking.”
With respect to Gonzomax:
Do you recall the First Interstate Tower Fire? This involved a 62 story building in Los Angeles in early May of 1988 which caught on fire during the late evening and took four hours to contain. I recall hearing or reading the day after, that during the fire there was fear the FIT might collapse. (This is from memory, tried to find a cite for possible collapse, no luck. Maybe LA Times archives may have it).
My friend and I went to the site on an early Sunday morning, four days after the fire, to take a gander at the damage. It was cordoned off–we couldn’t get closer than maybe a 1/4 mile (?), but we had the advantage of being on a rise east of the tower which allowed us the ability to see the burned areas more clearly with binoculars. Pretty sobering–seeing the blacken floors, missing window, soot, and the barely visible steel columns. We both commented on the immensity of the building and wondered what it would have looked like had it collapsed (hence, my earlier comment) …
One thing that saved the FIT from doom was “…Unusually good application of fire resistive coating helped maintain structural integrity in fire”. According to the above link, the efficacy of fire-proofing resulting in little damage to the structure. We note that WTC had the opposite problem. Also assisting in the prevention of the FIT collapse was the absence of a 767 punching a hole into the structure. (This is something that 9-11 nutters conveniently drop when they push the meme: no skyscraper that suffered an inferno has ever collapsed.).
The FIT fire started small, gradually spread out, and moved up to the next floor about every 45 minutes. The WTC, OTOH, was essentially a Molotov cocktail on multiple floors near the top of the buildings. It’s kind like trying to get a log to burn with a match verses soaking it with gasoline and tossing the match on it.
Another crucial factor was the location of the fire: it started on the twelfth floor. Now, which group has a bigger disadvantage: NY or LA? With respect to LA, it still took about 400 people to fight the fire which enveloped , with most of them working the logistics angle (air bottles, fire hoses, etc.). They used the 10th floor as a staging area. Compare and contrast with NY’s fire/rescue crews and their logistical hurdles.
With respect to WTC 7’s collapse this person argued that he could see the collapse coming (pg 330). Maybe he’s lying?
If there are any parallels, both LA & NY crews suffered problems with radio communications.
AFAIK, I’ve not heard any alternative theories about explosives, thermite, or wombats trying to bring down the FIT. With the WTC…:rolleyes:
On a side note: the estimated cost of World Trade Center One (3.3 G$) will require rents that are roughly double with respect to the current rental market in Manhattan. Democracy at work…sigh :rolleyes:
*You could try sneaking explosives to take out the door to hijack the plane, but why not blow up the plane mid-flight instead?. Oh wait, that’s what the Terrorist ™ have been trying to do for a couple of decades.
I deserved that.
So, how about them combat wombats on battle bears pulling down WTC7 with mysterious silk cables stronger than the strongest steel?
You’re right, he should be embarrassed, much in the same way a grown man should feel embarrassed for playing full contact rugby with a kindergartner.
There is no conspiracy, just poor design and build.
No it did not collapse. That after being in conflagration for a day. The towers and WTC7 ,fell very rapidly. You are aware of that aren’t you?
I know, I expected them to fall more slowly. It’s as though they used the same technology as the moon hoax, but in reverse!!!
Nothing we can do about the battle bears, the right to arm bears is written into the Constitution.
Not only is it an ethical, constitutional right ; but it’s one of the cornerstones of US military thinking. How d’you think they ousted the lobsterbacks ?
Weaponized butter?
I doubt you or anybody else expected them to fall, especially as quickly as the did. Firefighters were trapped because they did not anticipate the towers falling. Probably because bldgs burn for a long time , and don’t fall in a pile.
I remember how shocked everyone was when they fell. Now a decade later, some of you claim you expected that to happen. Bullshit.
It is dishonest to bring moon hoaxes into the discussion. But it is entirely expected.
I think DanBlather was completely out of line with that remark. Simple thermodynamics prove that the moon hoax technology is not a reversable system. And I did not expect the towers to fall. Every time I’ve seen a jet plane crash into a 100 story building, it simply burned for a long time, but did not fall. And as you point out, none of that had anything to do with WTC7, which was not struck by any plane. WTC7 was clearly brought down by the angry truckers on the 23rd floor. If I’d driven a truck all the way up to the 23rd floor of a building, and found out they had no diesel fuel, I’d do something to destroy the building too.
