The five biggest issues with the 'Official Story'

reply to post by spoor


the planes hit them...and i never ignore. this FACT.....I stated the buildings stood after the planes hit....1hour and 1 1./2 hour respectively...so don't twist what i said...nice try.

So do i need to clarify....they survived the planes impact...and wtc7 never got hit by a plane....is this where you try to spread lies....How come you do this.....You call truthers to be deceitful...but i have not been deceitful...i have no problem acknowledging planes struck WTC1 and WTC2. So dont throw BS around.

reply to post by samkent


please...show me where designers ever said they were bad design....why just say it without backing it up....and i acknowledge the difference in design...guess what...wtc7 was a different design than wtc 1 and 2....so your point is exactly what.

Apparently you just think steel structures suffer global collapse due to fires...prove this....just try and prove it.

now why not get to work on thing...is you who starred spoor for twisting words...is this what you do....rather than look at what has been stated...please go through my history and you will find i have not once ever said no planes were involved....so if you and spoor are going to lie...least do it where it is not so obvious to everyone reading the thread.

I show my own work...I do my own analysis....I analyze video...so maybe it you have the wit...or the talent...you might put your own work into proving what you state.

Originally posted by plube
i have no problem acknowledging planes struck WTC1 and WTC2. So dont throw BS around.

Then why did you state

the only theory here is what really brought these structures down.....Because it certainly was not fires and gravity alone.

Who stated that it was fire and gravity alone that bought WTC1, 2 &7 down?

Originally posted by plube
Apparently you just think steel structures suffer global collapse due to fires...prove this....just try and prove it.

Again you ignore the fact that aircraft hit WTC 1 & 2, and 7 was severely damaged by the collapse of the North tower....

reply to post by spoor


rather than take things out of context...if the building survived the impact...WHICH THEY DID...then the only thing left to bring them down was the fire and gravity alone....could i be anymore specific.

NOW please show this devastating damage from debris please.....





there i even provide a start for you both.....So again...the towers fell early in the morning...so any damage to WTC7 was already done...and It did not collapse...It did not Collapse until 520pm So again the only thing left to bring the structure down was FIRES...and Gravity alone....so what tales shall you spin on the FACTS...this is not theoretical...it is FACT.

reply to post by plube

...if the building survived the impact...WHICH THEY DID...then the only thing left to bring them down was the fire and gravity alone....

If someone shot me and I died three hours later at the hospital would you say that I survived the shooting? The buildings did not survive the impact. They collapsed. That collapsed was due directly to the consequence of the airplane impact, explosion and fire.

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
OOPS! Fire didn't make it collapse.



uk.news.yahoo.com...

psik

edit on 15-7-2012 by psikeyhackr because: (no reason given)

Have a look here psik

skyscraperpage.com...

NOW just for everyone benefit some text from the link.

Materials - glass - concrete, reinforced

YOU see psik YOU make yourself and all the other truthers that will star your posts look stupid.

Its not the same type of construction ie tube in tube and NOT EVEN THE SAME MATERIALS DOH!

Always check how its made psik that goes for you as well plube!

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by plube


I remember the denials for years that WTC7 even came close to freefall......but hey those darn stubborn truthers huh...can you believe the tenacity.

Did you know that one of those dam stubborn Truthers recently did a more in depth analysis of the acceleration of WTC7 than Chandler did.

What he found was that there were times when the acceleration was greater than free fall, even reaching accelerations of up to 38 ft per sec per sec. Isn't that great news. Well not great news for Truthers because it can mean only one thing:

Momentum Transfer,,,,, just like we been telling you for years.


So far I count three votes for the Official Truther Story. Are you ready to explain to us, how the Jews did 911, Can you fit your pieces of the puzzle together for us plube ?

edit on 8-7-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)

en.wikipedia.org...

apologies to the OP for pointing out a bit of BS here;
a term from PARTICLE physics is being misused/misapplied here
as a sort of buzzword.
whether it's intentional or because poster will make anything up in order to keep believing the OS
is ultimately irrelevant; the result is the same: falsehood is promoted.

this is why i refer to OS'ers as falsehooders [as opposed to "truthers"
carry on

reply to post by plube


Here are some pictures of the side that got the real damage.







Re your building fire pictures GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT!!!

For example this one you used.



This is a comment on the web re the above fire.

The boot-shaped high-rise has an exterior steel framework, much of which will be stripped away and rebuilt, and a concrete interior portion that can be salvaged.

The CONCRETE held the steel up !!!!!

Please post your 2 other examples I need a

Someone else on another thread used this as an example and as he didn't have a clue about how the buildings were constructed he got it wrong a bit like yourself and most others.

Now be a good fellow find another 110 floor building of tube in tube design struck by and aircraft that then went on fire and didn't collapse I WONT HOLD MY BREATH

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
OOPS! Fire didn't make it collapse.



uk.news.yahoo.com...

psik

edit on 15-7-2012 by psikeyhackr because: (no reason given)

Have a look here psik

skyscraperpage.com...

