The impact of a plane would have caused a very significant amount of friction, and caused a gaping hole in the building itself. That giant hole means that any support structures that were in the area are now gone, which can (obviously) compromise the integrity of said structure. Also, if you notice, the fire in Dubai was very visible. This means that there was definitely a lot of ventilation, which also means that the fire wouldn't get "super hot".

With the WTC, you could see a lot of smoke but no significant fire. The smoke says that there was ventilation, but not too much. Due to the lack of ventilation, super-heated gasses were trapped inside of the structure, and it essentially formed a "rocket stove" (look them up; ordinary wood fires can get hot enough to melt metals and rapidly cook foods.. pretty cool). Steel beams don't necessarily need to melt to become compromised. A steel support beam can expand a lot from a simple house fire (steel expands/contracts just from changing seasons).

In all reality, nothing can be 100% guaranteed because it's only happened that one time (multiple buildings, but all at one time). We have nothing else to compare it to.

It had nothing to do with the impact. The difference is what the buildings were used for. The building in this picture is a hotel. There's not a lot that can burn, and it has water running through it that keeps the fire from getting too hot.

The Twin Towers on the other hand were office and administrative buildings. They were full of rugs, office supplies, and among other things: paper, which burns ******* hot, hot enough to get through fire retardant and weaken the steel in the building, causing it to collapse.

I wouldn't know.

It doesn't say the WTC had concrete in it tho

**** , both this and comment >>#57 were me.

A large plane could bring down a skyscraper on it's own. What would need to happen is that the plane hits key supportive beams. Depending on from what angle and where the hit was, as well as force, of course, the above parts of the building would either fall towards where the plane hit, or the top part of the building would rotate around a point before falling down. Imagine sweeping a person's feet. Damage to the below areas of the building may vary, but should largely survive with some damage.


This is of course just what would happen if a plane crash alone tore down a skyscraper. There's no guarantee it would.

I am here talking about the physics of what a plane crash could accomplish alone. Other factors that are often relevant in bringing down a building could be explosives, or similar, on the plane, or in the buildings themselves. I'm also not saying this is what did, or did not, happen on 9/11. If we try to stay factual. t's much easier to discus and find truths.



Whether it was terrorists attacking, or rich people getting richer, that discussion is up to other people. I find neither side satisfactory.

The constuctor that made wtc tho claimed that the building could take multiple plane hits without collapsing

The tests for plane hits were actually designed around small planes, not commercial jet liners.

Yeah, the towers could take a tiny Cessna or two and live. Not two Boeing jets.

I remember from the interview they took that he specified that it could take multiple hits from Boeing 747,i will check it out later to confirm,there has been some years since then

No. It was tested for a single strike from a 707, which is a much smaller plane

Multiple*

TESTED for one. He thinks it could take more but has no testing to back it.

I'm fairly certain that they actually never did tests on the building for larger planes.

And i am fairly certain that thats what he claimed

the people who made the titanic claimed it was unsinkable
Icebergs cant melt steel ships

We dont live in 1912 though.

then why does it feel like we're 2 years off a world war?

Its second a cold war.

**** off anon

Not an anon. I opened a new tab in private browsing and it signed me out.

Thats why you keep downvoting as an anon?
Be my guest

I'm not. Maybe someone thinks your as much of a faggot as I do, but red thumbs instead of arguing. I avoid red thumbing people I argue with on principle.

I am a faggot because you dont like what you read?
Go be salty somewhere else man,also keep being an anon bitch,it suits you

No, you're a faggot because you think someone wouldn't hype something they made just because the sun's revolved around the earth a certain number of times. Human behavior hasn't changed in that respect over the last 100,000 years, so why would it happen in the last 100.
Also, because you're Greek. Go back to ******* teenage boys.

I guess your wife came over and got ****** like she wanted to so now you are salty as **** ?
Should be expected by a ******* like you. Also change your color you ******* twat,just because you are going blind from all the fapping that doesnt mean we should also.

And how the **** you know where i am from?
How more butthurt can you get to stalk me?

Hahahaha. You're so butthurt. I know you're Greek because you were nonstop bitching about criticism of Greeks during your financial crisis. You're so mad.

I dont even know who the **** you are man,thats how much memorable you are. And you are here now bitching about WTC,hypocrite much?

I dont have any reasons to be mad,whats done is done...you on the other hand...

I'm not bitching about anything. You have no reason to be mad? What about your last post? I was an anon at the time, actually. I only remember you because of what a butthurt salty little Greekfag you were. I'm surprised you could afford the salt, tbh.

