Scientific Theory for Controlled Demo Thread.

[sunflower]

Originally Posted by Circus

Silverstein is looking out for his own interests. He's trying to minimize how much the rebuilding will cost him.

I'm not saying he's a good guy in all this.
I'm just saying that he is not making any personal money from his terrorism insurance. It all goes towards the rebuilding.

Right....

[Circus]

Originally Posted by sunflower

Right....

Are you able to prove that he's made money? As in money that goes into his pockey, not rebuilding?

[sunflower]

Originally Posted by Circus

Are you able to prove that he's made money? As in money that goes into his pockey, not rebuilding?

He has a pockey? Is that anything like hockey?

I guess we'll have to see the P/L statements for Silverstein Properties, LLP, now won't we?

[Circus]

Originally Posted by sunflower

He has a pockey? Is that anything like hockey?

I guess we'll have to see the P/L statements for Silverstein Properties, LLP, now won't we?

The articles I linked specify that the insurance money was for rebuilding.

I'm not entirely sure what pockey is either. But it certainly sounds a lot like hockey. So it must be great.

[Duvidoo]

Originally Posted by Circus

Are you able to prove that he's made money? As in money that goes into his pockey, not rebuilding?

Sounds like you've got a case of the blind faith.
Just not when applied to those that we choose to believe.

[Denie]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Whoohoo, i'm a super hot super hero kind of guy.



Get your pencil and write this down - I don't know the answer to that.

Yet you keep pushing thermite as a theory. How mind boggling!

I'm starting with what we know - massively hot thermal temperatures at the base which have yet to be adequately explained.

Just what are these massively hot temperatures and where is the actual source that reported them? Now how do you go from hot temps to thermite? Why not say they secretly drilled into the earths magma core and melted down the WTC. Has the same scientific value as thermite theory.

In terms of the timing - and wiring - that completely accepts that all charges need to be wired - and interdependent.

And don't forget all the pre-weakening required for CD. Charges alone can't bring a building of this size down without blasting debis for miles in every direction. Now how is it they did the 1000's of man hours work to weaken the buildings without anyone noticing the building being tore to shit?

[Denie]

Originally Posted by Duvidoo

They should never have fallen.

And your engineering calculations are your basis for this claim?

Here, more actual reviewed work... I know, it hurts your brain to actually learn, but try anyway.

The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building. This was a very large and rapidly progressing fire (very high heat but not unusually high temperature). Further information about the design of the WTC can be found on the World Wide Web.

Source

[Circus]

Originally Posted by Duvidoo

Sounds like you've got a case of the blind faith.
Just not when applied to those that we choose to believe.

I believe those wall street journal and new york times articles.
You know, the ones that specifically say that the insurance money goes towards rebuilding the complex.

What evidence exactly leads you to believe otherwise?

[Duvidoo]

Originally Posted by Denie

And your engineering calculations are your basis for this claim?

Show me one more skyscraper that ever came down like that for ANY reason.
You seem to have so much knowledge at your finger tips ... let's see it. ONE building that fell like that ... that wasn't felled by controlled demolition. I will be waiting. Now tootle off and do your homework.

[Duvidoo]

Originally Posted by Circus

What evidence exactly leads you to believe otherwise?

Because 9/11 was an event with mega payoffs all around.
Winners one and all except for those who lost their lives.
Everybody else has been doing fabulously well.
If Silverstein isn't then he's as incompetent as the jerks
that can't catch Osama bin Laden.
Everybody except the people of Iraq....