- Dec 27, 2017
- 24,364
- 53,737
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Dunno about that but cheers.
It was. Gave me a lot to think about
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Dunno about that but cheers.
That was building 7 of the WTC complex. If you saw it from the other side there was a humungous hole where a huge chunk of one of the towers fell thru it and basically destroyed its insides. But from the other side it looked solid and unlikely to fall.That other building that dropped like a house of cards that wasn't hit by a plane looked pretty suspect, I remember some time afterwards there was a campaign by engineers who said a building like that shouldn't collapse like that to a regular fire.
At the time it was the only steel skyscraper to ever collapse due to a fire, not sure if any happened since but i don't remember of any. Some had to be demolished due to a fire but they were still standing. I think industrial steel needs to be heated to at least 600 degrees celsius to undergo metallurgical change and loses half it's strength, it needs about 1500 to lose structural integrity. A building fire is typically around 750 and it is not usually a uniform type of fire, it tends to be hotter in some places so they don't normally drop like a house of cards.
My nephew is an engineer working in construction, I should hit him up about some of the specifics.
I know the building standards changed post 9/11 to make them safer, but I don't think there was anything there to stop a building collapsing to a normal building fire. I am not sure if it is a conspiracy theory or not, but I think the explanation of a normal fire seems a bit odd, if a steel skyscraper could drop like that to a normal fire in 7 hours then I think something radical would need to change about building construction.
It was either poorly constructed or something else abnormal happened.
Itās a dark path and Febs has been down it.
LOL. What was fu**en abnormal was the plane caused the top 20 stories of the first building to seperate from the rest and eventually collapse down on top of it. You can see it in the video.
The structure of the building is such that losing half its strength would cause it to collapse anyway but if you watch carefully you can see the top section start to teeter then fall thru the rest of the building. The WTC towers were built around a steel core that had each floor connected to it with the support radiating out from that core. I don't think there was any structural support apart from the core and when it was weakened there was nothing left to hold the building up. And i think that was a unique aspect about its structure or design. Check it out for yourself. I couldn't be arsed. I know a bit too much about it all anyway.
Firstly the NIST report has heaps of flaws in it. It probably isn't worth wasting time on, secondly ... which building are you talking about?Both WTC 1 and 2 pancaked, the bulk of the debris came down vertically, some fire/debris hit the southwest section but as the official final report said, it had ignited fires on floors 7-9, 11 and 13. If is a 47 story building, what they are describing is a splash effect from WTC which broke the glass and started fires. The official cause of the collapse was the sprinkler systems not working due to some other unrelated pipe accident. But some buildings have pretty much burnt out with the structure skeleton still intact. This building had all of the support columns in the middle of the building all apparently go and then the outer part of the building just pancaked because it didn't have enough support.
The official cause of the building collapse is office fire due to failed sprinklers, not because any significant amount of debris hit the building.
I don't believe in the conspiracies, I think it is more likely that it was poorly constructed. If it was built properly and the events happened as they described in the official report, it may very well had burnt out but it should still have remained standing. It is the first ever steel skyscraper to collapse to a fire.
The official final report: https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610
Not as dark as some.
This is as good an article on 9/11 as you will read. Its by the guy that made that hip hop I posted a few weeks or months ago: Its a big day for the little people.
Its called Plain and simple fu** 9/11.
Fair enough.Tbh Iām not going to read something called fu** 9/11.
Firstly the NIST report has heaps of flaws in it. It probably isn't worth wasting time on, secondly ... which building are you talking about?
At least 3 collapsed that day.
Thirdly ... I don't believe in the conspiracies
LOL
The official explanation of the 9/11 attacks is they happened as a result of a conspiracy - between Bin Laden and Atta with his cell that hijacked then crashed the planes. Do you believe in that?
WTC 7, that was what we were talking about...
The point of our entire conversation was that I wasn't happy with the explanation of how "an office fire" caused this building to collapse in the manner it did given it wasn't hit by an airplane full of jet fuel like the other two.
The word has a number of meanings, in general when we refer to a conspiracy in the context of 9/11 we are referring to the "hypothetical speculation that is untrue or outlandish" definition.
Like people covering up stealing gold by blowing up the support structures to cover up a heist or sh*t like that.
Maybe you should reread the entire report and see if there is more to it.
I've seen a photo of the back end of the building and it was fāed. It may have only been the bottom 20 floors where the debris hit or in the middle... I don't remember and don't care enough to go looking. Either way after seeing that photo I'm not in the least surprised the building collapsed like a house of cards. You can think what you like about it. I really don't care.
So even tho it was a successful conspiracy that fundamentally changed the world (but shouldn't have been given how many people knew about it,) when you and whoever else you are referring to with that "we" (not me cos I'm not brainwashed lol. Must be that hat,) refer to a conspiracy in the context of 9/11 you think about stuff that is either batshit insane, or that you vaguely know a little about but stuff the details up (covering up stealing gold ... lol wasn't that a movie?).
Instead of the actual conspiracy that happened.
(And the surrounding events. Which all the outlandish conspiracy theories provide great cover for.)
No doubt you think other people are brainwashed.
personally i dont think afghanis are one of the same, your looking at a very remote country on the crossroads of a radically different countries consisting of very different topography. add to this many of different groups living within it ( Of the 31 million or so Afghan residents, 42% are Pashtun, 27% Tajik, 9% Hazara, 9% Uzbek, 4% Aimak, 3% Turkmen, 2% Baloch and 4% fall into an unspecified "other" group. ) . sure you may have some kind of governance in the bigger cities such as kabul but out in the regions iam sure its local rules and customs that dominate.I hope that after generations of war and destruction they would want peace, but youāre probably right and it wonāt take much prodding to kick off again.
personally i dont think afghanis are one of the same, your looking at a very remote country on the crossroads of a radically different countries consisting of very different topography. add to this many of different groups living within it ( Of the 31 million or so Afghan residents, 42% are Pashtun, 27% Tajik, 9% Hazara, 9% Uzbek, 4% Aimak, 3% Turkmen, 2% Baloch and 4% fall into an unspecified "other" group. ) . sure you may have some kind of governance in the bigger cities such as kabul but out in the regions iam sure its local rules and customs that dominate.
That was one of the many times the idea has kind of surfaced in pop culture.Here's something strange I heard about recently. A show called "The Lone Gunmen" which aired its pilot episode in march 2001, with a plot involving a plan by rogue U.S. government agents to hijack planes and crash them into the world trade centre, make it look like a terrorist group was responsible, and then use the resulting fervor to launch a new war.
The Lone Gunmen (TV series) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Iād love to know what happened to Rumsfelds 2.3 trillion that was missing from the pentagon budget..
Yeah exactly.Wut?
Wasnāt there meant to be some sort of āblack eagle trustā that was used to bankrupt the ole Soviet Union through total warfare, did itās job, and rather then hand the money back to the people, they stole it.( sssshhhhhh......... )
1. Do you like and want them?Can someone help me justify spending $250 ($125 each) on 2 jumpers that are going to be released soon. My friends arenāt helping and Hojuman was a poopyhead
Omg sounds like my mum too!!!1. Do you like and want them?
2. Are you able to spend that much money on them and comfortable doing so?
If you answered yes to both those questions, then there's no real reason not to. My mum's the most generous person I know when it comes to cash and always willing to spend on something if she likes it or buy stuff for others if they need it. Her favourite saying whenever I used to ask her about it: "I can't spend it when I'm dead."