9/11 demolition theory challenged
 

removed

Sounds like my last relationship.....

lol!

That explains the concrete,but doesn't explain the steel core.

Man, and I always admired engineers so much, doh!:lol:

Simple. The concrete holds the steel together and the steel holds the concrete together. Engineering 101.

Seems a bit odd they had to mention the death toll.

No offence to them.. but thousands of people die everyday in africa and no one ever makes a big deal about that. :crazyeye:

No not in this case,check out the blue prints,the central core was built out of 47 steel columns.It was a free standing core,that the concrete floors attached to it.Even if the floors collapse,the core stays standing.Or in the event of a plane flying through it,the top could collapse or fall over.But there were still 80 some floors of both tower where the core was undamaged.Even the NIST report stated,the fires weren't hot enough to bring the core down.I'm not saying there was explosives used,but so far thats the only theory that takes everything into account.

True and many times more killed by the American government.

I don't see why that wouldn't work. The real key to the whole thing is the length of the tubing, to create that anoxic zone for the bacteria to establish sufficient population numbers. Why not just give it a try and report back how it works?

Hey Tony, was this in reference to the denitrator? lol.

P.S. Nice to meet you tonight!

Sorry , I wasn't aware that they forgot to use concrete.

Only concrete floors.
The photo that is supposed to be demo charges going off sure looks air pressure ahead of the pancaking.
http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml

http://www.infowars.com/

9/11 was an inside job
concrete buildings never fall because of the fires never before 9/11 never after.
A 120 gallon woops 120 floor building collapsed at the free fall speed almost as fast as the speed of the rock dropped from the roof.
That means there was no obsticle to the folling upper floor and it did not hit the lower floor.

Ok forget the Towers the smoking gun is building # 7 why did IT collapsed ?there was no plains flying in to it just small fire on two (!) floors.
Building # 7 was block away from the towers and other buildings that were even closer then #7 were NOT damaged.
The truth is out there and it is ugly !

~~~

BBC Reported Building 7 Had Collapsed 20 Minutes Before It Fell
 

hey guys, check THIS out

An astounding video uncovered from the archives today shows the BBC reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell. The incredible footage shows BBC reporter talking about the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building while it remains standing in the live shot behind her head.

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...e+Search&meta=


~~~

If you guys want some interesting viewing regarding 9/11 and more, here is a link to a documentory. It is a 3 part, religion, 9/11, US central bank. They seem to pull it all together with some pretty convincing stuff.

http://www.documentary-film.net/sear...w.php?&ref=113

Muahah zeitgeist spreads.:mrgreen:

Good god people will believe anything, Do you know what it takes to demo a building? Do some reading of something other than internet hype.

Careful andresont, "they" will be sending the black helicopters after you.

Scott

Microsoft??

The building was never designed to withstand such latteral force. eg. side impact from a plane. Try building a house out of playing cards and then pull a card out of the side even on the top level and see if it still stands.

In fact the building was designed to handle that and more. Here is a quote from JOM (Published monthly by The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society (TMS), JOM is a technical journal devoted to exploring the many aspects of materials science and engineering.)

"The early news reports noted how well the towers withstood the initial impact of the aircraft; however, when one recognizes that the buildings had more than 1,000 times the mass of the aircraft and had been designed to resist steady wind loads of 30 times the weight of the aircraft, this ability to withstand the initial impact is hardly surprising. Furthermore, since there was no significant wind on September 11, the outer perimeter columns were only stressed before the impact to around 1/3 of their 200 MPa design allowable."

Sure. The only conspiracy that exists is the one between the engineers and the insurance industry aka '' finger pointing''. Only in America can you make millions from getting burned by a cup of hot coffee. Think of the billions of dollars the insurance industry could recoup if they could blame someone other than the terrorists.

Even some of the 911 commission staff are saying there was a cover up
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...g_coverup.html

Yeah. As sick as it is,both sides had something to gain as a result of 9/11. There are more than a few countries that will sacrafice human life even their own citizens for monetary or pollitical gain.

Building 7 people !
How about building 7 ?

Don't they call that an aftershock? Oh yeah, that's an earthquake .Hm? maybe the KGB has a word for it in one of their manuals.

Bet if you look real close there are black helicopters in the footage.

Scott

Sorry I didn't notice it Skylord. I was too busy watching the security guys carrying in boxes of explosives and wondering what they were doing. It's probably all good. Just hidding them from the terrorists.