Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[maxdimario]

Steel structures do not behave like that, usually.

please find another example in the history of steel-framed buildings.

steel will not weaken until it is red-hot. and then it bends.

otherwise when the steel reaches a high level of stress which is superior to it's tensile strength it snaps.

steel may have 'weakened' at the top floors because of heat generated by kerosene.. but not at the bottom floors.

is it true that there was melted steel found at the bottom of the building?

what was the major shock to the structure of the building: the impact of the jet, or the heat?

there have been other buildings with a steel structure on fire before... for hours on end.. with no similar impact on the structure.

there have been other buildings struck by aircraft.

and why is it that the other tower fell exactly in the same way with similar timing?

I'd like to hear a personal opinion from a construction engineer in plain language.

[watusi]

maxdimario wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 11:50

Steel does not 'weaken' it either melts (impossible with the jet fuel and the short time) or it breaks.. again.. impossible. impossible that all of the steel frame would collapse progressively like that. Any construction engineers out there? the buildings were designed to survive an airplane attack. remember the B52 that crashed into the skyscraper in new york in 1945? nothing happened. ignorance is bliss.

i hate to break it you,but the b-52 did not enter service until 1955.
better get a little more tin-foil for that hat,buddy.

in the immortal words of bugs' bunny "what an ultra-maroon"

[John Ivan]

I forget now but that was a B-17?? BIG difference!!

I've seen all the footage and the "Theories" and I have no doubt that those planes, flown by sick sick bastards is the reason the buildings came down.

It not Just Kerosene. It's a Kerosene based, very refined Jet fuel. It is totally possible that that much fuel burning all that office furniture and all the other stuff in there could weaken the structure. Once the top floors land on the rest of the building, I don't see how it would not pancake all the way to the ground.

It's funny how people like to compare these aircraft wrecks with others. As Miles pointed out, these planes were moving very very fast. In the case of the 757 that hit in Washington, it is completely plausible that there would be little left of the aircraft or anything on it.

Go ask a fireman about the buildings. Then go ask Boeing about the airplanes. They will tell you.

Also, remember, the 767's that hit in New York are HUGE!! They carry a LOT of gas. At over 400 KT's? forget it!! I've talked to really smart Engineer's who are surprised they didn't fall in 10 minutes.

Yep. These very nasty pig's really did this to us. I'm just sorry and sad about the whole thing. We all are!!

I don't know Nearly what Miles does about airplanes but I love to read about them and have all the sim's and all that. I can tell you that that much fuel moving that fast and then being enclosed to burn is unpredictable. Also, air craft are made out of light stuff for good reason. One can see how a 757 could just simply be GONE after an impact like that.

Where did you get this stuff about steel? It's not like it's either liquid or will "snap" there are levels of "softness" that can be measured when you heat it up.  NO?

[watusi]

John Ivan wrote on Fri, 30 June 2006 16:00

I forget now but that was a B-17??

"On Saturday, July 28 1945 a B-25 bomber, lost in fog, crashed straight into that era’s world’s tallest building – the Empire State building...In the low fog, the pilot became disoriented and crashed into the 78th and 79th floors of the Empire State. Luckily, because it was Saturday, only 1,500 out of the average 10,000 workers were in the building. Still, 14 people lost their lives after the plane and both of its engines plowed a hole in the Empire State."

[maxdimario]

well.. whatever. it was a bomber, not a cessna or something.

the pirelli building in Milan, which is so thin that it looks as if it's going to fall at any time was hit by a small plane a few years ago..minor damage.

the idea is that the steel-framed buildings are built to withstand such shocks, and can burn for hours on end before the metal starts to distort.

wind and earthquakes etc. can create a lot of stress.

one of the towers was hit just on the side and the fuel sprayed mostly outside of the tower.

it is very difficult to get something that tall to fall straigt down.. it would topple first.

there was a building in madrid that burned so long it looked like a crooked skeleton of a building engulfed in flames.

at one point some of the floors fell down on lower floors

did not come down.


this popular google video is easier to watch. if you look at the video from 20:20 or so onwards there is an MIT engineer which talks in depth about the technical issues involved..which basically prove that the towers were demolished. but look for yerselves.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3249714675910247150

[watusi]

maxdimario wrote on Sat, 01 July 2006 04:24

well.. whatever. it was a bomber, not a cessna or something.

right,never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.

[forgetmeknots]

Quote:

right,never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy

And where do you get your facts?  CNN??

[maxdimario]

watusi wrote on Sat, 01 July 2006 19:51

maxdimario wrote on Sat, 01 July 2006 04:24 well.. whatever. it was a bomber, not a cessna or something. right,never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.

and what the heck is that supposed to mean?

it is a fact that a bomber landed on the top floors years ago.

a big plane.. you know?

nothing happened. It's still there


plus one of the towers was only partially hit, with all the kerosene vaporizing OUTSIDE the tower..

all that dark smoke implies a low-temperature fire, nowhere near the heat necessary to melt steel.

it's obvious that you don't know much about the subject.. maybe you should watch the video, unless you're afraid of having to deal with something that's not safe and reassuring like the news.

think of all the people who died in the towers, all the firemen who reported hearing rapid-fire blasts..

all the documentation that was pulverized in the towers.

by the way there is no scientific way to explain the fact that the concrete and office furnishings and computers were pulverized other than bombs..

can you say controlled demolition, I knew you could!

