Merged Core-led collapse and explosive demolition

ergo said:
So, Noah, could verinage have brought down the Twin Towers?
Click to expand...

Not in a million years.

Go back to your hat and pull something else out.
Ideally something that could survive the impact of a 757 going 500 miles per hour, and a massive fire that went unfought for an hour.


Aannnddddd.......

GO
 
NoahFence said:
Not in a million years.

Go back to your hat and pull something else out.
Ideally something that could survive the impact of a 757 going 500 miles per hour, and a massive fire that went unfought for an hour.


Aannnddddd.......

GO
Click to expand...
I wouldn't doubt the technique could (obviously it didn't). All you need to do is set a large enough section in motion and let gravity so the rest.
 
DGM said:
I wouldn't doubt the technique could (obviously it didn't). All you need to do is set a large enough section in motion and let gravity so the rest.
Click to expand...

Indeed. As long as you get by the whole aircraft impact thing. It's as if ergo and his kind think the impact should have a negligible affect on the building and its contents. Patently absurd.
 
Anyone else? Could the towers have been brought down by verinage?

EdX, over here, thinks the twin towers collapses looked like verinage. What say bedunkers?
 
And I have yet to see any bedunker actually source and refute a so-called "lie" by the truth movement, so that's just your ass talking.
Click to expand...

Eh... I just wanted to go back to a better time when ergo epic bailed -

Say, you STILL haven't commented on the fact that I DID source AND refute a lie. Wonder why....


Not too long ago you were harping on firefighters and their insistence they heard explosIONS as proof of exploSIVES....why the change of heart all of a sudden?
EdX, over here, thinks the twin towers collapses looked like verinage. What say bedunkers?
Click to expand...

Another similie taken literally? Come on. At least try to be a good troll.
 
I'm not sure even a moon-sized field or mountain of rubble, dropped from a height of 12 feet would entirely crush the WTC. No. If you had it coming down from a higher height, in a steady stream over a long period of time, we would certainly see some major damage. Total collapse? I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

:tr:
 
NoahFence said:
Another similie taken literally?
Click to expand...

I think you mean smiley. :)

I would be happy to hear about how you sourced and refuted someone's claim, but right now I'm interested in hearing about why verinage could not possibly take down the Twin Towers.
 
ergo said:
I think you mean smiley. :)

I would be happy to hear about how you sourced and refuted someone's claim, but right now I'm interested in hearing about why verinage could not possibly take down the Twin Towers.
Click to expand...

I already sourced and refuted the pyroclastic cloud claim. Here it is again:

wtc-dust-911.jpg


And the verinage is just as easy:
wtc-Impact_4.JPG



NOW -
Why are you changing from explosives to non-explosives? Where'd you get the new info that made you change your mind?
 
Bailing out is fine. I just wonder if it means that you've realized your ideological error as a bedunker, or you simply don't know how to answer the question.

Don't worry. We'll get back to this. Next time you appear.
 
What does it matter IF verinage COUL BE used to take down the twins, it WASN'T used.

P.S.
Shotguns
 
What I don't get is why you don't answer direct questions, and ignore posts that answer your questions. That's what I don't get.
 
In a sense, one of the basic principlles behind verinage was at work in the towers. You over-load the key structural elements on one floor and you take out all of them, all the way to the ground, unstoppably.

The key elements in most demolitions by verinage are the bearing walls. The bearing walls in a normal building hold the floors up.

In the towers, the floors are guywires holding the walls upright. You break the floors and the walls start leaning outward. Pour a bit of rubble into the space that they enclose and they get shoved outward.

Why is this hard to grasp?
 
leftysergeant said:
In a sense, one of the basic principlles behind verinage was at work in the towers. You over-load the key structural elements on one floor and you take out all of them, all the way to the ground, unstoppably.
Click to expand...

Only "in a sense"?

What other forces were at work in the Towers that are not present in verinage?
 
leftysergeant said:
In the towers, the floors are guywires holding the walls upright. You break the floors and the walls start leaning outward. Pour a bit of rubble into the space that they enclose and they get shoved outward.

Why is this hard to grasp?
Click to expand...

It's a plausible starting point, Lefty. Are there any papers written on this?
 
ergo said:
Anyone else? Could the towers have been brought down by verinage?

EdX, over here, thinks the twin towers collapses looked like verinage. What say bedunkers?
Click to expand...

I would agree that yes, one building that collapses, typically look like other buildings that collapse.

COULD the towers have been brought down by Verinage? I would say in THEORY, if you remove all the fire, and airplane impact, and people, I would assume it COULD, but, why not just crash a plane into it?
 
ergo said:
Anyone else? Could the towers have been brought down by verinage?
Click to expand...
I like how you ignore Noah.

EdX, over here, thinks the twin towers collapses looked like verinage. What say bedunkers?
Click to expand...
Equating "looked like" and "was" again. You know you can't quote-mine people who can actually read and correct you, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom