alot of crazy **** happened that day 2 planes knocked out 3 buildings for gods sake, physics took a day off
does it matter where the beams were from? where did the energy come from to fire the beams(regardless of where they were from) 70 metres?
to fire the beams? how do you expect beams and debris from a falling building to come down? stacked up one on top of the other? you're sounding like someone who isn't quite sure just how big those buildings were. i saw them in 2000 and loosechange clips on youtube doesn't do them justice
Eddiee, can you not lay this to rest. Thousands of people died a horrific death, broadcast on TV for millions of people to watch around the world. That day changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, can you not just leave it at that? The families and friends of the people who died then have to constantly put up with little ****s like you, saying 'ooh, well, the building must have killed your wife like THIS because of blah blah blah'. Give it a ****ing rest, you utter dick.
[video=youtube;cFz9TZUyIZk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFz9TZUyIZk[/video] all of the beams and debris are coming from where the tower has failed ie from the impact zone. the top of the tower is in tact even as it's coming down at an angle.
I was on top of one of them in 1999 explosive energy was evident, where did it come from if not from strategically placed explosives?
I'm sure I've heard all this before somewhere. For the life of me I can't remember where! Can anyone help me remember where I might have seen this exact same argument happen?
course you were sweetheart errr how about the sheer weight of dozens of floors on weakened and sagging columns and floors?
did you expect them to fall immediately? they were actually made to withstand the IMPACT of a jetliner. so they did their job. what they couldnt do was deal with what was to follow and the stress put on the building. i dont even know why im repsonding. you never get through to these ****ing complete cocks as soon as one thing is explained away up pops some other nonsense. you're a waste of a ****
weakened and sagging columns? there is no evidence of this other than slightly at the impact zone not nearly enough to compromise the structure in such a way that it would explode into dust, you would have seen big chunks of bulding falling everywhere if your theory was right. I was up the tower in 1999 ive got the pictures to prove it
they did their job read that back to yourself jordan you are suggesting that the architect built them to withstand a plane crash but not for "what followed" what did he think to himself then, the plane would crash then after the initial impact everything would return to normal?
theres numerous pics on that vid showing the outer colums bowing, and is really evident at 2:20 [video=youtube;bMZ-nkYr46w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w&list=FL36bw-lp7VpB0bcYBqiDd1A&index=3&feature=plpp_video[/video]
or perhaps he never actually envisioned such an event taking place? it was said by the architect (ill try find a link) that they're capable of taking the impact
theres numerous pics on that vid showing the outer colums bowing, and is really evident at 2:20 as I said, minimal evidence directly at the impact zone this does not begin to explain why the building eploded into dust