Perhaps you're just the kind of person who has put america in the clutches of the ulra-rich and powerful clans.

unquestioning, proud and ...

oh well, I've said enough.

[Oldfart]

Slightly off topic ......

All the buidlings (hotels etc.) surrounding  the Pentagon have cameras pointing at the Pentagon. All their video tapes have been confiscated by the "agencies".

Why haven't we seen a single video of a plane hitting the Pentagon?

(please don't be so stupid as taking into account those 14 frames released on which we see nothing)

(just a curious) Oldfart

[watusi]

maxdimario wrote on Sat, 01 July 2006 14:07

watusi wrote on Sat, 01 July 2006 19:51 maxdimario wrote on Sat, 01 July 2006 04:24 well.. whatever. it was a bomber, not a cessna or something. right,never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy. it's obvious that you don't know much about the subject.. maybe you should watch the video, unless you're afraid of having to deal with something that's not safe and reassuring like the news.

sorry,i don't click links like that. i keep my pc on a strict diet of music and porn.lots  and lots of porn.

[Die BREMSSPUR]

Well,

Actually,

It's obvious that there were bombs in the towers.

America is controlled by the ultra-rich.  It is the most difficult country to get ahead in unlike the rest of the world including Europe where anyone can shoot straight to the top.   This is obviously a conspiracy to let us have our own fishing boats and SUV's and rental property.

But I digress...

The issue of the bombs in the towers of which there is video and testimony of, is easily understandable using common sense.

Have you ever met an Arab?

I mean one with long robes and prayer beads....

That's right!  You haven't!  BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH THING!!!

This is a fabrication created by Bush's great great uncle who, as it turns out was Albert Speer's father.

The desert or Middle East if you will, was an unpopulated wasteland.  There was noone there to exploit or "do business" with.

Enter the Panama canal.  Seven of the Colombians that weren't happy about the new Republic and that fought valiantly against the gringos were rounded up.  They were first offered amnesty but refused to wear the "Panama Hat".  The Colombian surrender flags which were manufactured in Philadelphia by Jewish bankers were used to cover their heads and along with about twenty-five prostitutes still loyal to King Alfonso were packed off to the "desert" so that Standard Oil could have someone to sign a contract with.

As an aside, Osama Bin Laden is reported to have the only remaining fabric originally used as a sign of surrender...which would be irony and not sarcasm....

Where was I?

Oh Yeah,

Bombs in the towers....

Well it's clear isn't it.

Anyone who is knowledgeable in the engineering of such structures and with combustion and explosions, or anyone with a computer can easily point out that a jet plane after take off could not possibly have what it takes to knock down a building of that size.

That is why Bush put the explosives in the WTC!

The ultra-rich will stop at nothing to destroy Manhattan.

Agents are everywhere and will do anything if ordered to do so.  

The U.S. government is ultra-competent.

Noone actually knows what's going on?

Bush is from the Reptilian blood-line.

The American people have not turned their duties over to idiots of non-existant character because they forgot about their civic duties.  It's a plot deeper than any of you can imagine.  There is only one or two people that know the exact details and have chosen not to tell anyone except President Bush and people with Google.

Hope this sheds some light on this sordid little affair.

I hope I am not assassinated for releasing this information.  I think there is something wrong with my kidneys, I may have already been injected.  I am afraid to go to the doctor as he may have already been informed.  My only hope is if Hillary is elected.

lemme nough

tik



[kidneys line - transplanted (originally liver)  from Dostoevsky]

sorry

[maxdimario]

I think it's difficult to shoot straight to the top in europe as well.

perhaps more so.

but as you mentioned what counts are the blood-lines.

and there are less of those in america, perhaps.

remember new york at the beginning of the century? Mafia, gangsters etc.

remember how america was built? Railways were what brought people inland.
think how many people died while building the railways because of the rush investors imposed to be the first to claim.

let's not forget slave labour etc.

freedom is not free.

but we do love those nice politicians anyway.

[Die BREMSSPUR]

You're absolutely right.

Your homework assignment is to find out when we became a nation, the reasons for the Missouri Compromise and the war to end slavery and the length of that whole period and who was doing what to end slavery....unless you think it just went away like everything else....as allah wills......

If you are constantly going to bring it up at least know your facts.....please.

Also you might want to take a gander at who had slave laboueour when and who had it last.  And which countries outlawed it when and which countries enforce against it.

You will find that people in Italy that are still alive participated in slave labouueour maybe some of your neighbors even profited from Mrs. Goldstein suddenly not being an occupant of 7B anymore.

I do not grasp the railway, bombs in the towers connections.

But maybe I am missing your point.

lemme nough

Your student in the Fatherland...

tik

[maxdimario]

railways, towers, oil, money, natural resources, profit, control etc.

exploitation with disregard for human rights ..

slavery was widespread at the time, not just usa.. of course..

it's just naivety to believe that at one point politics became 'nice' and correct... which perhaps is a common belief of many TV watching people too busy to worry about such details.

[Die BREMSSPUR]

maxdimario wrote on Sun, 02 July 2006 09:15

railways, towers, oil, money, natural resources, profit, control etc. exploitation with disregard for human rights .. slavery was widespread at the time, not just usa.. of course.. it's just naivety to believe that at one point politics became 'nice' and correct... which perhaps is a common belief of many TV watching people too busy to worry about such details.

I totally agree.  

Politics is mostly people who don't want to make an honest living.