{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Bearbeitet von Muh 6 Gorillion:
5/17/2017 10:07:09 AM
28
Do people actually think 9/11 WASN'T an inside job?
As a civil engineering technologist myself, it disgusts me to see these paid actors to go on TV and pose as engineers to issue propaganda.
A fire at the top of a building would not cause the entire building to explode underneath it. That's what happened. It turned to dust. Steel and concrete does not turn to dust under structural failure, nor does structural failure in steel happen all in an instant.
A tall skyscraper would tend to topple over, not collapse straight down, floor after floor. Especially with a localized fire. You would see the building slowly start to topple over, towards the fire. Columns are designed to buckle long before crushing. The fire would create moment forces, with the fire as the centre point. The parts above the fire would begin to topple over, which would in turn pull on the supports underneath the fire, creating too much shear in the connections which would then fail and cause the top section of the building to fall over sideways.[spoiler]“the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor."
-Rebuilding America's Defenses, PNAC, 2000
The members of PNAC are now known as the NeoCons who pollute Washington with their corruption. But it's just a coincidence that they all practice that one religion, right?[/spoiler]
English
#Offtopic
-
1 AntwortenI believe that 9/11 was an inside job. In fact, I also believe in going to bed nice and early on Christmas so Santa will come, and I never walk under a ladder.
-
Bearbeitet von SaintForAll: 5/19/2017 3:15:41 AM9/11 couldn't have been an inside job because the planes came from the outside
-
How else could we convince people to kill the mooslims
-
2 AntwortenAre you krishnas profit
-
they didnt use jet fuel, they used dank memes. Jet fuel cant melt steel beams. Dank memes melt steel beams. Jet fuel cant melt dank memes.
-
[quote]A tall skyscraper would tend to topple over Columns are designed to buckle long before crushing[/quote] Pictured: WTC 2 toppling over & columns buckling. [quote]The parts above the fire would begin to topple over, which would in turn pull on the supports underneath the fire, creating too much shear in the connections which would then fail and cause the top section of the building to fall over sideways.[/quote] Literally exactly what happened.
-
We should test this on more buildings
-
6 AntwortenBearbeitet von pValue2010: 5/17/2017 4:19:51 PMYou're just all sorts of conspirator theorist aren't you? At first I thought you were just anti-Semitic
-
3 AntwortenIt couldn't of been an inside job because the planes came from the outside
-
My problem with 9/11- America; "One-off terrorist attack kills (was it 2000? I think it was..)" Syria; "Another 5000 civilians have been caught in crossfire this week"
-
1 AntwortenYeah 3 buildings fell from two planes #jewishmath
-
Bearbeitet von AirZingis: 5/18/2017 1:56:05 AMOkay there, buddy. Whatever you say.
-
5 AntwortenWhat did Bush or the other people on the inside have to gain from it though? That's why I can't really see it as an inside job, there wasn't a motive.
-
4 AntwortenBearbeitet von Catty_Wampus22: 5/17/2017 6:17:22 AM[quote].[spoiler]“the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor." -Rebuilding America's Defenses, PNAC, 2000 The members of PNAC are now known as the NeoCons who pollute Washington with their corruption. But it's just a coincidence that they all practice that one religion, right?[/spoiler][/quote] It's also interesting to note that the authors of that paper, PNAC, became the Bush administration; Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle......
-
Are you good friends with the prophet? All you do is post conspiracy theories.
-
1 AntwortenArea 51 doesn't melt JFK
-
8 AntwortenBearbeitet von shell: 5/17/2017 1:14:30 PMI didn't think it was the fire that leveled the buildings. [spoiler]Wow, that GIF is terrifying.[/spoiler]
-
2 AntwortenOne of the most brutal tragedies in history could've been an inside job?
-
3 AntwortenBearbeitet von DE4LZ: 5/17/2017 10:37:46 AMSomthing was definitely up that day. From the towers symmetrical demise to building 7 and the missing pentagon plane. The insurance claim on the buildings to Bush Jr finishing continuing his fathers war. It has white flag written all over it. For each study their are conflicting results, professionals also have a dilemma in keeping their reputations intact. Then their is always the question of who was supporting the perpetrators... Its not an open an shut case no matter how smart you think you are or what facts you choose to believe. [spoiler]Cognitive dissonance is not your friend[/spoiler]
-
2 AntwortenThat might not happen to a normal skyscraper, but he WTC was a very strange building. The only major reason it collapsed is because (for some damn retarded reason) the structural integrity was on the outside of the building and not the core. This made the plane crash cause the building to become very unstable. [spoiler]idk tho, this is just my best guess[/spoiler]
-
3 AntwortenThis is obviously bait. Anyway it all makes sense if you know anything about building construction
-
4 AntwortenIf I knew I'd get my masters in physics, engineering, architect, and chemistry after reading a single Bush did 9/11 post, I would've done that years ago.
-
10 AntwortenBearbeitet von The Cellar Door: 5/17/2017 4:31:28 AMLol. This is why the community laughs at engineers. Everything that occurred was completely reasonable from a physical perspective. Also, it is very clearly not the top of the building that was struck, and no, the building should not have fallen to the side. [i]Especially[/i] given the fact that it fell due to the top segment falling downwards because of gravity.
-
1 Antworten[quote] nor does structural failure in steel happen all in an instant.[/quote] 1 hour is instant?
-
Bearbeitet von Commander Tempu: 5/17/2017 9:38:54 AMSome reason people think steel beams can't be melted by jet fuel. News flash when my dad was in the Air Force i was buddies with some Firemen. I asked about what if a plane catches fire years ago. The told me they would let it burn. The melting point of steel is just the element iron that has been processed to control the amount of carbon. Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F). Its been proven that fire can weaken metal at high temperatures. Jet Fuel burns at around 800 to 1500 degrees. About the same as the melting point for Steel. If the fire has plenty of oxygen and fuel it can burn at high temperatures it can weaken or even melt through a support structure of metal. In the case of 9/11 where the plane impacted and how the tower fell is science and fire fact. Fire weakened the beams through extreme heat due to plenty of fuel. What do i mean by fuel? Forest fires have trees wood to dry grass ect as a fuel source. Imagine desks and paper to even the walls all adding to the jet fuel. Anything that burns in a fire can be a fuel source. So it was so hot that the building collapsed due to heat and the impact of the plane previously. Something that should have been factored in. Speed+Mass+Impact+Fire= Weakening of the towers support structure. That lead to it's collapse. I am not a math guy but from what i did see on TV this is my estimation of what occurred in the public record. Any one not taking every fact into consideration needs to see the impact of the plane and the subsequent fire. People are so focused on the fire they forgot the plane rammed the building. Also not every fire is going to burn at between 800 to 1500 degrees exactly. Why? Simple as the more fuel such as anything that can burn will make the fire hotter thus some consumables can make fires twice as hot. It took time for the fire to take effect on the skeletal structure of the building. Twenty minutes till the tower fell i think? It took time. When you factor in everything it all makes sense. The other tower they demolished it as it had all the paperwork in it. So i heard. Thus i think they blew it up for many obvious reasons. Or was that the administration building near it? Kinda weird how a building falls down straight like when they are blowing up a building to make room for a new one.
-
I think what's funny is kids like you who get on here and act like they know what they are talking about
