|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: How long have you been playing seriously? | |||
| 20yrs+ |
   
|
4 | 1.21% |
| 15-20yrs |
  
|
2 | 0.61% |
| 10-15yrs |
  
|
1 | 0.30% |
| 8-10yrs |
  
|
1 | 0.30% |
| 5-8yrs |
  
|
4 | 1.21% |
| 4-5yrs |
  
|
8 | 2.42% |
| 3-4yrs |
|
19 | 5.76% |
| 2-3yrs |
|
80 | 24.24% |
| 1-2yrs |
|
141 | 42.73% |
| less than 1 year |
|
70 | 21.21% |
| Voters: 330. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#181
08-29-2007, 04:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So if the floors started coming down, why is there no central steel structure still standing today? [/ QUOTE ] Do you really think you are qualified to argue whether or not an airplane crash could have caused the towers to collapse? [/ QUOTE ] stfu amirite? 
|
|
#182
08-29-2007, 04:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So if the floors started coming down, why is there no central steel structure still standing today? [/ QUOTE ] Do you really think you are qualified to argue whether or not an airplane crash could have caused the towers to collapse? [/ QUOTE ] stfu amirite? [/ QUOTE ] no
|
|
#183
08-29-2007, 04:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So if the floors started coming down, why is there no central steel structure still standing today? [/ QUOTE ] Do you really think you are qualified to argue whether or not an airplane crash could have caused the towers to collapse? [/ QUOTE ]Are you? Is there an explanation out there for why the building basically just crumbled apart? I would imagine, as I said earlier, a physist and a structural engineer are probably the only people qualified to explain this.
|
|
#184
08-29-2007, 04:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
Are you? [/ QUOTE ] nope [ QUOTE ] Is there an explanation out there for why the building basically just crumbled apart? I would imagine, as I said earlier, a physist and a structural engineer are probably the only people qualified to explain this. [/ QUOTE ] Surely someone qualified already explained what caused the collapse
|
|
#185
08-29-2007, 04:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Are you? [/ QUOTE ] nope [ QUOTE ] Is there an explanation out there for why the building basically just crumbled apart? I would imagine, as I said earlier, a physist and a structural engineer are probably the only people qualified to explain this. [/ QUOTE ] Surely someone qualified already explained what caused the collapse [/ QUOTE ] There are many professional structural engineers and demolition experts saying it was a controlled process. So these facts alone don't help us. Seems like you STILL have to do some evaluation for yourself.
|
|
#186
08-29-2007, 04:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
Stop calling me Surely.
Seriously, I don't know. One would assume. I thought most of the explanations were how the steel on those floors were compromised and how the top portion of the buildiong fell. The air between the collapsed floors caused the "explosion" look. But why did the entire building just collapse like it did?
|
|
#187
08-29-2007, 04:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
There are many professional structural engineers and demolition experts saying it was a controlled process [/ QUOTE ] what % of all structural engineers and demolition experts do those who say it was a controlled process make up? If some say it was a controlled process and some and say it wasn’t, how can you be so sure that it was? Is it not the same as being sure that there was no conspiracy? It seems like you have a predetermined conclusion in your mind about what exactly happened and you are just finding evidence which support your case. [ QUOTE ] But why did the entire building just collapse like it did? [/ QUOTE ] Because of the weight of the floors above the impact area? Seems plausible to me
|
|
#188
08-29-2007, 04:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
Because of the weight of the floors above the impact area? Seems plausible to me [/ QUOTE ] But thats assuming the amount of weight above the impact area was able to generate enough force coming down onto the remaining building, crushing another, what, 75 floors? I dunno I guess its possible. But then the floors above would have to hit perfectly square, wouldn't it?
|
|
#189
08-29-2007, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Because of the weight of the floors above the impact area? Seems plausible to me [/ QUOTE ] But thats assuming the amount of weight above the impact area was able to generate enough force coming down onto the remaining building, crushing another, what, 75 floors? I dunno I guess its possible. But then the floors above would have to hit perfectly square, wouldn't it? [/ QUOTE ] No. Remember, the critical points of failure on each floor were probably the angle clips on the floor joists. Each floor failed individually from the weight of the floors above it falling on it. A square hit was not required to overwhelm the angle clips. 1/2 WTC failed from the top down. Controlled demolitions cause failures from the bottom up
|
|
#190
08-29-2007, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction?
I have 2 question for the people that say the 2 towers were taken down by explosive. In all my looking around I have not found any answer to either.
1 ) How do you attach explosives to load-bearing I-beams in such a way that they stay in place during the initial violent explosions when the planes hit at 450+ MPH ? 2) What kind of explosive and remote detination device was used that could withstand the 1000+ fahrenheit fire for 55 minutes without cooking off ?
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