>Implying you got more money than me,nice one fam

The dead sea has less salt than you right now

Kek, having more money than Greeks would make me an Ethiopian. Considering the US GDP per capita is over 2.7 times that of Greece, and I'm pretty well off even for an American, I'd say it's a safe assumption.

You have probably never heard of Buying power of a nation.
We dont pay 2000 dollars on rent over here you ******** .
Go get tipped now while buying dildos from wallmart after you got stuffed on 1$ burgers
Also... Building 7

You get payed 100 Dollars minimum wage per day over there (if not more) and still cry that you dont have enough money.

Go play it rich somewhere else *******

aw man, a bigger dick contest, I love these

A celebrity downthumbed me.
What a ******* honor.
Are you butthurt as well man?

I'm not crying about not having enough money. I'm happy as hell. Where did I complain about money? Also, I'm 5'11'' and weigh 165 pounds. I'm not even close to fat.

I...dont...care.
Even if you made more money what is there to brag about?
We both live in our countries during a ****** economy while richfags are getting richer.
Thats life and you better learn to live it like it is.

One last thing.I want you to tell me whats the official story about building 7,i want to hear it from you.

If the constuctor claims the building should keep standing he is a liar and i am a faggot. If Bush says it was ze evil terrorists you are correct and a genius...

Ok man,sure

What constructor was this? I can't find anything about it anyway. Was he the chief architect or a construction worker?

This wasnt exactly it,since i remember the interview was around 10 minutes,but its the closest i can find right now

This guy was not an engineer, nor was he involved in the design or construction of the buildings. He was an onsite construction manager, and his opinion is not infallible. Additionally, he only said that impact wouldn't knock the towers down, and it didn't. Fires weakened the steel frame after the jets damaged much of it and blew of fireproofing, causing the tower to collapse. Additionally, he said it was built to withstand one impact from a 707. The towers were hit by two much larger planes. This proves exactly nothing.

He also said MULTIPLE impacts

He said "AN impact from a fully loaded 707." He believes it could withstand several, and he's still not an expert, nor was he wrong. Impact didn't destroy them.

Yeah,"fire" did

Ok ok you are correct and all knowing,sorry that i wont spend my free time to search all over the web for the "Official" story after 5-8 years and i prefer to rest for now.
All i ask of you is to tell me the "Official" story of Building 7,my mind keeps forgetting,dont skip any details,i wanna hear ALL about it.

I don't know "all about it." I also don't want to spend all my time doing it, but I know that they said rubble from the WTC caused it to collapse. Why does everyone mention WTC 7, when WTC 3,4,5, and 6 were all destroyed by rubble?

Oh god this never gets old

Rubble caused the collapse or partial collapse of 15 buildings. Why is it only WTC 7 that people fixate on?

No reason mate,its not like building 7 had any serious documents in it,or how some Trillion Dollars disappeared overnight.

No reason at all.

I found it some yeras ago from interviews they took. I will try to find it later and post it to you since i am at work and linking and typing from android is frustrating

Differences
>The impact caused massive structural damage to the building
>The impact stripped off a lot of the fire retardant
>The world trade center used an unusual design in which the outer walls supported the weight and the floors were essentially suspended from the outer walls
>This building was full of people's couches and carpets, not jet fuel
>The opening created by the planes hitting allowed wind to rush into a large area of the building, fueling the flames essentially like a blast furnace
>9/11 damaged two huge buildings as well as setting a number of large office buildings in the area ablaze (caused by falling debris), which quickly overwhelmed the fire department. The insulation in the towers was only designed to maintain the buildings' integrity long enough for the fire department to begin to control and eventually put out the fire. Instead, the overwhelmed fire department never got to actually even begin to slow the fire none the less put it out. In dubai, the fire department only had one otherwise undamaged building to deal with and were able to keep the fire relatively under control and eventually put it out.
tl;dr jet fuel can melt steel beams but your burning couch can't

Here is a report from the most appropriate architectural and engineering group (the Council for Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat) and their explanation. Read it if you're interested:

www.ctbuh.org/Portals/0/People/WorkingGroups/Fire&Safety/CTBUH_NISTwtc7_%20DraftReport.pdf

The third building was hit by flaming debris. It was completely evacuated so the fire department let it burn and instead focused on rescue efforts in other areas where there may have been survivors not to mention the hundreds of people injured. The unchecked fire compromised the structural integrity of the building and it collapsed. Most large buildings will collapse if you let a fire burn continually within them. Their fire suppression systems are only enough to give the fire department time to respond. It should also be noted that the building was partly cantilevered over an electrical substation which made it structurally weaker to begin with.

