• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Look at this collapse

another useless thread.

Docker, why don't you post some more pictures of Manhattan so that us natives can debunk them?
 
between 95 and 99. Go ahead, tell me that isn't bowing. I dare you. I double dare you.
 
Last edited:
Living in manhattan makes you an expert on building collapses? Maybe I should move there.

it surely dones't make you an expert since you dont live there.

and thanks for quoting me (out of context btw) in your sig. Its not appreciated one bit.
 
I see a man with a good body which you envy.

Hey look his number two tell! Sound familiar? This guy sure sounds like, the new improved version of someone banned from here. Hmm, same hero, same pet phrases...
 
There is a small amount of bowing. Now tell me how that bowing leads to the huge explosions shown in my photo.
 
I trust you have seen the bowing by now? Why isn't that building about to collapse? It's still burning. How much more sagging can those trusses take before they go?
 
There is a small amount of bowing. Now tell me how that bowing leads to the huge explosions shown in my photo.

cameras can lie; anyone who's used a telephoto lens can tell you how much is loss by taking pictures with it.
 
Hey look his number two tell! Sound familiar? This guy sure sounds like, the new improved version of someone banned from here. Hmm, same hero, same pet phrases...

Show your proof or retract your assertion.
 

Ok, look again at the above picture.

Now look at Jones in this video:

http://www.911blogger.com/files/images/showbiztonight2_2.jpg

Compare the chiseled features on the above picture with the real Jones in the video clip. The real Alex Jones has a much rounder face indicating a much higher body fat content.

The only weightlifting the real Alex Jones does is burritos and beer mugs. :p
 
I trust you have seen the bowing by now? Why isn't that building about to collapse? It's still burning. How much more sagging can those trusses take before they go?

At worst the top portion should break of. That beautifully vertical demolition wave would not occur.
 
docker, remove my quote from your sig. Its out of context, and like a CT'er you quote mined it to suit your conclusion. REmove it, as you are presenting it as it means a totally different thing.
 
Look at this simple gravity driven collapse. The steel simply weakened. There are no explosions involved. The concrete wasn't turned to dust.
I agree. There are no explosions in the photo. Not all the concrete turned to dust, but there sure was a lot of other material that did (although I am sure at least some of that dust is concrete). Gravity, in an atmosphere such as ours, could easily cause a plume of smoke and material to billow like that, even in a gravity-driven collapse. You can't see the steel from here, but knowing that the building was hit by a passenger jet full of fuel, I'd say it would be dang likely much of that steel must of weakened.

So, what's your point, again?


Oh, right, the elbow analogy. Well, that picture wasn't even a good photo of an elbow, anyway.
 
At worst the top portion should break of. That beautifully vertical demolition wave would not occur.

If there are no lateral forces being applied to the portion of building above the impact points, why would it "break of(sic)"?
 

Back
Top Bottom