NOW just for everyone benefit some text from the link.

Materials - glass - concrete, reinforced

YOU see psik YOU make yourself and all the other truthers that will star your posts look stupid.

Its not the same type of construction ie tube in tube and NOT EVEN THE SAME MATERIALS

DOH!

Always check how its made psik

that goes for you as well plube!

Reinforced with WHAT?

psik

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
OOPS! Fire didn't make it collapse.



uk.news.yahoo.com...

psik

edit on 15-7-2012 by psikeyhackr because: (no reason given)

Have a look here psik

skyscraperpage.com...

NOW just for everyone benefit some text from the link.

Materials - glass - concrete, reinforced

YOU see psik YOU make yourself and all the other truthers that will star your posts look stupid.

Its not the same type of construction ie tube in tube and NOT EVEN THE SAME MATERIALS

DOH!

Always check how its made psik

that goes for you as well plube!

Reinforced with WHAT?

psik

It's a reinforced CONCRETE structure SO NOT THE SAME AS WTC WHICH were STRUCTURAL STEEL FRAMEWORK as you well KNOW!!!




As you can see different materials and not open plan floors that can fall internally!!!!!!

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger


en.wikipedia.org...

apologies to the OP for pointing out a bit of BS here;
a term from PARTICLE physics is being misused/misapplied here
as a sort of buzzword.
whether it's intentional or because poster will make anything up in order to keep believing the OS
is ultimately irrelevant; the result is the same: falsehood is promoted.

this is why i refer to OS'ers as falsehooders [as opposed to "truthers"
carry on

Silly Truther. The entire universe including WTC 1,2,and 7 are made up of PARTICLEs.

Momentum transfer still works for large chunks of particles too.

Read section 14.4

www.lightandmatter.com...

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger


en.wikipedia.org...

apologies to the OP for pointing out a bit of BS here;
a term from PARTICLE physics is being misused/misapplied here
as a sort of buzzword.
whether it's intentional or because poster will make anything up in order to keep believing the OS
is ultimately irrelevant; the result is the same: falsehood is promoted.

this is why i refer to OS'ers as falsehooders [as opposed to "truthers"
carry on

Silly Truther. The entire universe including WTC 1,2,and 7 are made up of PARTICLEs.

Momentum transfer still works for large chunks of particles to.

www.lightandmatter.com...

silly falsehooder,
you can not apply quantum level science to the macro world
and momentum transfer does not equal conservation of momentum
fail

also not interested in giving you a platform for obfuscation
just pointing it out

nor in helping you derail

continue to munch happily on your grass

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

silly falsehooder,
you can not apply quantum level science to the macro world
and momentum transfer does not equal conservation of momentum
fail

Silly truther you need to double check your source.

Look to the right where it says "Part of a series on Chemical engineering"

This is a limited definition. It only defines what is important to chemical engineering.

Read section 14.4
www.lightandmatter.com...

If there is no such thing as momentum transfer on Truther World does anybody get hurt when there's a car crash ?

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger


If there is no such thing as macro scale momentum transfer on Truther World, what would happen if Truther World collided with the real world ?

Would the real world be destroyed and only Truther World survive ?

Comparison between a Tower and a man:

Tower weight: 500,000 ton
Boeing weight: 200 ton
man weight: 80 kg

500,000 tons : 200 tons = 80 kg : x
500,000,000 kg : 200,000 kg = 80 kg : x
x = 0,032 kg = 32 g

Can you destroy a man, can you crumble him with a little steel ball that weighs 32 grams?
NO
Can a ridiculous plane that weighs 200 tons crumble a powerfull Tower that weighs 500,000 tons?
NO ABSOLUTELY NO

reply to post by SkepticGuy


As far as I know nothing can crumble a man. People are essentially un-crumble-able.

Originally posted by SkepticGuy

Can a ridiculous plane that weighs 200 tons crumble a powerfull Tower that weighs 500,000 tons?
NO

ABSOLUTELY NO

Can a powerfull Tower that weighs 500,000 crumble a powerfull Tower that weighs 500,000 tons?



Yes ABSOLUTELY YES



That is what happened.

reply to post by SkepticGuy


What a ridiculous attempt at an analogy.

Can a 300 pound torpedo sink a 45,000 ton ship?

Hmm.....maybe we should check the history books on Naval warfare?

Another Comparison between a Tower and a man:

Tower weight: 500,000 ton
Boeing weight: 200 ton
man weight: 80 kg

500,000 tons : 200 tons = 80 kg : x
500,000,000 kg : 200,000 kg = 80 kg : x
x = 0,032 kg = 32 g

200,000 kg : 32 g = 800 km/h : x 200,000,000 g : 32 g = 800,000 m/h : x

x = 0,128 m/h = 12.8 cm/h

Steel ball impact velocity against the man: 12.8 cm/h

Biggest velocity indeed



These are Phisics calculations with proportions