REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

Brilliant - I just Googled '9/11 conspiracy theories' on an all-web search, and got Wikipedia's list of several, all of which are popularly enshrined in the Serendipity websites. It's worth just doing that to get the hit where structural engineers debunk the 'WTC blown up' theories.

Headstrong, you say you don't subscribe to the wilder theories, but it seems plain that you do. Are you a construction engineer, qualified to decide that the way the towers came down was 'wrong'? They don't implode - to implode would mean that the walls fell inwards. They don't, they're clearly seen falling outwards. The floors fall, as you'd kinda expect floors to do, straight down. What else would you expect them to do - fly outwards?

The fact is, we have either seen film of buildings being bombed, or brought down in controlled demolitions, where they USUALLY, but not always, fall straight down. The thing about a controlled demolition is that the charges vary from floor to floor in order to prevent blow-out of external walls, yet in the case of the WTC there is clearly blow-out. The other scenario is in bombing, where everything depends upon the angle and explosive force of the bomb (or missile) as to how the buildings explode.

<blockquote data-quote="krizon" data-source="post: 2087236" data-attributes="member: 64950">Brilliant - I just Googled &#039;9/11 conspiracy theories&#039; on an all-web search, and got Wikipedia&#039;s list of several, all of which are popularly enshrined in the Serendipity websites.&nbsp; It&#039;s worth just doing that to get the hit where structural engineers debunk the &#039;WTC blown up&#039; theories.Headstrong, you say you don&#039;t subscribe to the wilder theories, but it seems plain that you do.&nbsp; Are you a construction engineer, qualified to decide that the way the towers came down was &#039;wrong&#039;?&nbsp; They don&#039;t implode - to implode would mean that the walls fell inwards.&nbsp; They don&#039;t, they&#039;re clearly seen falling outwards.&nbsp; The floors fall, as you&#039;d kinda expect floors to do, straight down.&nbsp; What else would you expect them to do - fly outwards?The fact is, we have either seen film of buildings being bombed, or brought down in controlled demolitions, where they USUALLY, but not always, fall straight down.&nbsp; The thing about a controlled demolition is that the charges vary from floor to floor in order to prevent blow-out of external walls, yet in the case of the WTC there is clearly blow-out.&nbsp; The other scenario is in bombing, where everything depends upon the angle and explosive force of the bomb (or missile) as to how the buildings explode.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="krizon, post: 2087236, member: 64950"] Brilliant - I just Googled '9/11 conspiracy theories' on an all-web search, and got Wikipedia's list of several, all of which are popularly enshrined in the Serendipity websites. It's worth just doing that to get the hit where structural engineers debunk the 'WTC blown up' theories. Headstrong, you say you don't subscribe to the wilder theories, but it seems plain that you do. Are you a construction engineer, qualified to decide that the way the towers came down was 'wrong'? They don't implode - to implode would mean that the walls fell inwards. They don't, they're clearly seen falling outwards. The floors fall, as you'd kinda expect floors to do, straight down. What else would you expect them to do - fly outwards? The fact is, we have either seen film of buildings being bombed, or brought down in controlled demolitions, where they USUALLY, but not always, fall straight down. The thing about a controlled demolition is that the charges vary from floor to floor in order to prevent blow-out of external walls, yet in the case of the WTC there is clearly blow-out. The other scenario is in bombing, where everything depends upon the angle and explosive force of the bomb (or missile) as to how the buildings explode. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?