Why the burning tower in Britain never collapsed

[maryjane48]

i agree fully free but its a piece of a puzzle . whats the final picture is what im trying figure out .

[Ranger66]

You said,

“ several ton chunks of the central core being ejected 500 feet plus horizontaly .”
“ i can prove they were being ejected”
“massive steel beams, weighing 4 - 20 tons or more, were ejected horizontally as much as 520 feet.”

I asked for proof, you supplied deflection. I am not saying it could not happen, I am saying it did not happen. Put up your proof or go back to your comic books.

[maryjane48]

haha . thats your choice to believe it. the facts you dont know i gave you proof twice already tells me everything i need to know . ok anyone else want to try ? with proof ?? i will have to consider this poster as failed to provide evidence that steel beams did not get ejected horizontaly when even nist admits they did . they just made a implosible answer as to why , nist said the beams bent under load like plastic and shot out like if you took a piece of plastic in your fingers and bent it till it popped out .


get it now ranger ? nist admits the beams went the distance the debris field was mapped not by truthers but by the govt themselves . so if you doubt me you also doubt nist and american govt position .

[atenbacon]

haha . thats your choice to believe it. the facts you dont know i gave you proof twice already tells me everything i need to know . ok anyone else want to try ? with proof ?? i will have to consider this poster as failed to provide evidence that steel beams did not get ejected horizontaly when even nist admits they did . they just made a implosible answer as to why , nist said the beams bent under load like plastic and shot out like if you took a piece of plastic in your fingers and bent it till it popped out .


get it now ranger ? nist admits the beams went the distance the debris field was mapped not by truthers but by the govt themselves . so if you doubt me you also doubt nist and american govt position .

I'm with Ranger on this one. The only evidence you have displayed is that our education system as a whole definitively fails for some.

It is kind of cute how you show a picture of a building collapsing that has had 40-50 floors of debris (Of the 110 floors) also falling and equate that to holding a piece of plastic in your fingers and bending it until it popped out. Maybe add two tones of similar plastic falling onto your fingers and you would get a similar result to 225000000 Kilograms of debris falling (at near free fall speeds per your "opinion")

Durrrrr...

[maryjane48]

hardly . newtons law of motion that describes momentum is accepted reality . if you have a updated theory then by all means show the world your new laws of physics . its not me your arguing against . its nist and fema

[atenbacon]

LOL... Newtons law of motion, and physics in general explains it exactly.. It's like talking to a child... but one that is not smart. Go to school.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QBv2CFTSWU

[maryjane48]

well its sad that you claim to know all this yet still see green sky when its blue . and still not you ranger or anyone else including nist or fema of why multi ton steel beams came to be where they were found by them and failed to explain the near freefall speeds of the implosions .

the score is still me 1 you zero .

[Dizzy1]

Some people need to be banned from using terms such as "facts" and "proof".

[Ranger66]

“massive steel beams, weighing 4 - 20 tons or more, were ejected horizontally as much as 520 feet.”

OK lets keep this simple. Supply a picture of a 4 ton plus steel beam on a building roof top and a picture of where it came from.

[Ranger66]

Also could you post the official document where NIST confirmed that tower one or two fell at near freefall?

“From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.”

[peaceseeker]

[Ranger66]

So once again nothing. deflection is all you have.

[maryjane48]

i gave you facts and figures from nist . if you dont believe your own side then whats your point ? scores still me 1 you zero

[Ranger66]

You have provided no proof, you cannot supply a picture of what you said was easy to do. You cannot supply the NIST information about the freefall at buildings 1 and 2. Nothing so I will take your statement as factual incorrect.

“In a controlled demolition of a building, charges are placed so as to break the structure into pieces of manageable size for easy removal by truck. Thus, the steel columns were broken and ejected by explosive force.”

In a controlled demolition the building falls into its footprint not send steel beams weighing 4 to 20 tons into a 1000 foot circumference. That’s the problem with just making stuff up, you get it wrong.

[Passion4Truth]

LOL... Newtons law of motion, and physics in general explains it exactly.

2,900 Architects & Engineers disagree with NIST's official explanation of the collapse.That's a bit of a Red Flag, don't you think?