Keep in mind the fire suppression systems were not working in building seven after the collapse of 1 and 2 severed the water mains. So it was burning completely unimpeded as well.

This is not actually true. Not the way you're telling it, anyways. "...like a blast furnace" is exactly why it's not possible in any way for jet fuel to melt steel beams, if you wanna follow the meme. However it can do a lot of damage to stuff and in combination with other factors it might bring down a skyscraper. The notion that jet fuel could bring towers like those down alone is absurd. I don't care whatever you believe. People aren't interested in educating themselves either way. My problem is the heavy focus on jet fuel. Jet fuel may very well melt steel beams when combined with x and y, but saying that yet fuel can melt steel beams is a stretch at best, and very insignificant. Don't do bad science.

While it can't melt them, it can heat them to the point that they can no longer cary weight. You do not need to come close to melting steel to compromise it's structural integrity. Jet fuel is plenty hot on it's own to do this.

Which does not mean jet fuel can melt steel beams. People here are spewing false information, misleading a lot of people.

The "explosions" were the floors (which were essentially suspended from the load bearing walls) beginning to collapse on top of one another. One floor fell onto another weakened floor and then the two floors collapsed onto a third and then so on. That's why they heard what sounded like an explosion before the buildings collapsed. The buildings had actually started to collapse from the inside before you saw evidence on the outside.

The upper floors absolutely could have imploded the lower floors. Once the collapsing internal floors compromised the structural integrity of the outer supports, the upper 15+ floors OF SKYSCRAPER essentially went into freefall. No building is designed to not crumble under those forces.

The weight is absolutely enough. The world trade center had virtually no internal supports and relied almost entirely on load bearing external walls. This made it extremely susceptible to this kind of collapse.

WTC 7 burned down because it was an unchecked fire. It collapsed HOURS after the towers because there was no added accelerant or structural damage. The fire department simply never responded to the fire because the building was fully evacuated and they had better things to do. Any high rise can collapse if a fire goes unchecked. Their fire suppression is only designed to give the fire department time to control the fire.

There were not billions of dollars of precious metals. There was slightly under a billions (maybe as low as 650 millions) of which 200 million+ was reported recovered. Keep in mind that gold has a very low melting point and could have easily melted in with the other debris making it nearly unrecoverable.

The FBI does not control who boards planes.

A van with explosives was stopped. It isn't talked about because they didn't blow anything up. Not very interesting. Also be aware that not all Israelis are Jewish. A large section of the country is muslim.

This is a much smaller building (34 stories) which means it had to support significantly less weight

The fire was in fact controlled and eventually put out (only 6 hours after it started).

The building you're showing also used significantly less steel for support. It was also MASSIVELY overbuilt because it was designed to withstand large earthquakes.

It was also not occupied at the time of the fire. It was still under construction meaning there was far less flammable material within the building.

You are comparing a small unocupied building built mainly with concrete that is specifically designed to withstand earthquakes to the world trade centers after being hit by aircraft. This is not a reasonable comparison.

Never thought there was someone so stupid as you.

As long as you don't try to argue anything. Nice going.



Literally 99% of people on either side has no ******* clue what they're doing.

im calling him stupid for the sheer fact that this thing is still around, hes just another conspiracy theorist who is losing control of his life and looking for something to blame it on, namely the U.S government.

Main reason people who believe in conspiracies are people whose lives are falling apart and they dont want to fix the source of the problem, instead they blame it on the government and vehemently believe conspiracies as if they were the new age bible, they try to find any reason at all to make it seem like some plot against the common man, or just some plot in the first place.

Why people have it in their head that the government has to be 100% transparent with every little detail are either very dim witted, want the us/world to fall into chaos or want to find more reasons to blame the government for not handing them a $250,000 check to make their life not a **** hole that they them self forged it into by making stupid decisions.

Some people on the defense have it right, bringing up factual information as to how the tower came down, what caused it to go down, have a solid grasp on the physics behind it. If the evidence can be backed up by fact (such as the load bearing capabilities of steel as it reaches the temperatures that jet fuel melts at, how fire spreads, Structural integrity loss on impact, collateral damage, and the lives lost.

Id rather side with factual evidence over hair brained **** scams that make people feel better because they think they've got the government figured out.

