I’m not an expert, but I’ve seen what happens to the structural integrity of over-heated steel. It gets greatly weakened and breaks or even completely falls apart, and that’s without having to support anything. I’m not sure why something so obvious is still so controversial.
it's absolutely insane these fucking kids continue to regurgitate this dumb shit.
when you heat steel up it looses all of it's structural integrity, there is data sheets readily available to see exactly what kind of steel was used in the buildings and what temps they begin to turn into useless garbage when it comes to carrying the weight of a god-damned skyscraper.
the planes took out a huge portion of the support structure on impact... the damaged and undamaged supports left standing were able to hold the upper floors, but not after you cook them with a fire for that long.
it's just lazy logic... it's easier for them to think/believe that some magical conspiracy shit happened because it's more comfortable than the realization that someone can decide to do this again whenever the fuck they want.
Interesting picture! Could easily explain it! Thanks.
Personally, I never really bought into the conspiracy theories, as I just felt it would involve too many people and someone would talk. However, I do find it interesting how many people that know physics are speaking out about how impossible it is that the events took place as we were told. That being said, I do think 9/11 was one of those events that was so out of the norm for fires and building damage that there is no other precedent to compare it to. Sometimes things defy what we've been taught, so maybe that explains the questions some are having.
I appreciate your perspective and hope you are right. The thought of 9/11 being an inside job is overwhelming and I really would be horrified if it were true. I love looking at both sides of an argument and truly appreciate when you share information that supports the side I hope is true. Thanks again! Have a good afternoon!
everyone seems to be misunderstanding my intent here, i certainly am not here to claim that there isn't something seriously crazy going on with 9/11...
but it would be easier to just fly planes into the building than it would be to do all this covert ninja planting of explosives these people claim are responsible for the collapse of the towers.
fact is i've been associated with the blasting industry in one way or another for decades, i know what it takes to bring a small building down and to do this on such a massive scale is just impossible to do without it being blatantly obvious.
we are talking miles and miles of det cord and/or blasting wires leading to hundreds of holes punched into the drywall to access critical support structures to place the cutting charges.
much smaller buildings take months and months to prep for a demo... including hundreds of weakening cuts to the support structure with cutting torches in order to ensure that the demo works as intended.
any building that was "demo'ed" would have had to been closed for months and the evidence of the prep would be clearly obvious to the thousands of people who worked there daily.
it's just like the moon landing... it's easier and cheaper to just go to the moon than it was to fake it.
however...
none of that means someone in our government didn't plan, fund, and allow it all to happen.
many "well regarded" "experts" claim biden won the election.
stack bricks on top of an empty beer can until it's about to crush, then flick the side of the can, the bricks fall at "near freefall speed".
thats what things do when what is holding them up stops holding them up.
I’m not an expert, but I’ve seen what happens to the structural integrity of over-heated steel. It gets greatly weakened and breaks or even completely falls apart, and that’s without having to support anything. I’m not sure why something so obvious is still so controversial.
it's absolutely insane these fucking kids continue to regurgitate this dumb shit.
when you heat steel up it looses all of it's structural integrity, there is data sheets readily available to see exactly what kind of steel was used in the buildings and what temps they begin to turn into useless garbage when it comes to carrying the weight of a god-damned skyscraper.
the planes took out a huge portion of the support structure on impact... the damaged and undamaged supports left standing were able to hold the upper floors, but not after you cook them with a fire for that long.
it's just lazy logic... it's easier for them to think/believe that some magical conspiracy shit happened because it's more comfortable than the realization that someone can decide to do this again whenever the fuck they want.
That still does not explain Building 7
sure it does... the exact same principals apply.
both towers collapsed next to 7 and when that happened it took a massive chunk out of the corner of the building and set it on fire
https://911fantasyworld.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/wtc7corner.jpg
damage + heat from fires = slowly weakening damaged area which eventually can no longer hold the weight of the above building.
Interesting picture! Could easily explain it! Thanks.
Personally, I never really bought into the conspiracy theories, as I just felt it would involve too many people and someone would talk. However, I do find it interesting how many people that know physics are speaking out about how impossible it is that the events took place as we were told. That being said, I do think 9/11 was one of those events that was so out of the norm for fires and building damage that there is no other precedent to compare it to. Sometimes things defy what we've been taught, so maybe that explains the questions some are having.
I appreciate your perspective and hope you are right. The thought of 9/11 being an inside job is overwhelming and I really would be horrified if it were true. I love looking at both sides of an argument and truly appreciate when you share information that supports the side I hope is true. Thanks again! Have a good afternoon!
everyone seems to be misunderstanding my intent here, i certainly am not here to claim that there isn't something seriously crazy going on with 9/11...
but it would be easier to just fly planes into the building than it would be to do all this covert ninja planting of explosives these people claim are responsible for the collapse of the towers.
fact is i've been associated with the blasting industry in one way or another for decades, i know what it takes to bring a small building down and to do this on such a massive scale is just impossible to do without it being blatantly obvious.
we are talking miles and miles of det cord and/or blasting wires leading to hundreds of holes punched into the drywall to access critical support structures to place the cutting charges.
much smaller buildings take months and months to prep for a demo... including hundreds of weakening cuts to the support structure with cutting torches in order to ensure that the demo works as intended.
any building that was "demo'ed" would have had to been closed for months and the evidence of the prep would be clearly obvious to the thousands of people who worked there daily.
it's just like the moon landing... it's easier and cheaper to just go to the moon than it was to fake it.
however...
none of that means someone in our government didn't plan, fund, and allow it all to happen.