brian_wilbanks

oh give me a break....you guys have been using the same tied old tricks as always.

Free-fall speed, thermite yadda yadda yadda

And then you have admittedly RIDICULOUS statements like the one in my signature.

__________________



If you don't like my fire, then don't come around, cuz I'm about to burn one down.

Duvidoo

Maybe because I never ever said that, you fucking cow.

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

Duvidoo

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

brian_wilbanks

Doop-dee-doo has been infected with Rage.

__________________



If you don't like my fire, then don't come around, cuz I'm about to burn one down.

Duvidoo

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

lrrp

Consider for moment, the notion of pre-stressed concrete. I don't know how many of you here come from this background, but before I went to college, I was a fire sprinkler fitter working on the Denver International Airport...(or Do It Again as we used to call it)

In order to get a certification and inspector to sign off on the project, the steelworkers had to cover ALL the exposed steel with something called mono-kote. Mono-kote isn't just fire proofing, it is a jacket to help ablate the actual heat from the fire. That heat, left unchecked, would allow steel crossmembers to twist BEFORE they fail, and communicate added stresses in ways the structure was never designed to absorb.

Structural steel collapses all the time in fires that don't really seem all that dangerous. One of the major problems with this is, the pre-stressed rebar within the slabs melts too. Pre-stressing makes concrete 3 to 4 times more strong & resilient, and the engineers assume that quality will never be compromised. Things are built to that higher weight and stress limit. When the rebar in walls fail, all bets are off.

Also think about the fuel, even if all the sprinklers on the floor went off at the same time, (they can't, because the pumps couldn't maintain the pressure for more than a few seconds) you would still have unchecked fires that will consume something. Once those fires reach an elevator shaft, the heat rises and you have the a mini-Dresden in the main shafts. The air pressure increases (just like the fire bombing raids in Dresden, Tokyo, Kobe & others) and you have a firestorm. Those tempratures are so hot that the hydrogen is stripped from the oxygen in h2o and the water actually becomes fuel for the fire! This is why, at the United and Continential hangars, we installed foam fire fighting systems & cannon.

I would really like to talk to the guy who signed off on the refit of the towers after the 93 bombing. A quick trip for him to gitmo might yield some of the missing pieces for why this happened so fast...

eagleclaw

I like Ptechs arguement about aluminum airplanes cutting through steel core buildings.

Just try and think about it.

Especially after most of the jet fuel appears to be consumed on the intial impact.

So what caused all the destruction?

An aluminum bodied aircraft cutting through a steel cored building?

Or whatever jet fuel was left causing a fire hot enough to melt that steel cored building which in turn caused the underlying floors to disintegrate into a pyroclastic dust cloud?

And was there really that much kinetic energy to cause all this destruction? The buildings were still standing after the initial impact. How much time is needed for all that kinetic energy to be released?

__________________
All the time, always

eagleclaw

We only ask questions:

Largest Swiss Newspaper Asks if Bush Was Behind 9/11
Largest Swiss Newspaper Asks if Bush Was Behind 9/11...
Posted May 30, 2008 01:54 PM PST
Category: 911
, Category: DUBYA


By Elie Peter - Sept 15, 2006, BLICK newspaper, Zurich, Switzerland
(translated from German into English, but not yet published online in English)

2,973 humans died with the attacks of 9/11. "Bin Laden" and "Al Qaeda", the Bush clan cried. The world believed themm. In the meantime even scientists doubt the Bush version. Now, Swiss university professors Albert A. Stahel and Daniele Ganser raise new questions.

"Something is not correct", says strategy expert Stahel in "World Week", and here he refers to the "incomplete" official US Government 9/11 Report of 2004.

The university professor confirms his criticism in BLICK: "Osama Bin Laden cannot be 'the large godfather' behind the attacks. He did not have enough means of communication".

Dr. Stahel doubts that a passenger airliner crashed into the Pentagon: "For trainee pilots it is actually impossible to crash into the building so exactly. Seven hours after the Twin Towers collapsed, the World Trade Center Building 7 next to it also collapsed. The official version: It burned for a long time. Nothing at all is clear."

Raising questions along with Stahel is historian Dr. Daniele Ganser, his colleague at the University of Zurich. Dr. Ganser also calls the official US version "a conspiracy theory".

"There are three theories, which we should treat equally":

1. "Surprise theory" - Bin Laden and Al Qaeda implemented the attacks.

2. "Let it happen on purpose" - The US Government knew the Al Qaeda plans and did not react in order to legitimize a series of wars.

3. "Made it happen on purpose" - The attacks were actually planned and orchestrated by the Pentagon and/or US secret services.

Ganser: "3,000 humans were sacrificed for strategic interests. The more we research, the more we doubt the Bush version. It is conceivable that the Bush government was responsible. Bush has lied so much already! And we already know that the US government planned an operation in 1962 [Operation Northwood] that was approved by the Pentagon that would have sacrificed innocent US citizens for the government's own interests."

As for Ganser and Stahel: "We only ask questions."


«Je mehr wir forschen, desto mehr zweifeln wir» - 9-11 - Ausland - News - Blick Online

__________________
All the time, always

Titanium Cat

Maybe because you can't figure out what imply means in the English language!!!

You said Silverstein wasn't talking about the firefighters when he said "Pull it" to a FDNY Commander and that it was a reference to a controlled demolition! The only way it remotely makes sense is if the FDNY Commander is IN ON THE CONSPIRACY!

Your accusations against Silverstein IMPLY that the FDNY was in on the conspiracy! How can you not understand this?

Titanium Cat

You actually understand that? I don't think so. If someone actually understood that they wouldn't have posted this:

That exoskeleton you refer to now was the perimeter steel columns that carried almost half of the buildings vertical load and all of the buildings horizontal loads.

Yes they stood which is what they were designed to do. But the energy release, much greater than anticipated, did greater damage than was expected from an accidental low speed crash.

LOL, this from the guy who didn't even understand about all the steel columns that were severed in the crash.

LOL, could I strike one with the other at 500mph? Think that would make a difference? Here is a test, take a piece of ice and smack a piece of steel with it. Who wins?

LOL, the airplane collisions struck only a very small region in the buildings. The huge energy release was in a small concentrated area. Do you know how idiotic your logic is? Compare the mass of 9mm bullet to your body and get back to me. Does the fact that you might weigh about 10,000 times as much as the bullet make the damage it does to you any less?

Yeah that's got a lot to do with your idiotic physics.

You are the mindless one who can't even understand basic physics.