MudSlinger09 Posted June 27, 2006 Report Share Posted June 27, 2006 (edited) i think that there science teacher is one of dems earth lovin city folks ... jet fuel is fuggin hot dude , think of steel in an incenerator , they melt tha shit down then it turns into mush ....heat transfers thru metal rigghhhht ? wouldnt it make a shit load of sense that it just got so fuckin hot that the steel warped and the weight of the towers was just too much weight for the weakened steel?????? Edited June 27, 2006 by MudSlinger09 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bansheefreestyler Posted June 27, 2006 Report Share Posted June 27, 2006 is that what they teach you up there in america jr. err..i mean canada? a little advice; your teacher is a moron. now youre talking about the towers, we were all discussing the pentagon before. do you know what the pentagon is? the video was about the pentagon. not many people say the towers didnt get hit by airplanes because the second plane hit on live tv. and theres pleanty of video of the first one hitting. did you pay attention to anything i wrote?brooke do you think you know everything? im not fucking stupid i know what the pentagon is. read what i write not just glance through it before you start replyinh. and i knew the planes hit all im saying is that i dont think just planes hitting even with the fuel was enough to bring them down. im not saying its not possible but you have to take into consideration the size of the steel that was used in those buildings. they were made to withstand ALOT of abuse. the planes hit at the top. with the weight of the planes and the burning i still dont think it was enough to make the bottoms give out. why is it when they demolition buildings they blast at the bottom and not the top? its so the whole building will collapse. dont you think if the top was as weak as it was it would have fell sideways instead of down? just doesnt make sense to me. but hey according to brooke im just a dumb canadian and i dont know anything so ill just replying to this thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboybanshee Posted June 27, 2006 Report Share Posted June 27, 2006 did you pay attention to anything i wrote?brooke do you think you know everything? im not fucking stupid i know what the pentagon is. read what i write not just glance through it before you start replyinh. and i knew the planes hit all im saying is that i dont think just planes hitting even with the fuel was enough to bring them down. im not saying its not possible but you have to take into consideration the size of the steel that was used in those buildings. they were made to withstand ALOT of abuse. the planes hit at the top. with the weight of the planes and the burning i still dont think it was enough to make the bottoms give out. why is it when they demolition buildings they blast at the bottom and not the top? its so the whole building will collapse. dont you think if the top was as weak as it was it would have fell sideways instead of down? just doesnt make sense to me. but hey according to brooke im just a dumb canadian and i dont know anything so ill just replying to this thread You are definitely entitled to your opinion, but you have to look a little bit beyond the "cover of the book" to really understand how this happened. When a plane smacks a building, it doesn't just sit there and burn in that one spot. It'll leak fuel all over everything, catch anything flammable on fire, and then you have more than just a plane stuck in the side of a building, you have a large fire. The plane started the fire, it began burning everything around and below it causing instability in the building's structure, then it gave way and collapsed. Rather than knock you, I'll try and help you understand :beer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bansheefreestyler Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 i realize that but i still think that those buildings shouldnt of collapsed how they did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboybanshee Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 i realize that but i still think that those buildings shouldnt of collapsed how they did It's not like the planes hit them and they instantly dropped to the ground. They smoldered in flames for a while and then fell. Even though those building were designed to withstand a lot, no one can engineer a building to be able to take a 757 flying into the side of them with a full tank of fuel. Not trying to be a smartass, just being realistic :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooke Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 did you pay attention to anything i wrote?brooke do you think you know everything? im not fucking stupid i know what the pentagon is. read what i write not just glance through it before you start replyinh. and i knew the planes hit all im saying is that i dont think just planes hitting even with the fuel was enough to bring them down. im not saying its not possible but you have to take into consideration the size of the steel that was used in those buildings. they were made to withstand ALOT of abuse. the planes hit at the top. with the weight of the planes and the burning i still dont think it was enough to make the bottoms give out. why is it when they demolition buildings they blast at the bottom and not the top? its so the whole building will collapse. dont you think if the top was as weak as it was it would have fell sideways instead of down? just doesnt make sense to me. but hey according to brooke im just a dumb canadian and i dont know anything so ill just replying to this thread yea i paid attention to everything you wrote....it wasnt just a plane, had something to do with bush and oil, the building collapsed from the bottom, a giant plane hitting a building wouldnt collapse it blah blah do a liittle research before you decide to spit on an event that killed and effected so many people. some of us are a bit sensitive about it. im sick of everyone trying to blame bush or america for something terrorists did. we should all be a lot more angry about this, and a lot more angry when people try to take the focus off the real evil people. here is a little reality for you kid; you all can give me shit for "knocking" him if you want, but i refuse to coddle stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 (edited) i realize that but i still think that those buildings shouldnt of collapsed how they did You've got to remember that the one plane hit with about 20 floors above it the other had more. Once the steel melts the floor collapses. The problem isn't solely one floor collapsing though it's actually one floor that has the weight of 20+ floors. That's like 1/5th of the building suddenly dropping then the next floor underneath it collapses and so on as gravity does its job. Edited June 28, 2006 by PUSH THE THROTTLE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelbanshee2 Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 if you saw the videos of them falling it it started to go out at the top right where the planes hit. So basically the top part of the tower above the impact fell down on top of the lower part and making the subsequent floors collaps from the impact. The top of the building was like a pile driver kind smashing its way down. Think of it like a hockey stick crushing a big pile of flapjacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 Think of it like a hockey stick crushing a big pile of flapjacks. :yelrotflmao: :yelrotflmao: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboybanshee Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 you all can give me shit for "knocking" him if you want, but i refuse to coddle stupid. You can do what you want, you always have....I was just telling him that I was gonna try and help him understand, rather than tell him how stupid he is for thinking what he does. He's a teenager...did you understand everything you do now at age 15? I'm not trying to piss you off Brooke, I just think its better to try and educate someone than jump down their throat and talk about how ignorant or stupid they are...I know that what happened to the twin towers isn't rocket science, but you have to take into consideration the crowd you're talking to....not everyone has the same level of education or is tune to the world as much as yourself and a few others :beer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPEN Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 (edited) You are definitely entitled to your opinion, but you have to look a little bit beyond the "cover of the book" to really understand how this happened. When a plane smacks a building, it doesn't just sit there and burn in that one spot. It'll leak fuel all over everything, catch anything flammable on fire, and then you have more than just a plane stuck in the side of a building, you have a large fire. The plane started the fire, it began burning everything around and below it causing instability in the building's structure, then it gave way and collapsed. Rather than knock you, I'll try and help you understand :beer: I agree, not to mention that people need to view those huge ass planes as not really a plane but more of a missle. The plane entering the building derstoried allot of supports, not to mention the explosion on impact. It's not like the planes hit them and they instantly dropped to the ground. They smoldered in flames for a while and then fell. Even though those building were designed to withstand a lot, no one can engineer a building to be able to take a 757 flying into the side of them with a full tank of fuel. Not trying to be a smartass, just being realistic :shrug: Again I agree. Buildings are obviously designed and tested for allot of different things(earth quakes, high winds ect.) But no one could have fathomed the idea of a fully loaded/fueled jet airliner crashing into a tall ass building... The buildings are made to flex/bend/expand and all sorts of shit but heat(that intense) is one thing that Iam sure engineres never thought about. Brooke-nice write up/visual RIPPEN Edited June 28, 2006 by RIPPEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.