any structural engineers or architects?
- Thread starter red
- Start date
(NIST) lolI never cared for nor looked into it until I read your post, interesting points brought up with pictures.
Also, isn't real blood more dark in colour?
http://deepinsidetherabbithole.com/...bithole.com/The_Boston_Bombing_Hoax.html#2971
Nothing compelling about wtc7?
NIST claims one column got hurt by debris and fire and that building came down perfectly on its own footprint because of that single fire and debris.
That right there should be enough to raise everyone's eyebrows about NIST and how clueless or intentionally dishonest they're being.
As for Pentagon videos, I call bullshit, if the government v version is true and its so secretive a place, how the heck did some stupid Arabs who couldn't fly Cessnas manage to crash an airliner into it on first try? Lol
Plus the irony that the Pentagon I'd such a well guarded secret these clowns found it no problem.
There are tons of pictures if the Pentagon available online as well as video on 911, I looked it up the day it happened.
So your story or defense of their story (being pro US and/or Israel) doesn't hold. Sorry
Fail: I stated: "I've not looked at any of the WTC 7 stuff and may in the near future."
First, you need to shut-down your racism. That was an idiot thing to say.
Fail: Clearly all three hijacked planes managed to strike their targets on the first attempt. What is your point?
What!? What goes on WITHIN the building is what is secret. Obviously the building is not hidden (or for you tin-hat looney types, cloaked or moved between dimensions).
Yet in your post #31 you state "One other thing that has me wondering, the Pentagon, no video, just some 5sec clip of an explosion and there are 85 cameras around the Pentagon? Really? Why not show what happened? *shrug*"
Make up your mind FFS!
I stand by my original statement.
How did you manage to tie in "being pro US and/or Israel" to all of this. I've never ever said anything about Israel on Terb ever. I think your racism is starting to become obvious.
But for the record, yes I'm pro-American. But I think they have their problems, just like Canada. I'm also pro-Israel, pro-Egypt, pro-Jordan and 195 other counties in the world. Ever since I heard they don't wear deodorant in Scotland, I've been anti-Scotland, but that could also be crap as I did read it here on Terb.
Seriously Tesla, you and Titalian should more carefully verify the information you provide instead of just throwing links out here. Much of the info has already been debunked by others and many of your "experts" aren't experts on the WTC itself, nor did they have access to the materials for examination or testing.
I 110% support people who try to offer an alternative EXPERT opinion in an attempt to expose errors, incompetence and/or lies. I believe that not everything in this world is as it seems (i.e. Cuban missile crisis, Bush's milk truck WOMD plant). But I do try to research the alternative explanations, and take everything with skepticism until proven by a source I trust. Frankly, I enjoy doing the research.
I 110% support people who try to offer an alternative EXPERT opinion in an attempt to expose errors, incompetence and/or lies. I believe that not everything in this world is as it seems (i.e. Cuban missile crisis, Bush's milk truck WOMD plant). But I do try to research the alternative explanations, and take everything with skepticism until proven by a source I trust. Frankly, I enjoy doing the research.
Understood and I asked if you found nothing compelling enough to even look into it?
I'm fairly certain by the other thread or by this one you know now that NIST reported WTC7 fell (so symmetrically straight down btw) becaue of fire and debris that compromised one column.
If you haven't heard of it, maybe it's because the media (go figure) didn't report too much about it. Granted it didn't have the visual impact and storyline of the Twin Towers, but it's still suspect. So there you go, no "FAIL", just wondering how you could not find it compelling enough to look into.
But I suspect it's a hard point to debate/refute, so you just take the "turn a blind eye" stance to it and claim you haven't looked into it.
Actually, that was the point. I was calling them stupid, because these guys weren't professional pilots. Just a bunch of goons who attempted something INCREDIBLY hard and impossible (according to a LOT of PROFESSIONAL pilots).
Again, no fail here.
The Twin Towers were hit. Even THEN, there are a LOT of skeptics out there (engineers AND pilots who argue it wouldn't be possible for the planes to fly at those speeds and to be able to hit the towers with such accuracy on the first try). But you can go argue with them here.
I haven't watch this all myself, but he sure sounds like he knows what he's talking about and other pilots agree with him.
Watch from 15:00 and onward, 2 pilots describe what it's like to fly those airliners at those speeds.
That my friend, was sarcasm. I was being facetious.
Exactly, that's my point. EVERYONE (almost everyone) knows the Pentago, can look up where it is, what it looks like.
So WHY didn't/doesn't the goverment release the video of the ALLEGED plane crashing into the Pentagon.
Everyone has seen the building before, releasing the video of a REAL APPARENT attack, won't compromise any security.
"fail" on your part to understand.
Racism how so? I think it's clear that those who refute sound, scientific facts and evidence, along with questionable actions by the government clearly follow an ideological path and do so because of other motives.
Shocker.
Like I said, I never looked into the Boston bombing nor cared to until this thread.
I'm just pulling a Fox News type manouevre "some say..." type mentality.
Nothing wrong with that is there?
I didn't claim to believe the Boston bombing was an inside job, just did a search and that site came up.
So, "some people..." say/think...
You can't debunk MY (??) "experts" who were an integral part of the builidng of the towers? lol Sorry that just sounded comical "your experts". lol
As for experts who had access to materials for examination. Here's a Danish scientist, just one of the many that did have access.