Red thumb me all you want people, but honestly, if you think observation and speculation beats facts, you're an absolute tard.

I didn't see any factual evidence, or other evidence. All I see are several sides that uses faulty logic, brings no sources, and resort to name calling. Some here has brought more to the table, of course, and I don't expect people to use hours of their lives on something they care little about, but let's keep it to a slightly higher standard.



If I were to bring in my own personal observations, I notice that people would likely lump me with the conspiracy nuts, as I'm mostly replying to people on the other side. I think what you say about the conspiracy people is wrong. I find that the conspiracists are 90% people who ask questions, and the other side is 95% that don't. The other 5% of the norm asked questions and found that it was ******** . Numbers are rough estimates. Of course, in any discussion, it would be the conspiracists that asks the most questions, often really dumb ones, but we should rather humour them then ridicule, and look at things from every perspective. The vast majority that simply ignores is worrying. If you don't care, that's fine, but don't enter any arguments with that. Keep yourself to a higher standard.

I call people names because theyre asking questions when they shouldnt, more often then not, every conspiracy theorist ive met, not someone debating, but people doing the digging and saying bush did 9/11 are people whose lives are in dissarray, Sure I humor them in real life where my opinion has consequences, im a keyboard warrior online, and call people out on their ******** . Both sides are full of jackasses who are wastes of space.

One side is too trusting of the government, while the other wouldnt trust the power button on their remote to actually turn on the tv, instead turn on 32 million cameras watching them from every conceivable angle (over exaggeration, I know) and I cant humor them, I just honestly cant. When someone is so considerably stupid that they think soccer is made by Satan because it starts with S, it makes me think they lack the capability to be anything but an idiot.
And I call them as such.

While those who blindly trust our government do need to think a little, not everything the government does for the good of the united states, instead its for their own wallets. Now, not every person in the government is like that, there are some trying to fix America, its just got a long way to go.

My official stance is to sit in the chair watching all of this and laugh, throw peanuts (and then grenades) and call names, because I honestly think both sides need to shut up, grow up, get a conscious and handle their own life.

You made me chuckle mr anon, too scared to type it with an account.
Seems I struck a nerve with you bud, Did I hit close to home with you being an idiot? Or was it the fact that your life is in shambles because either you, or your parents poor decisions with money.

I know about fema camps, Ive seen more blood and gore than you have, I can guarantee that, and you really honestly believe that we have had an epidemic so bad that we have had FEMA camps lately? And transporting prisoners by train isnt a crime. Body bins are unsanitary and frowned upon.

And I dont have everything figured out little one, I have enough knowledge and common sense to know that a majority of conspiracy theorists are literal ******* retards.

You sound like youve got another problem bud, you cant take your own life seriously? That's dissapointing bud, Because life can be great, it can be amazing and it can be crap, your choices lead you to where your life ends up, and if you think its a joke, then you must have made some really **** decisions. So I cant really take you seriously, also, I dont like watching the news, its too biased and doesnt show the full picture of whats going on.

in gods name, amen.

Thanks. I'm not actually one of those conspiracy guys, but I like playing Devil's Advocate to get the best answer.

Playing devil's advocate is the best

Asking questions is always a good thing. The difference between the smart and the stupid is the ability to recognize the truth when it's presented.

The exterior was the main support for the towers the large white beams running top to bottom. The building was designed to take a hit from a Boeing 707 at cruising speed. 2 747 (larger planes) hit the towers near top speed. The building did do what it was supposed to do. It did give everyone below the impact time to escape and they nearly stayed standing. You have to think about how hard something the size of a plane hits at high speed then light it all on fire.

I assume you meant to type "plane" and are referencing 9/11.

The impact of the planes blew all the fireproofing off of the steel columns thereby allowing the structural steel beams to heat to the point that they failed.

if you got kneecapped would you fall?

Not straight down, that's for sure.

I would still not fall straight down, if my kneecaps were blown the **** out.


Neither would I fall straight down if my bones became loose and like rubber. I would fall to any side. For me to fall directly down, I would need much more to happen, like all my inmates and bones disappear.



I don't care much for your silly 9/11 fights, but faulty science is faulty science.




There are some very specific, and virtually impossible cases where I could potentially fall straight down from losing my knee caps. However, let's not extort to faulty logic and bad science to project a wrong view.

It would be extremely painful.

you're a big guy

For you.

Alright, you got yourself kneecapped. Now what's the next step of your master plan?

Crashing this plane