Tranqvillia - Remembering the past

Zebonka12 wrote:

Let's take the temperature of the fires in the Twin Towers for example.  It has been established that, in places, the fire reached 1832F.  That's an actual, irrefutable fact.

===============

Right, and steel burns at about 2750 degress.  Your above link states, "their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength."  Assuming this is true, it doesn't explain why the building collapsed in real time.  For this to happen, there must be no resistance below it.  How can an airplane hitting the 78th floor affect the structure of the bottom of the building to such an extent?

Sir GH wrote: Zebonka12 wrote:

Let's take the temperature of the fires in the Twin Towers for example.  It has been established that, in places, the fire reached 1832F.  That's an actual, irrefutable fact.

===============

Right, and steel burns at about 2750 degress.  Your above link states, "their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength."  Assuming this is true, it doesn't explain why the building collapsed in real time.  For this to happen, there must be no resistance below it.  How can an airplane hitting the 78th floor affect the structure of the bottom of the building to such an extent? ==========================================================

Exactly , as i said earlier 75 % of the building was unharmed so its impossible for it to fall like that. Zebonka is just one naive little boy.  Cant believe that he follows that official fairytale story website that "totally debunked" all other theories of what really happend.

BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE.....FFS......

inu-liger wrote: BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE.....FFS......
=============================================================================================

It is on topic.....they're "remembering the past" lol.  Hope you liked that one.  It made me smirk.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Thistleboy 1980 wrote: [/QUOTENAME] inu-liger wrote: BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE.....FFS...... ============================================================================================= It is on topic.....they're "remembering the past" lol.  Hope you liked that one.  It made me smirk. [/QUOTE]

Best post in this thread, ever ;-P

Back to the topic, Tranqvillia is bringing REAL music back again! :D

"Assuming this is true, it doesn't explain why the building collapsed in real time."

Sure it does.  30 levels of skyscraper falls down rather abruptly (once it can no longer be supported by the fire damaged parts of the building), and that kind of stress is just meant to be withstood by a structure that was never designed to put up with that kind of cascade failure?  Is there an appropriate speed that a massive building should collapse upon itself?  I guess they should've done it slower then.

"Exactly , as i said earlier 75 % of the building was unharmed so its impossible for it to fall like that. "

Sure it's possible.  It happened.

"For this to happen, there must be no resistance below it.  "

Bunkum.  That is not how it works at all.  http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

"How can an airplane hitting the 78th floor affect the structure of the bottom of the building to such an extent? "

If you are of an even remotely scientific mind, look at the math of it and you'll see that this 'free fall' nonsense is an ill-conceived fallacy.  What annoys me the most is that these answers are in plain sight for people to take a look at, and they ignore them.

"Back to the topic, Tranqvillia is bringing REAL music back again! :D "

A lot of music is 'real music', you're just paying too much attention to the 'music industry' which is something else altogether.  In any case, your sunny attitude about the songs has been a lovely change!  I still think a singer would help things though.

Sir GH wrote:

How can an airplane hitting the 78th floor affect the structure of the bottom of the building to such an extent?
==========================

Perfect example of what I'm talking about.   There is nothing to indicate the bottom of the building was compromised, and everything to indicate that the floors collapsed one by one or in sections, in sequence.  Every single photo and every single video confirms that the towers collapsed at the damage points and took down each floor after that. So whether the building was blown up by the government or destabilized to the point of  collapse by catastrophic damage and raging inferno, it didn't happen because the bottom of the structure gave way. Your question is completely irrelevant.

Zebonka said it perfectly: it is possible, because it happened.  It's possible that a building can collapse at near free fall speed without having the bottom of it compromised because we all saw it happen.   The collapse of the two towers looked nothing like traditional controlled demolition and sounded  nothing like traditional controlled demolition, as any controlled demolition video on YouTube will show you.  The variables are so numerous and the processes so complex that 99.9% of us are in no position to confidently assess the physics of that collapse.  All we know for sure is that whatever happened, the collapsing floors could offer little resistance to the massive and accumulating force being applied to them.  The average person who pretends to know that this could necessarily *only* happen through sinister forces is generally going to be full of crap.

"The collapse of the two towers looked nothing like traditional controlled demolition and sounded  nothing like traditional controlled demolition"

You said it.  I was trying to compose another reply earlier but I gave up because I hate posting lots of things in a row, but basically I was watching a lot of *actual* controlled demolitions and it's completely effing different.

thanks zebonka, actually we will have singing from now on, we all will sing.

Awesome!  Thing about singing is that it only gets better if you keep at it.