That does not explain Bigfoot also being a ghost like entity that never drops a pile o’ poop. Just them damn footprints.
I hear he looks up at chemtrails.
Why wouldn’t the stuff fall straight down? Isn’t that the way gravity essentially works?
Because people think that buildings should fall like a tree.
There was/is a video I saw on YouTube or something, it was a controlled demolition of a a tower. Not nearly as tall as Pisa or the WTC or those buildings.
It went sideways, literally. It fell all over a parking lot full of cars. I suspect wind or the demolition explosion was off.
Since a lot full of cars on one side and houses on the other I assume they expected it to go straight down.
A proper demolition that goes off properly will fall straight down. Things can go wrong.
What’s really missing from the claims of a controlled demo rather than the plane are the very loud explosions from the demo charges.
Dude, gravity is just a “theory.” So to quote “The Dude” Lebowski, “Yeah? Well, you know, that’s just like uh, your opinion, man.”
Damn. That’s heavy.
It’s not how gravity works on trees, or lampposts or other rigid columns - they sweep down to the ground through an arc.
And I know exactly what @Kimstu means - just intuitively, eyeballing this apparently rigid body which is already on the lean, you might well think that it will continue to topple over like a dead tree that finally snaps. But of course, as she says, it’s not in fact rigid - it’s a bunch of stones wedged/mortared together in a way that holds for now but which will separate with each chunk going on its individual plummet straight down.
“Heavy.” Why are things so heavy in CT-land? Is there a problem with the Earth’s gravitational pull?
Deliberately missing in at least one video used by that Architects & Engineers group. Somebody stripped the audio from an actual demolition for a side-by-side comparison with 7.
I always picture that crash as, a still swamp, maybe an alligator lurking, the only sound is the loud buzzing of insects. Suddenly, there is a screaming plane nearly vertical, smashing into the swamp at 500 mph. It disappears below the water, lost in the mud. Then the water stills again, and all you hear is the buzzing of insects.
The one thing about the WTC is that their design goes against intuition by NOT being a three-dimensional grid of beams, like every other skyscraper. A plane hit the Empire State building, and it didn’t come down. So therefore, the armchair analysts say, why did the WTC? AHA!
Because the WTC was unique. It had more in common with a pop can than the Empire State Building. It’s structure was all on the outside, and the core. The beauty of the design was there were no structural supports in the offices! Each floor was wide open from the core to the outside. That was also its downfall.
As for intuition, my intuition knew watching it burn that it was coming down, But by intuition also figured the top section, above the impact, would fall off as a unit once a wall buckled. because I thought the WCT was built like a normal skyscraper. I didn’t factor how much gravity would overcome the tipping. As noted, I had no intuitive grasp of how much buildings weigh.
I actually thought there would be a lot left standing, maybe everything below the impact. So much for intuition! But when it came down, I was all, Oh yeah, that makes sense!
As for buildings always falling straight down, I give you
The building DFO’d intact, in defiance of us logical people! There was also one on Destroyed In Seconds TV Show where a six story apartment fell over like a cardboard box into the building across the street. I can’t find a picture of that one, though.
I am, as always, (but not that way!) Just Asking Questions
Someone forgot to put shims in when they set that building down.
Of course, there’s going to be a big difference between a steel (or steel- reinforced) building and a brick one. If someone blew up one of the legs of the Eiffel Tower, it would fall over intact. When the leaning tower of Pisa falls over, it will be a pile of rubble close to the base.
For me, at least, there is no picture, and since it was addressed to me…can you tell me what it is?
It’s the Twin Towers backlit by the sun. You can see the central core through the glass/steel outer “skin”. It really shows how “empty” the towers were.
Ah! Thanks. I like that picture.
I think it’s also worth pointing out that there was a very significant difference between the plane that hit the Empire State Building in 1945 and the ones that hit the Twin Towers.
The Empire State building was struck by a B-25 Mitchell bomber, which was a relatively small twin-engine propeller plane with a typical gross weight of around 27,000 pounds. It had a cruise speed of around 230 MPH and was estimated to have struck the building at about 200 MPH.
In contrast, both planes that struck the WTC were Boeing 767s, heavily loaded with fuel for a transcontinental flight. Each would have had a gross weight probably well in excess of 300,000 pounds, or more than 150 tons, including thousands of gallons of jet fuel, and each was traveling at an estimated 590 MPH at the time of impact…
So besides differences in building construction, there were immense differences in the nature of the projectiles that hit the buildings.
Plugging the numbers into a kinetic energy calculator shows the airliners each carried 97 times the energy of the bomber.
And the Towers had been designed to withstand the impact of a 707, inbound to JFK from Europe, low on fuel, and lost in fog.