What really happened on 9/11?

@camlok,

Quote:

...how does a United.. airliner fly thru two WTC walls...
...when a bird strike can cause major damage...?

The velocity at which the plane was moving allowed it to have enough momentum to swiftly pass through the building. A bird, on the other hand strikes directly into just one location. Think of it as a person on a bicycle riding through a plate glass window after descending a steep hill. They possess greater volume than a bird and while the bird may be either knocked for a loop or smash the window and be injured, a person on a bicycle might not sustain any visible signs of having gone through the glass.

Problem solved.

Oh, by the way....the support columns of the WTC towers were in many places not properly spaced (too far apart). Additionally, it has been shown/discovered that several beams were not properly (adequately) bolted

4 Replies

@Sturgis,

Quote:

The velocity at which the plane was moving allowed it to have enough momentum to swiftly pass through the building.

With no damage at all, Sturgis?

That is interesting. It doesn't seem to comport with Newtonian physics?

Why do you supposed universities such as Purdue would create computer simulations that showed the airlines being shredded into tiny particles?

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Quote:

Oh, by the way....the support columns of the WTC towers were in many places not properly spaced (too far apart).

That seems odd. Wouldn't that have leaped into view and been discovered many years ago when the lines of the outside facade didn't line up?

But I would love to see your source anyway.

Quote:

Additionally, it has been shown/discovered that several beams were not properly (adequately) bolted

Odd that farmerman the scientist or Maxdancona, as thorough as they both have been in their presentations of science, have never mentioned that.

I would love to see your source anyway.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

2. It is accepted as fact that the link to Al Qaeda (or any other Islamic terror group) was made up by the real perpetrators.

So now, I would like start the discussion with the answers to these questions.

2. Were the planes actually hi-jacked by Atta and crew?

How do such inherent contradictions even come to a person who suggests he is of science, a guy who pretends he holds science in high regard?

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

1. Did airplanes actually fly into the Twin Towers?

Maybe a better question, Max, were the planes that "actually flew" into the twin towers the ones that have been described by the USG Official Conspiracy Theory?

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Quote:

The velocity at which the plane was moving allowed it to have enough momentum to swiftly pass through the building

How did you already know that the plane that was alleged to have hit WTC2, UA175, had passed thru both the south wall and the north wall of WTC2, Sturgis?

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

I gave you a thumbs up for effort, Sturgis.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

Take note of the burnt cars some thirty to forty feet from the building. Intense heat burned them.

That is correct, intense heat burned them. Except that there is no possibility of intense heat in the US government official conspiracy theory [USGOCT].

Jet fuel/office furnishings fires cannot reach more than 1,500 F/800C.

Yet there was intense heat from the US government/military proprietary nanothermite that was found in WTC dust.

There was molten/vaporized steel in the towers, including WTC7, and there were also molten handguns found in the cars, Impossible according to the USGOCT.

Quote:

Please note building seven was not designed in the traditional manner of rigid I beam construction. It was a modified shell construction so you can not compare it with standard I beam construction or how they behave during collapse. Its irrelevant comparison.

Totally false.

Quote:

Take note of the raging fire in building seven. Multiple floors with Windows broken due to heat. Some you can witness breaking as the fire moves.

Also totally false. Fire is organic and it is the same in all high rises. Fire burns for 20 to 30 minutes then goes out in one location and starts up in other locations. 20 to 30 minutes is nothing for unprotected steel and this was all insulated protected steel.

Quote:

Take note at the beginning of the video showing how internal collapse happened prior to exterior movement. This is why armchair engineer conspiracy nuts fail. They assume data and ignore other data.

You are describing the NIST armchair conspiracy nuts. They lied about over 10 things relating to WTC 7s construction. They lied about the molten/vaporized steel, in fact they outright denied its existence.

The entire structure of WTC7 was tied together. There wasn't anything found within the USGOCT that could have caused any collapse, internal or external. There was of course nanothermite, which caused the free fall of WTC7.

Free fall can ONLY occur with a controlled demolition, which is what happened to WTC7 and WTCs 1 & 2.

0 Replies

What really happened on 9/11?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know