You’re wasting your life on this.
<snicker>
Back and to the left … weeeepweeeepp … back and to the left …weeeepweeeep… back and to the left …
-XT
I also pointed out before how the best like explosion noises close to the ground were recorded at the very end of the collapse of the tower in the 9/11 documentary made by the French. Before that, the noise was like a concrete mixer full of rocks increasing in volume, and the firefighters began to run away as they understood that it was clearly a collapse going on.
Now, if one does still believe in the explosive demolition, why make the explosives go at the very end of the collapse? :smack:
Most likely the explosions were the bottom floors of the building crushing engines and other flammable things at the floor levels.
Or the windows explosively blowing out as the floors above collapsed on them…like an accordion being rapidly compressed. The air had to go somewhere. Personally, I think that’s the most likely explanation for the puffs of smoke called ‘squibs’ by the 9/11 CTers, and the sounds heard during the collapse.
-XT
So you admit you are JAQ-ing off? :dubious:
Yeah, but he’s doing it all ironic-like.
You forgot the ever-popular “Watch this YouTube video I made showing the collapse of a comparable building I put together with tiddlywinks, tongue-depressors and glue” counter-argument.
Well, to be fair, a large part of the WTC construction did indeed use tongue-depressors. It was New York City in the seventies; corruption in the building trades was rampant.
Tongue depressors?! They would be so lucky…it was mostly the skinnier popsicle sticks!
Tongue depressors? Have you ever dropped one? They don’t collapse straight down. They gently waft down gently and flutter as they do.
So, unless there was some kind of controlled demolition, how do you explain the vertical drop of a structure made of tongue depressors? The bits and pieces should have spread all around Manhattan and taken several minutes to fall. How can “engineers” explain that? The most reasonable explanation is they coated the superstructure with glue and blew it up with silent explosives. Right?
I’m just asking questions.
Tongue depressors are so last century…
Nuts, Bolts and Washers, now that is a high tech model!
Cite.
I read through the Wikipedia article on 9/11 and the only thing I could find that was dubious was this sentence:
:dubious:
Komzik, I don’t have an issue with that sentence. The Twin Towers and WTC7 collapsed because of structural failure, WTC3, 4, and 5 were destroyed by giant chunks of giant skyscrapers fall on top of them.
Those were sound effects. Just a little delayed.
I think it’s safe to say that when buildings collapse, it’s pretty much always due to structural failure.
Yeah, this. Structural failure =/= just kind of fell down. The structure failed because a great big fucking plane hit it.
Or a great big fucking chunk of a larger building hit it because a great big fucking plane hit the larger building.
My hockey-blog nitwits are at it again, this time with “explain how FIRE BURNED METAL for the first time in history! Huh? Fire can’t melt METAL!” I’m so tempted to recommend they hop back to the Iron Age and see if they can work it out for themselves.
They said burn not melt. Metal can not burn.