9/11 to me was just such of a fucked up event. The terrorists went in and killed thousands of innocents just because they felt that the American public wasn't paying much attention to the Palestinians.
rip
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;32260882]I'm not doing this free-fall theory bullshit either. FreakyMe is entirely right.
Also my statement:
Just accurately predicted what happened. Out of everything I posted, the evidence I provided he picked one thing, quoted it (even though it has no relevance to what he just said) and makes a statement providing no sources or any clear reason [i]why[/i] what he said is the truth and what I said is false.
His avatar probably was an early indicator of how futile that was going to be. Now, usually in this situation the Truther will point out my reluctance to answer his question as me 'running away' or as a clear indication of my own ignorance on the subject.
Protip: You cannot cite "Physical impossibility" and nothing else as a credible source for your theory.[/QUOTE]
I'm not a truther lol. I dont believe in either side of the argument because i just dont know, im just trying to put an alternative argument out to see how it goes down and im not one of these new world order alex jones guys either. One thing i do have to say is that alot of debunkers will always tell you how the buildings COULD have collapsed via damage and fire, but can rarely explain the sheer speed and symmetry of the collapses.
Funny, when it happened, the afghans didn't even knew who Osama was.
[QUOTE=Talkbox;32268689]I'm not a truther lol. I dont believe in either side of the argument because i just dont know, im just trying to put an alternative argument out to see how it goes down and im not one of these new world order alex jones guys either. One thing i do have to say is that alot of debunkers will always tell you how the buildings COULD have collapsed via damage and fire, but can rarely explain the sheer speed and symmetry of the collapses.[/QUOTE]
Actually, that's been covered. Learn to read. Everything failed roughly at the same time when the building collapsed due to the fact that the additional stress was distributed across the structure of the entire heavily damaged building. When one piece broke, it dragged the rest down with it.
I'm done with this, because you don't even read what is being posted. If you are only here to cause arguments in a 9/11 memorial thread with no interest in actually debating your points, then you are trolling. You have completely derailed the thread with pointless arguments you now say were only made so you could see "how it goes down".
Do this experiment if you want to see the basic principle behind what is being explained.
[QUOTE=daijitsu;32261122]no kidding. Let's make this a little more interesting.
Set up three jenga towers, remove as many pieces as possible, and lay a long, wet rag across the top of them.
remove one block[/QUOTE]
The sudden shift in weight distribution due to the failure of one segment will unbalance and pull on the other segments, causing all to fall either at the same time or in rapid succession.
who even argues about this, conspiracy theorists are crazy and stupid. they all have delusional disorder paranoia type.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;32260882]a Truther will point out my reluctance to answer his question as me 'running away' or as a clear indication of my own ignorance on the subject.[/QUOTE]
[editline]13th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Talkbox;32268689]One thing i do have to say is that alot of debunkers will always tell you how the buildings COULD have collapsed via damage and fire, but can rarely explain the sheer speed and symmetry of the collapses.[/QUOTE]
[editline]13th September 2011[/editline]
You're correct, in review my statements were hazy, unclear and unquantifiable compared to your monolithian display of knowledge on the subject, your library of sources and evidence and in any manner I apologise without reserve and ask for nothing but your understanding. I hope, in time, you can come to forgive me for such contemptible statements. If I could retract my statements I would but I do not have a time machine.
I wish that I did have a time machine, I would buy a Macbook Pro and take it back to 1984 and visit Steve Jobs. After selling my laptop to him for millions I would return to the present. I could do this several times as each time the present technologies would have changed. It is a flawless plan, I am sure you will agree, lacking only the availability of time/dimension manipulation technologies.
i'm back again. i got banned. sorry about not being able to update the OP when i was banned. i guess i should have thought twice before flaming some guy.
sorry, guys.
[img]http://www.prosebeforehos.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/jon-stewart-on-september-11th.jpg[/img]
Jon Stewart is cool
[QUOTE=FreakyMe;32270102]Actually, that's been covered. Learn to read.[/QUOTE]
no, let me clarify.
[QUOTE]When one piece broke, it dragged the rest down with it.[/QUOTE]
Localised failures in buildings can not cause complete near freefall implosions. You have not considered the fact that there was no jolt at the point of collapse, the rate at which the top portions of the buildings crushed through 60k+ tons of structural steel and huge steel structural elements of these buildings being shot 60-70ft horizontally away from the twin towers.
The jenga experiment that you quoted is not only hugely pseudo scientific, but even if it was to be taken seriously, do you see the jenga blocks crushing through the other jenga blocks at a near freefall rate whilst shooting other jenga blocks at the point of collapse great distances horizontally?
also, just to debunk another dumb thing you said
[QUOTE]How many modern skyrises have had a 20 floor gash put into the side of them, had fire and physical damage destroy the support structure leading to an eventual collapse that you [or anybody] have seen?[/QUOTE]
Zero, but let us go by that logic. Before 9/11 how many steel framed high rise buildings had ever fallen due to office fires, you have to consider most of the kerosene was burned out by the planes in their fireballs, so the fires were mainly due to office furnishings. The awnser is also zero. How many planes had ever crashed into high rise steel framed buildings before 9/11, resulting in a collapse like that of the twin towers? Zero. So how can you say we dont know it was a controlled demolition and do know it is a terrorist attack via aeroplane just because we have never experienced a building collapse via aeroplane going by that logic. We have never witnessed either event occur.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