Wombat, that is not mystery silk that is stronger than the strongest steel, it is a natural fiber collected from the oozing wounds of Morgellons sufferers.
The WTC was built to withstand the impact of a 707, not a 767
Who’s being dishonest?
Did you store your vowels in one of the collapsed buildings?
So we should stick to heaping scorn while trying our best to one up each other with witty replies? I’m good with that. 
It IS a conspiracy theory you have going there, because it contradicts the official NIST findings, as well as other official reports on the collapse. Since you insist it was poor design, that means you feel that the official report was some sort of cover up (for gods know what reason)…QED, it’s a CT.
When you say ‘fell very rapidly’, are you saying that once the collapse started they fell rapidly (to which I’d say…‘well Duh!’), or that they ‘fell rapidly’ based on when they were struck and how long they stood after that? If the former, as I said, the answer is NSS (or No Shit Sherlock), if the later than the answer is ‘you are a clueless fuck who doesn’t know much about this subject’.
No…it’s not. The differences are myriad for anyone who is paying attention. First off, the Beijing Tower wasn’t hit by a large air plane causing structural damage and blowing the fire proofing off of the load bearing supports of the building. Nor was it hit by an avalanche of fiery debris, such as Tower 7 was. Also, the fire was actually fought for hours by the Chinese fire fighting service (who’s name escapes me atm) because it was just a building fire, instead of two sky scrapers hit by two different air planes fully loaded with passengers and fuel. Or attempting to fight a fire after two sky scrapers fell down, partially on the building we are discussing, and raining down fiery debris and tons of material on it. And, of course, the buildings had different designs, with the Chinese building being designed using modern tools and methods, while the Twin Towers were designed decades ago, using earlier and less precise techniques, tools and materials.
I know that the CT lunatics are all frothing over how this ‘proves’ that the WTC collapses were really controlled demolition (which your own cite is saying there…and which is leading me to think you really ARE a CT nutter, just in disguise. Though I’m torn, because I don’t think you are smart enough to hide your real motive). But it’s only ‘proof’ for the uninformed, the stupid, and the faithful.
Show me a building that suffered similar damage and remained standing and you might have a point. Again, you are comparing apples to oranges and then trying to draw a conclusion. That’s exactly what the CT nutters are doing…and, in fact, they are using the exact same line you are.
No…ignorance and stupidity are on your side. They generally are, but in this case they specifically are, since you are too stupid to grasp what anyone is telling you, and too ignorant of the subject to do more than spew out the CT non-sense from the 9/11 Truth Movement whackjobs.
Sure you do. For one thing, the cites you give are from 9/11 Truth Movement propaganda lists, and for another, you are spouting a claim that contradicts the official findings, which means you are saying, essentially, that they were either wrong or they are covering it up. Either way it’s a conspiracy, since such eagle eyed observers as yourself have been able to uncover this, while the government spend 10’s of millions to arrive at the wrong conclusion.
-XT
Oh right, that could never happen.
This has nothing to do with the 911 Truthers. Are you fully retarded now? I make no conspiracy claims. I merely claim the design and build was bad. You are getting dumber every day. Ask one of your kids to explain it to you. It is in English.
I asked my son, who speaks perfect American English to translate for you, and he merely scratched his head and said ‘I can’t, Dad…I’m not a crazy, stupid old guy who thinks in terms of wild conspiracies. You will need to get someone with an IQ measured in single digits who is also a nutter to translate whatever point gonzo thinks he’s making’.
He had some less flattering things to say about you as well, but I think you get the gist.
If you aren’t making wild, idiotic conspiracy claims how do you explain the fact that your baseless ‘claim’ is so different than the official explanation?
As to getting dumber every day, no doubt you are correct. Sadly, I am getting older, and probably getting dumber as well. I’m certainly getting fatter. Luckily the same is not true for yourself (well, the dumber part…I make no claims as to whether you are getting fatter or not)…you aren’t getting dumber by the day, clearly. If you were you’d need life support, since what little brain power you have is clearly devoted heavily to the whole ‘eat, breath and shit’ functions. Were you to get any dumber one or more of those functions would doubtlessly shut down, and then where would you be?
-XT