|
March 10th, 2006 | #281 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: S.E.PA
Posts: 1,626
|
Structural steel has to be covered with something to make it aesthetically pleasing, or out of site. My guess is the covering is required to be fireproof to avoid the structural steel uprights from becoming flame-propogating columns/chimneys.
__________________
KILL YOUR TV! Or at least stop taking it more seriously than a goldfish. |
March 10th, 2006 | #282 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,370
|
Quote:
ETA: I refuted your childish arguments in numerous other posts. Apparently facts, logic and science mean nothing to any of you. From here on out, I refute your moronic bullshit with equally moronic bullshit. I say that the towers were hit with photon torpedoes. Did you know that William Shatner and Leonard Nemoy are both jews? |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #283 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Soon to be Oregon
Posts: 1,069
|
Quote:
|
|
March 10th, 2006 | #284 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,370
|
Quote:
Bad piston, don't you know you can't melt from some silly old gasoline fire. |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #285 | |
Doubts the official story
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Pineywoods
Posts: 4,974
|
Makes sense to a kike I suppose.
Have you seen the video yet that the thread is about, Fizzie? No? Yet you continue to post your remarks on this thread. To an open-minded gentile that's incomprehensibly stupid.
Quote:
Agree completely. The responses from Team Bush has gone past desperate and entered incomprehensible. |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #286 | |
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
Quote:
Take a look at these photos of the burnt hulk of the Windsor highrise fire in Madrid. http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #287 | |
Friendly
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,778
|
Quote:
My knowledge of steel and temperatures and stesses is small enough that I honestly believed the government story was possible. Then I read more about building #7. Some windows knocked out and some very small fires. No fuel. Boom Boom Boom and it fell to pieces like the towers did. Fissile, people are learning more about this attack. There's not much you can do about it. It really was an attack. No doubt about that. |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #288 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,370
|
Quote:
|
|
March 10th, 2006 | #289 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,370
|
Jet fuel can't damage steel? Somebody should have told the Germans.
Quote:
|
|
March 10th, 2006 | #290 |
Friendly
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,778
|
He's very interested in this. That's for sure. That's why he's here. I have no doubts that he's read and watched all that we have. There's a dozen reasons why a plane and it's fuel can't make skyscrapers like the WTC towers just crumble to bits. He knows that.
Even if all that information is ignored, he's stuck on building #7. He won't even mention it. |
March 10th, 2006 | #291 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 934
|
I'm not really interested in this, since I know the story the government told doesn't hold any water and I know who controls the government, so that is enough, but I suppose I can pick up some slack.
Joe, if it is falling faster that means something must have applied some force to it making its downwards momentum greater than that accounted for by gravity, say some explosions for example. Fissile you keep on comparing apples with oranges. Anymore moving parts you going to compare to static structures or is this all part of your now infamous Star Trek defense? Johnny Cochran, you silly incomprehensable old blackman, come back all is forgiven! Oh yes and I'm off to bed everybody, so I wish you a good day or good night where ever you are. Catch you all later.
__________________
Cursing braces; blessing releases. Last edited by Cthulhu; March 10th, 2006 at 09:49 AM. |
March 10th, 2006 | #292 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 446
|
Fissle,
You came back but you STILL haven't told us WHY you believe the crashing of the planes caused the buildings to collapse? WHY do you believe that? HUH? Go through it step by step with us, ok? Please don't respond with MORE QUESTIONS, just your detailed scenario, unless you have NO IDEA yourself. Ih which case, why do you beleive something you cannot explain logically to others here? Are you swallowing something on BLIND FAITH? Tsk, tsk. Snuffy, what is your theory? Did the planes crashing cuase the collapse -or what? Do you even have a theory? Get specific, ok? Contumacyman |
March 10th, 2006 | #293 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,302
|
Quote:
The reason? It was ejected by the massive explosions the the centre of the building. You'd have to blind not to see it, unless of course, you don't want to see it. Or if you're one of the three stooges, you not only don't want to see it, you don't want anyone else to see it. See? |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #294 | |
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
Quote:
also was WTC7 structurally damaged? |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #295 |
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
the most basic premise that can be reasonably accepted is that it was a demolition that caused all three collapses.
that doesnt tell you who set the charges, or why, or whether or not the planes were hijacked or not, just that the buildings were demolished. We bring questions and ask for a decent chance to investigate the physical evidence. Which in arsons and transportation accidents is always preserved, right? Ooops-- Jewliani sent the stuff off to the landfill, and sold the scrap to the Chinks for recycling 2 weeks later. Evidence was destroyed. Destruction of evidence in court, if it can be proven, establishes some very bad inferences against the one who "spoliates" the evidence. For obvious reasons. |
March 10th, 2006 | #296 |
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
Folks, opposition forum user "guy," an Israeli research assistant flunkie living in NYC, wants to chime in on this. Let's hear what he has to say.
http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=30411 the title of his thread is "why theologists should stay the fuck away from science." |
March 10th, 2006 | #297 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
March 10th, 2006 | #298 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: orlando, fl
Posts: 3,683
|
Quote:
Couple this with the fact that the jet fuel in the towers was oxygen starved (compared to an engine cylinder) it puts the burden of proof back on the skeptics. Take into account that WTC 7 didn't even have any jet fuel inside it makes one wonder if the reason the Twin Towers collapsed was because of weakened steel due to jet fuel then how did WTC 7 collapse? |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #299 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,370
|
Quote:
BTW, jet engines don't operate on liquid oxygen, they use air for the combustion process -- rocket engines use liquid oxygen. Moron. |
|
March 10th, 2006 | #300 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,370
|
Quote:
WTC 1 & 2 weren't "bumped", they had massive holes torn in their sides by those airplanes. I saw it with my own eyes; you saw a TV show. Unless you were there to see it, it's hard to appreciate just how large those holes were. When I got to a spot where I could see the buildings clearly, I was shocked --not that they collapsed, but that they stood up for as long as they did after the airplane impacts. Last edited by Fissile; March 10th, 2006 at 06:18 PM. |
|
Tags |
#1, 911, c4l, gov, jew bs, jew vs jew, jews did 9-11, wtc |
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|