100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: 15 disturbing facts about 9/11 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
all this stuff is great news for the few elite demolition companies in business today... they will be saving tons of money and man-hours of work by adopting this new technique of razing skyscrapers..... no longer will it be necessary to do any of that ground level preparation to compromise the integrity of those pesky core columns whatsoever..the new manual says, we can just take the elevator up to the upper portion of the building and fill a couple of floors with fire accellerants (like thermite maybe) and explosives and hit the detonator switch... then, when top 10 or 20% of the building falls twenty or thirty feet enough force will be generated to bring the remaining balance of the building straight down to groung zero just like a stack of pancakes...there will be no bowing outwards of the outer structure support columns, no chance of the top portion falling off sideways or for that matter, the whole building falling sideways, no chance of any 20 or 30 story spike-like twisted mass of mangled steel and concrete to deal with either...clean-up will be a breeze.... the NIST along with the example of the twin towers falling identically within hours of each other, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, this new technique should become the new standard throughout the demolition industry.... What is your point? Are you saying that the official explanation must be a lie, because proper demolition is hard and expensive, and yet fire brought a building down? If so, you seem to be ignoring the most important part of a controlled demolition: Control. my point is...that no steel and concrete skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire damage in the history of steel and concrete buildings, no not a single one....and that the common practice of demolition companies to compromise the integrity of the core support columns at the ground level with explosives and timing the charges in a climbing pattern as they travel upward through the building leaving little if any resistance to support the floors above them....well, you can throw all that stuff out the window now..because the wtc towers prove, beyond a doubt, that it can be done just as easily and safely by taking out 3 or 4 floors up near the top with explosives and a fire accellerant and that steel and concrete building will absolutely fall straight down like a stack of pancakes....i'm sure all the demo companies will be instituting this amazing industry revolutionizing new technique on their very next contracts.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my point is...that no steel and concrete skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire damage in the history of steel and concrete buildings, no not a single one.... You omit so many details that also are 'firsts'. But you wouldn't be doing that to project a bias, would you? No steel framed building had 767's crash into them either. No steel framed building had a raging fire go unfought for seven hours. I could go on, but it's a fallacious argument from the outset, so I won't bother. because the wtc towers prove, beyond a doubt, that it can be done just as easily and safely
LOLOL Safely? How do you figure that one? by taking out 3 or 4 floors up near the top with explosives and a fire accellerant and that steel and concrete building will absolutely fall straight down like a stack of pancakes
You forgot the impacts. That was rather convenient for your fallacious argument, but transparent. ....i'm sure all the demo companies will be instituting this amazing industry revolutionizing new technique on their very next contracts.... Of course, that is utterly ridiculous as it would not be safe, nor predictable. You have a limited understanding of the subject. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
all this stuff is great news for the few elite demolition companies in business today... they will be saving tons of money and man-hours of work by adopting this new technique of razing skyscrapers..... no longer will it be necessary to do any of that ground level preparation to compromise the integrity of those pesky core columns whatsoever..the new manual says, we can just take the elevator up to the upper portion of the building and fill a couple of floors with fire accellerants (like thermite maybe) and explosives and hit the detonator switch... then, when top 10 or 20% of the building falls twenty or thirty feet enough force will be generated to bring the remaining balance of the building straight down to groung zero just like a stack of pancakes...there will be no bowing outwards of the outer structure support columns, no chance of the top portion falling off sideways or for that matter, the whole building falling sideways, no chance of any 20 or 30 story spike-like twisted mass of mangled steel and concrete to deal with either...clean-up will be a breeze.... the NIST along with the example of the twin towers falling identically within hours of each other, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, this new technique should become the new standard throughout the demolition industry.... What is your point? Are you saying that the official explanation must be a lie, because proper demolition is hard and expensive, and yet fire brought a building down? If so, you seem to be ignoring the most important part of a controlled demolition: Control. my point is...that no steel and concrete skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire damage in the history of steel and concrete buildings, no not a single one....and that the common practice of demolition companies to compromise the integrity of the core support columns at the ground level with explosives and timing the charges in a climbing pattern as they travel upward through the building leaving little if any resistance to support the floors above them....well, you can throw all that stuff out the window now..because the wtc towers prove, beyond a doubt, that it can be done just as easily and safely by taking out 3 or 4 floors up near the top with explosives and a fire accellerant and that steel and concrete building will absolutely fall straight down like a stack of pancakes....i'm sure all the demo companies will be instituting this amazing industry revolutionizing new technique on their very next contracts.... I doubt it would be very cost effective since you would need a large passenger plane to strike the building and compromise the structure then start the fires. Did you forget that part? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
all this stuff is great news for the few elite demolition companies in business today... they will be saving tons of money and man-hours of work by adopting this new technique of razing skyscrapers..... no longer will it be necessary to do any of that ground level preparation to compromise the integrity of those pesky core columns whatsoever..the new manual says, we can just take the elevator up to the upper portion of the building and fill a couple of floors with fire accellerants (like thermite maybe) and explosives and hit the detonator switch... then, when top 10 or 20% of the building falls twenty or thirty feet enough force will be generated to bring the remaining balance of the building straight down to groung zero just like a stack of pancakes...there will be no bowing outwards of the outer structure support columns, no chance of the top portion falling off sideways or for that matter, the whole building falling sideways, no chance of any 20 or 30 story spike-like twisted mass of mangled steel and concrete to deal with either...clean-up will be a breeze.... the NIST along with the example of the twin towers falling identically within hours of each other, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, this new technique should become the new standard throughout the demolition industry.... What is your point? Are you saying that the official explanation must be a lie, because proper demolition is hard and expensive, and yet fire brought a building down? If so, you seem to be ignoring the most important part of a controlled demolition: Control. my point is...that no steel and concrete skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire damage in the history of steel and concrete buildings, no not a single one....and that the common practice of demolition companies to compromise the integrity of the core support columns at the ground level with explosives and timing the charges in a climbing pattern as they travel upward through the building leaving little if any resistance to support the floors above them....well, you can throw all that stuff out the window now..because the wtc towers prove, beyond a doubt, that it can be done just as easily and safely by taking out 3 or 4 floors up near the top with explosives and a fire accellerant and that steel and concrete building will absolutely fall straight down like a stack of pancakes....i'm sure all the demo companies will be instituting this amazing industry revolutionizing new technique on their very next contracts.... I doubt it would be very cost effective since you would need a large passenger plane to strike the building and compromise the structure then start the fires. Did you forget that part? it is easy to "forget" pertinent facts... when your try to prove something can't happen after it already did... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that it can be done just as easily and safely
What?! As I suspected, you have confused a safe, controlled demolition with a completely uncontrolled collapse. |
|
|
|
|
