It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by ferretman2
There was sh*t literally everywhere. It was such a large mess over a 16 acre area.
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by bsbray11
I have a question for Howard about this picture. Notice the two column walls that are still standing? Notice that they don't have diagonal bracing? How are they still standing then Howard? I thought you needed diagonal bracing for columns to stand? BTW, it looks to me that they are at least 10-15 stories tall.
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by BigTrain
This is quite comical. A few months ago, BSbray was posting all these posts on "how come the buildings collapsed on their own footprint then?" Now he is trying to justify his position on the fact that the buildings DID NOT collapse onto their own footprint, even posting photos that prove material was ejected outward which proves my point I was making against him a while back.
And your understanding of this situation bsbray is a joke. You keep contradiciting yourself time and time again. How many different scenarios are you going to enbrace until you decide on a definitive cause? At least pick one collapse theory and stick to it, it will make you seem at least more respectable, but as far as im concerned, you have no moral ground to stand on.
BSB flipflops more than Kerry.
Train
In his defense, I have NEVER heard him argue that the towers fell into their footprints. Simetrical yes, but not in their footprints. Care to provide a post that he has said this? But like everything else I ask you to provide, you'll just probably ignore me.
Also, I keep hearing things from you with no proof to back up anything you say. Where's your structural calculations? I've been asking you for these for at least 6 months now.
Also, I guess "staying the course" is a respectable thing to do? Even if you have been proven wrong? Maybe BSBray changes his theory when new evidence comes out. But, I guess going by your thinking, the world is flat?
Originally posted by bsbray11
The centers of gravity would have been in the footprints because all of the debris fell around the footprints.
Big Train's problem is that he doesn't understand the difference between center of gravity, and where most of the debris itself actually landed. Hope that clears that up.
Originally posted by BigTrain
And why would I spend a thousand hours on calculations and models just so you guys can call it disinformation.
Originally posted by Griff
My point was that Howard says that the core would have buckled without the support of the floors. But, even then, the floors were only horizontal bracing themselves. So why did the structure stand with only horizontal bracing Howard?
I know I'm getting very off topic. Sorry for that Howard.