Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
- SassySasquatch
- Board Meister
- Posts: 673
- Joined: Mar 26th, 2011, 6:47 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
And the 1945 aircraft accident in which a B-25 Mitchell bomber crashed into the 78/79 floors of the Empire State Building.
"...always keep your mind and heart open." - Henry Fonda
-
- Walks on Forum Water
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
SassySasquatch wrote:And the 1945 aircraft accident in which a B-25 Mitchell bomber crashed into the 78/79 floors of the Empire State Building.
You're actually comparing 2 aircraft with one that weighs 10 times as much as the other, uses a more combustible fuel with a higher burning temperature and carried more of it than the weight of the other aircraft and its fuel and then hitting a building at least double the speed as the other aircraft? You're comparing a rifle to a tank.
No wonder some of you don't believe the truth, you don't even understand simple physics.
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 6808
- Joined: Nov 11th, 2008, 4:47 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
^^^^^ and the engineering of the WTC was far superior to that of the Empire State building. A plane flying into it was a scenario that was considered when designing the WTC.
From what I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but the type of plane they planned for flying into the WTC was not that much smaller than the ones that flew into it.
ETA: sweet pic by the way.
From what I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but the type of plane they planned for flying into the WTC was not that much smaller than the ones that flew into it.
ETA: sweet pic by the way.
Last edited by Static on Jan 14th, 2016, 3:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Walks on Forum Water
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
Static wrote:^^^^^ and the engineering of the WTC was far superior to that of the Empire Stat building. A plane flying into I was a scenario that was considered when designing the WTC.
From what I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but the type of plane they planned for flying into the WTC was not that much smaller than the ones that flew into it.
ETA: sweet pic by the way.
I'll disagree with the notion that the WTC was built better than the Empire State for the simple reasoning that things were built a lot better then than now despite today's safety standards. Given the fact that the Empire State used a lot more concrete than the WTC adds to its stronger foundation.
Also, while the WTC were designed to survive the impact of a B707 (which they more or less did with a B767) the designers didn't take into account the ensuing fire potential
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
- averagejoe
- Buddha of the Board
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Nov 23rd, 2007, 10:50 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
Just a reminder that WTC Building #7 wasn't hit by a jet......
Ecclesiastes 10:2 A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left.
Thor Heyerdahl Says: “Our lack of knowledge about our own past is appalling.
Thor Heyerdahl Says: “Our lack of knowledge about our own past is appalling.
- averagejoe
- Buddha of the Board
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Nov 23rd, 2007, 10:50 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
No debris hit or damaged the roof top WTC building #7......from Popular Mechanics photo.
Ecclesiastes 10:2 A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left.
Thor Heyerdahl Says: “Our lack of knowledge about our own past is appalling.
Thor Heyerdahl Says: “Our lack of knowledge about our own past is appalling.
-
- Walks on Forum Water
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
averagejoe wrote:Just a reminder that WTC Building #7 wasn't hit by a jet......
No one said it was
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
-
- Walks on Forum Water
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
averagejoe wrote:No debris hit or damaged the roof top WTC building #7......from Popular Mechanics photo.
Who said anything about the roof?
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 6808
- Joined: Nov 11th, 2008, 4:47 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
Dizzy, the WTC was built 30 years later. Do you no think technology and engineering advanced considerably? Concrete would have been used if it was better.
- peaceseeker
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 4000
- Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 10:27 am
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
Static wrote:^^^^^ and the engineering of the WTC was far superior to that of the Empire Stat building. A plane flying into I was a scenario that was considered when designing the WTC.
From what I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but the type of plane they planned for flying into the WTC was not that much smaller than the ones that flew into it.
ETA: sweet pic by the way.
Dizzy1 wrote:I'll disagree with the notion that the WTC was built better than the Empire State for the simple reasoning that things were built a lot better then than now despite today's safety standards. Given the fact that the Empire State used a lot more concrete than the WTC adds to its stronger foundation.
Also, while the WTC were designed to survive the impact of a B707 (which they more or less did with a B767) the designers didn't take into account the ensuing fire potential
Actually the buildings were built to withstand impacts from a jet airliner...listen to the words from a WTC architect...
Those ain't toothpicks being hurled upward and outward for hundreds of feet...they're 30-foot multi-ton steel beams!
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
~ John Lennon
- peaceseeker
- Lord of the Board
- Posts: 4000
- Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 10:27 am
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
Jlabute wrote:Well, it was damaged by heavy debris, and the sprinklers were not fully functional. Did anyone hear explosives?
The Dubai hotel had working sprinklers which stopped the fire from spreading internally.
Surrounding WTC buildings (3,4,5 & 6) suffered much greater damage than WTC7 but remained standing...go figure. Look at the gaping hole in building 6 but still standing!
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
~ John Lennon
-
- Walks on Forum Water
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
Static wrote:Dizzy, the WTC was built 30 years later. Do you no think technology and engineering advanced considerably? Concrete would have been used if it was better.
No I don't. Look at houses today compared to those built in the early 20th Century. They'll still be standing in 100 years - doubt modern houses will
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
-
- Walks on Forum Water
- Posts: 10778
- Joined: Feb 12th, 2011, 1:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
peaceseeker wrote:Actually the buildings were built to withstand impacts from a jet airliner...listen to the words from a WTC
And they did
Nobody wants to hear your opinion. They just want to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.
- goatboy
- Guru
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Feb 26th, 2008, 8:56 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
I don't why I'm going to bother, but if 9-11 was not real, what was the end game for whomever put it on and why not go for something far simpler and accomplish the same goal? This simple question and observation negates all the "theories" out there and is what stands out to me as being the biggest hole in any conspiracy theory.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 6808
- Joined: Nov 11th, 2008, 4:47 pm
Re: Dubai Hotel vs WTC 7
goatboy wrote:I don't why I'm going to bother, but if 9-11 was not real, what was the end game for whomever put it on and why not go for something far simpler and accomplish the same goal? This simple question and observation negates all the "theories" out there and is what stands out to me as being the biggest hole in any conspiracy theory.
War is very profitable for America.