sundevil777 102
QuoteQuoteQuoteThere are a lot of unanswered questions but do you really honestly doubt that two airliners hit the towers?
Not at all.
I believe an airliner hit each of the twin towers.
I don;t believe that jet fuel burned hot enough and more importantly in a symetrical enough pattern as to simultaneously melt 47 steel columns resulting in a perfectly straight down freefall .., (wait for it) ..twice in one day.
Fire is chaotic and random.
The buildings each fell in an orderly and structured collapse.
***They didn't fall perfectly straight down - the tipping of the part above the impact is quite evident, but when that mass impacted what was below, it all failed. They just didn't tip over as much as your seat of the pants engineering sense tells you it should have. I suggest your seat of the pants engineering sense is not well calibrated.QuoteSo let me get this straight.., and I saw exactly what you are stating.
The top began to fall asymetricly but suddenly the entire structure below fell straight down as with no resistance.
Is that what you witnessed?
QuoteQuoteIf the fire was hot enough to melt steel how was he able to stand on that floor?
***The asst fire chief was overly optimistic. The fire wasn't hot enough to melt steel. It was hot enough to weaken it. It's strong enough right up until it isn't strong enough, and then it collapses.
So although you weren't there and he was on the floor and had been trained to asses fires and the requirements to place them under control and extinquish them, you discount his proffesional opinion?
Really?
Riddle me this Batman..;
If the fires were hot enough to "weaken" steel how could he have been standing on the same floor as the fire and would a trained firefighter be likely to confuse a fire capable of weakening steel with an office fire easily put out with a couple of hoses?
Just wanted to issue a reality check.QuoteOf course I'm just throwing out my opinion. Of course it is based on nothing at all but conjecture - and what actually happened. Ya, we still have the actual events to help us make those assessments, unless you think it is all part of a massive conspiracy with tentacles reaching out to the tiniest corners of the events on that day...
I'm sure all of us would give more creedence to the opinion of the trained fire fighter right there at the impact site as to the strength of the fires.
As far as conspiracies tell me what do you know about the Iran/Contra affair?
How many people had to keep the secret to keep that one under wraps?
sundevil777 102
QuoteSo let me get this straight.., and I saw exactly what you are stating.
The top began to fall asymetricly but suddenly the entire structure below fell straight down as with no resistance.
The top did begin to fall asymmetrically, but it did impact the lower floors in a way that caused all of it to fail. That you can't see how the two are compatible is not a surprise. There is a lot of stuff in the scientific/engineering realm that isn't intuitive. That is why not just anyone can design a building, or analyze why or how it failed. No matter how much you want it to be something naturally analyzed by the seat of your pants, it is not.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am
***The asst fire chief was overly optimistic. The fire wasn't hot enough to melt steel. It was hot enough to weaken it. It's strong enough right up until it isn't strong enough, and then it collapses.
So although you weren't there and he was on the floor and had been trained to asses fires and the requirements to place them under control and extinquish them, you discount his proffesional opinion?
Really?
Riddle me this Batman..;
If the fires were hot enough to "weaken" steel how could he have been standing on the same floor as the fire and would a trained firefighter be likely to confuse a fire capable of weakening steel with an office fire easily put out with a couple of hoses?
Of course I'm just throwing out my opinion. Of course it is based on nothing at all but conjecture - and what actually happened. Ya, we still have the actual events to help us make those assessments, unless you think it is all part of a massive conspiracy with tentacles reaching out to the tiniest corners of the events on that day...you see I was thinking everything was as officially stated, but then you've got me wondering now that I see a trained firefighter made a bad assessment - wow, that really seals the deal for the conspiracy, how could it be anything else!