I 110% support people who try to offer an alternative EXPERT opinion in an attempt to expose errors, incompetence and/or lies. I believe that not everything in this world is as it seems (i.e. Cuban missile crisis, Bush's milk truck WOMD plant). But I do try to research the alternative explanations, and take everything with skepticism until proven by a source I trust. Frankly, I enjoy doing the research.[/QUOTE]
Who is they ?? you are cherry picking your facts again. 'They' is usually a twisted or made up quote conveniently fabricated to provide frivolous or irrelevant data that appears to counter the fabricated story line.
Engine parts were found around the site & in the rubble as noted in the reports. Nobody except the tin foil hat clan suggest that titanium fans burned. Similarly all the reports of steel beams melting come from the same 'they' as opposed to the structural fatigue caused by the heat. You really have to put on some special blinders to ignore so many facts.
Pretty much the issue with conspiracy theorists. In the same paragraph you say the towers were hit then you go on to say there were no planes.
You don't really care what arguments or if they contradict each other as long as you can fight against authority.
On the contrary, I believe planes hit the buildings.
However many professional pilots like the former CIA pilot with 19,000 hours reordered flight time beg to differ.
I'm simply pointing out that (some people say) planes didn't hit or it would be impossible for them to hit the towers with the plane's size, weight, speed and low altitudes.
That's a tough one to believe for myself.
I'm glad you brought that pic up. obviously for some reason no one is watching the videos we have posted.Who is they ?? you are cherry picking your facts again. 'They' is usually a twisted or made up quote conveniently fabricated to provide frivolous or irrelevant data that appears to counter the fabricated story line.
Engine parts were found around the site & in the rubble as noted in the reports. Nobody except the tin foil hat clan suggest that titanium fans burned. Similarly all the reports of steel beams melting come from the same 'they' as opposed to the structural fatigue caused by the heat. You really have to put on some special blinders to ignore so many facts.
That engine in the pic on Murray St, is a CFM56 Manufactured by General Electric, the problem with this is that
United Airlines strictly used Pratt & Whitney engines. Some schmuck decided to dump this engine off as proof,
only problem is it was the wrong engine. LOL
Jes*s Titalian, again did you check your facts?? Could that engine be from the OTHER jet which DID have those types of engines?? (I know, you are now going to argue 737 vs 767). At this point I'm not going to further provide links debunking your and Tesla's conspiracy theory. Tesla's racist rants put a bad taste in my mouth.
The Internet is full of made-up videos, pictures and posts by self-claimed experts. If you want to be taken seriously, at least try to verify the validity of the information you are presenting us with. Again, I'm all for alternate investigations to keep our gov'ts honest, but most of this crap undermines the real investigators.
I found the "jets never crashed in the WTC" theory amusing.
I outright laughed at "the aircraft were really military drones and the jets and passengers are being hidden at Diego Garcia".
My favourite is "it was the military using stolen alien technology to guide the aircraft into the WTC so that the President would have an excuse to start a war to bolster his failing public opinion polls". <-- An expert told be that one.
From the video at 6:00, the clown in the video says, “Flight 11 & 77 didn’t exist… no record of them taking off…”
Would think it easy for the airlines, pilots, crew, flight controllers, booking agents, passengers and families of the passengers, and world news media to pick up on that tidbit if true, unless they are all in on it.
You might look up to this guy up as an expert, but thinking people not so much.
watched from 3:30 to 6:20, that is already too much time pissed away watching nonsense.
Further to Benstt's post #6 and yours, I know that the Exchange Tower had a reinforced, concrete elevator core which they build the steel frame around (as well as vertical steel columns supporting loads). I remember seeing it go up in the 80s when I used to work in one of the T.D. towers.
But when they built the original T.D. Centre Towers, was the elevator shaft reinforced concrete, or did they use masonry blocks (for the elevator shaft) against steel columns and beams? I would think masonry construction for an elevator shaft for such a tall building wouldn't be ideal or sound.
I studied structural engineering and took metallurgy courses for three semesters before switching to a related field. In a situation where a plane full of fuel slams into a building above mid level and a fire erupts from the burning fuels on board. There is not an existing structure that would survive since none of this is taken into consideration during the conception, design and construction. A fire at mid level in and building design would have weakened and buckled the steel support columns causing all of the above weight to come down on the lower portion of the building. This would act like a karate chop breaking multiple concrete slabs. The top slab breaking would facilitate the breaking of the lower slabs but only if there is a space between the slabs. If the concrete slabs are place one on top of each other with no space then it becomes much harder to break. This was exactly what happened at the WTC incident. This would be true if it would have been any other structural design.
In the above GIF you can see on the graph after the karate chop the initial impact breaks the first slab, the lower slabs are broken by the weight of the first slab breaking.
The collapse of the WTC is not evidence of any government conspiracy
What happened at the WTF incident is exactly what would have happened in a controlled implosion of a structure. The supports are knocked out and the weight of the building is used to take down the structure.
You mentioned mid point. Whether it was, the real point is that those collisions did not happen at the top 5 floors. So you're point is valid. It was raised in an email exchange I was in a while ago. When the structural integrity was compromised at a certain point which was above a certain threshold of building mass, the shear weight was enough to cause the collapse we see in the WTC buildings.
So when you posted video claiming there were no planes and said the guy sounded like he was reliable you were .....?
