Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
was talking with co-worker about politics as usual this morning, somehow we got into 9/11.
he said he's uncertain about 9/11 and was confused why building 7 would just crumble apart so easily. he is an engineer, and from what he said the story about a fireball coming out and destroying the foundation wasn't legit or possible anyways.
i explained the only possible solution being a controlled demolition from the start.
i could not explain why the US government would want to do this though.
not saying it couldn't happen, but dont get the motive.
Why is it when the twoofers talk about bld7, people never:
1. Admit that the building got BADLY damaged when the towers fell:
a) the entire front fascia was sheared off
b) a 12-16 story gash(hole) in the corner(main supports)(Proves the FACT that there was MASSIVE structural damage)
2. Admit that there was an entire ConED substation(electric plant) below the building. (this article PROVES the substation and the new one rebuilt in May04,, It also gives a good description of the transformers)
Lower Manhattan Development Corporation - GOVERNOR PATAKI JOINS CON EDISON TO MARK OPENING OF ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION AT 7 WORLD TRADE CENTER
3. Admit that the building had 20 or more back up generators (4 on the 23rd floor, 3 on the 7th floor, 14 on the 5th floor, 1 on the 8th floor w/fuel tank, 4 on the 46th floor, 1 on the 9th floor)(Proves the FACT of many things that could have BLOWN up within the building supporting the statements of "heard explosions")
4. Admit that the building had 22 main Transformers(which can explode if heated(full of oil))(some of them 2 stories tall) and 2 dry transformers (10 1st floor, 12 5th floor, 2 7th floor)(proves the FACT of more things that could have blown up)
5. Admit that the Fuel source for those generators was stored in the building and equaled 18 tankers (18,000 gallons on the 2nd floor, and 48,000 in the lower level, 300 gallons on the 23rd floor, 300 gallons on the 5th floor, 100 gallons on the 9th floor, 300 gallons on the 7th floor)(proves the FACT of a major fuel source, along with all the office furnature)
6. Admit the there was LP gas lines running throughout the building
7. Admit that the Penthouse fell FIRST
8. Admit that the building did NOT fall symmetrically it collapsed from the center(the north wall even covered the debris
9. Admit that it did NOT fall with in its footprint, it covered "barkley street" and caused SIGNIFICANT DAMAGED(fell onto) another building (30 west broadway) and the Verizon building( just some logic here cant be in its "own footprint if it went OUTSIDE of its footprint)(ABSOLUTELY proves that it was not a PERFECT symmetrical fall)
10. Admit that the FIREMEN, said the fire could not be CONTROLLED
A) I will give just two,,,,"We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors." –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca
b). The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. –FDNY Chief Frank Fellini
11. Admit that there was a problem with the water supply(NO WATER)
12 the only mention "3 buildings" but not the other 10 buildings were destroyed that day in NYC
13. Admit that to wire a building.:
.......a) would take months.
.......b) beams would HAVE to be cut ,making the building NOT safe to go into for months prior to the collapse(proves that there is not way the building could have been imploded since monday sept 10 was a WORK DAY)
.......c) explosives don't like fire and heat
........d) that the term "pull" is NOT used in Explosive demos
was talking with co-worker about politics as usual this morning, somehow we got into 9/11.
he said he's uncertain about 9/11 and was confused why building 7 would just crumble apart so easily. he is an engineer, and from what he said the story about a fireball coming out and destroying the foundation wasn't legit or possible anyways.
i explained the only possible solution being a controlled demolition from the start.
i could not explain why the US government would want to do this though.
not saying it couldn't happen, but dont get the motive.
Curious as to why an engineer would come up with a story about a fireball coming out (of where?) and destroying the foundation. An engineer would know to go on the NIST.gov website and read NCSTAR1A, the NIST report about Building 7, which says nothing of about a fireball destroying the foundation, and then would have explained what the report did say and what he thought about it.
Methinks there is no engineer, just an imaginery coworker used as a vehicle to start this truther thread. Nice try.
What are your qualifications for "explaining" to an engineer that the only possible solution is a controlled demolition, if said coworker/engineer existed in the first place?
Curious as to why an engineer would come up with a story about a fireball coming out and destroying the foundation. An engineer would know to go on the NIST.gov website and read NCSTAR1A, the NIST report about Building 7, which says nothing of about a fireball destroying the foundation, and then would have explained what the report did say and what he thought about it.
Methinks there is no engineer, just an imaginery coworker used as a vehicle to start this truther thread. Nice try.
he said that it was reported about a fireball coming out that melted the foundation.
im not taking sides here, im actually trying to figure out why the government would be behind it.
you dont have to believe me, i simply dont care either way.
this is a debate for people who have more knowledge then myself about that building and reasons why it went down.
Curious as to why an engineer would come up with a story about a fireball coming out (of where?) and destroying the foundation. An engineer would know to go on the NIST.gov website and read NCSTAR1A, the NIST report about Building 7, which says nothing of about a fireball destroying the foundation, and then would have explained what the report did say and what he thought about it.
Methinks there is no engineer, just an imaginery coworker used as a vehicle to start this truther thread. Nice try.
What are your qualifications for "explaining" to an engineer that the only possible solution is a controlled demolition, if said coworker/engineer existed in the first place?
i never said i had qualifications. i said that was the only conspiracy that i could think of with that building.
we were talking about conspiracies, and thats when he brought up 9/11.
he questioned how tower 7 could just fall apart like that, i then introduced the common controlled demolition theory.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
