A 34-story building collapse into its own footprint in Brazil

[alienentity]

Another video from Reuters in English

 

[WildCat]

It will be interesting to find out what the engineering investigation reveals.

My knee-jerk guess is that the concrete wasn't the correct mix, or wasn't allowed to cure long enough before they built more on top of it.

 

[achimspok]

Would you agree that the building did the expected?

 

[TruthersLie]

Yup, looks like it fell largely onto its footprint. Just like WTC7. This is a shame. Maybe they should have used steel construction.

I thought a building that falls onto its own footprint is a sure sign of a classic CD.

So this was CD too, right?

People even heard explosions. CD, CD, CD. Inside jobby job. Someone must have "made out like a bandit" too.

 

[achimspok]

I thought a building that falls onto its own footprint is a sure sign of a classic CD.

So this was CD too, right?

People even heard explosions. CD, CD, CD. Inside jobby job. Someone must have "made out like a bandit" too.

BS, the building toppled over a fell sideways. The entire thread has the false name and no moron noticed it. Watch the hand:

 

[Carlos]

BS, the building toppled over a fell sideways. The entire thread has the false name and no moron noticed it. Watch the hand:
[qimg]http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/743/footprintc.gif[/qimg]

BS

This guy said: I was on the computer using the internet when the building tilted forward and backward, so the bases began to crack and break then the whole building came down.

"forward"

Watch his hand after 0:25, when he was referring to the collapse.

"the bases began to crack and break then the whole building came down"



The images are quite clear: the building did not toppled over.

Watch the pile of debris.

 

[timhau]

BS, the building toppled over a fell sideways. The entire thread has the false name and no moron noticed it. Watch the hand:

Yes, the hand is obviously the most important piece of evidence here. That's how you get hard data from collapsing buildings -- by the careful study of gestures.

 

[TruthersLie]

BS, the building toppled over a fell sideways. The entire thread has the false name and no moron noticed it. Watch the hand:
[qimg]http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/743/footprintc.gif[/qimg]

Oh so it collapsed even MORE like wtc7. It isn't helping your case.

 

[Bell]

To be fair, the likes of Jammo and Red Ibis think no planes hit the WTC towers either........but we don't have video of the collapse so there probably was a plane/cruise missile/DEW

No planers aside...

Truthers claim the World Trade Center should not have collapsed, even after jets slammed into the towers. But then they bring up WTC7... how it collapsed even though NO jet crashed into it.

I guess truthers can have it both ways.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Another video from Reuters in English

Reuters say it was only 25 stories high......is this evidence of a media coverup

They also said it fell because of wind and rain......thats ridiculous, if wind and rain could cause a collapse, none of my native Scotland would still be standing!

Obvious Gov. coverup of CD

 

[achimspok]

Yes, the hand is obviously the most important piece of evidence here. That's how you get hard data from collapsing buildings -- by the careful study of gestures.

No, the headline! It's always the headline. If you cannot trust the headline what can you trust at all?

 

[alienentity]

No, the headline! It's always the headline. If you cannot trust the headline what can you trust at all?
[qimg]http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/4804/pic00015b.png[/qimg]

Fair enough, perhaps some pieces of it fell outside the footprint. So it was even more like the WTC towers then.

I wonder if any debris was laterally ejected onto adjacent buildings? I think it was.

 

[Bell]

This collapse does proof one thing: We don't need a fore for a building to collapse. So let's drop that discussion.

 

[alienentity]

Here's an AP page with images from the Jan 2011 collapse of a 32-story building in Belem.

The debris pile is quite compact, the ground is fairly level.

http://www.apimages.com/Search.aspx?st=det&sort=date&ids=BRAZIL%20-%20BUILDING%20-%20COLLAPSE&showact=events&prds=10135&intv=3d&sh=10&kwstyle=or&adte=1296478365&pagez=60&cfasstyle=AND&

 

[Dave Rogers]

We don't need a fore for a building to collapse.

You think the Twin Towers were knocked down by golf balls?!?

Dave

 

[Bell]

You think the Twin Towers were knocked down by golf balls?!?

Dave

Fire, I meant to say fire.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

No planers aside...

Truthers claim the World Trade Center should not have collapsed, even after jets slammed into the towers. But then they bring up WTC7... how it collapsed even though NO jet crashed into it.

I guess truthers can have it both ways.

Actually, on their face, those two claims are one of the few consistencies in their fantasy. If you believe that even a building struck by an airplane should not collapse, then it's completely logical to assume that a building not struck by an airplane should also not collapse.

Of course, in the case of WTCs 1, 2, and 7, you need to also believe that fire has no meaningful effect on the buildings. And, in general, that buildings can collapse in no other way than intentional demolition.

So, it's not smart—it ignores too much—but it is consistent.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

BS, the building toppled over a fell sideways. The entire thread has the false name and no moron noticed it. Watch the hand:
[qimg]http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/743/footprintc.gif[/qimg]

You told us to watch the hand, I'm watching it.

Oh wait, that's called handwaving! Kind of like you kooks who handwave the evidence that 9/11 wasn't an "Inside Job".

 

[Dragon37]

Wow those are some skinny buildings!

 

[Bell]

Wow those are some skinny buildings!

Trump World Tower looks like it could have toppled over if Cory Lidle's plane had hit that one instead.