Trying to reason in this thread is like banging your head against the wall. Might I suggest something a little more light hearted and high brow. There's a great thread about camel toes and roast beef curtains.
one foot in the door
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Islamic militant leader Osama bin Laden, the man the United States considers the prime suspect in last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, denied any role Sunday in the actions believed to have killed thousands.
In a statement issued to the Arabic satellite channel Al Jazeera, based in Qatar, bin Laden said, "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it.
"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons," bin Laden's statement said.
Yes he denied involvement in the attacks 6 days after the attacks.
USAMA BIN LADEN: In the name of Allah (God), the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the Earth as an abode for peace, for the whole humankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for our guidance. I am thankful to the Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and momin (true Muslim) people of Pakistan who refused to believe the lies of the demon (Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf).
I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam....
Yes he denied involvement 17 days after the attacks.
now perhaps that is a lie, i have no clue, just pointing out he has denied being a part of it
I said that 100 posts ago.
BUT, what is interesting is he called Musharraf a 'lying demon'...i'llhave to look later but i remember reading something about a pakistani (tho i thought it was the head of their intel apparatus) was found to have wired the main hijacker $ a few days before 9/11...
This information has to get out to the people. I just hope people who refuse to believe just the possibility that what happened on 911 was not executed solely by 19 box cutter men. So many people don't want to believe that our goverenment may have been involved. I don't want to believe it. Unfortunately I do believe it. I've believed for almost a year now. I think there is more than enough red flags with the Official story that everyone should be demanding a REAL investigation. But who is there to investigate the most powerful people in the world?
As far as being called a conspiracy theorist for what I believe, I guess I understand where people are coming from. I am just a regular person. I am married and I go to work everyday. I have seen the greatest band in the world (pearl jam) 15 times, my first being at Soldier Field in 1995. Up until about a year ago, I was all about catching Bin Laden and was clueless as to what was actually happening in this world. The world we live in is FUCKED up. Thank God we have Pearl Jam's music to escape into.
you're right! the government conspired with aliens and the crash was meant to make it look earthly. the aliens used their high tech lasers to weaken the steel and used telepathy to direct the entire opperation.
the aliens are also using chemicals in the water to make people gay in an attempt to cause human extinction.
oh; and the russians killed kennedy so that's solved now.
you're right! the government conspired with aliens and the crash was meant to make it look earthly. the aliens used their high tech lasers to weaken the steel and used telepathy to direct the entire opperation.
the aliens are also using chemicals in the water to make people gay in an attempt to cause human extinction.
oh; and the russians killed kennedy so that's solved now.
Prove that the building was wired with explosives. Don't give me circumstantial evidence that wouldn't pass in court. Prove it!
Sorry if I hurt your feelings.
Prove it wasn't wired with explosives.
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
read back and see i already proved it.
YOU PROVE IT WAS!
no way to truck in 2 semis of explosives; no residue; no outward explosion; no detonation when the plane hit; and it goes on and on.
Such a proof is impossible, even if the official version is definitively proven correct. The building could have been "wired with explosives" since 1980 that never were detonated.
read back and see i already proved it.
YOU PROVE IT WAS!
no way to truck in 2 semis of explosives; no residue; no outward explosion; no detonation when the plane hit; and it goes on and on.
Not sure if anyone has brought this up before, but how/why did building 7 fall down on 911? Can someone give me a real logical answer? I have an answer. They pulled it. Thats what the World Trade Center owner Larry Silverstein admitts to. How long does it take to domolish a building? I would guess it takes weeks to prepare a building to come down in the manner that it did. With that said, how could they have done this in about 8 hours with the largest disaster in years was laying in rubble across the street.
How long does it take to domolish a building? I would guess it takes weeks to prepare a building to come down in the manner that it did.
Not only does it take weeks to prepare a skyscraper for demolition, but the preparation makes the building completely unsafe to operate. It's not a matter of just placing charges on a few supports and walking away. The rest of your points have already been touched on in this thread.
of course not. secret explosives that don't leave residue have been invented but the knowledge has not yet been released to the public. and each charge was independently set with remote detonators so there wouldn't be miles of wire in the buildings. anyone trying to hide wires for an entertainment system knows it would take months if not a year to hide all the wires.
oh; and it was magic that caused the charges to detonate in proper succession to drop the building straight down. if you know anything about implosions; one charge misfiring or out of sequence will cause the implosion to fail.
Dude, I'm not saying explosives were there. I don't believe there were explosives there. I'm simply saying you can't definitively disprove they were there. Here's why:
of course not. secret explosives that don't leave residue have been invented but the knowledge has not yet been released to the public.
Perhaps. Regardless, you haven't inspected enough steel to determine if residue actually did exist.
and each charge was independently set with remote detonators so there wouldn't be miles of wire in the buildings. anyone trying to hide wires for an entertainment system knows it would take months if not a year to hide all the wires.
Remote detonation is certainly possible. But timed detonation would be much more likely.
oh; and it was magic that caused the charges to detonate in proper succession to drop the building straight down.
It isn't "magic". It's science.
if you know anything about implosions; one charge misfiring or out of sequence will cause the implosion to fail.
Certainly! But that seems fairly irrelevant considering the required morality of anyone who would destroy a building full of innocent people. If WTC was an implosion, it did fail considering the fact that the outer shell of the building fell outwards instead of inwards.
Dude, I'm not saying explosives were there. I don't believe there were explosives there. I'm simply saying you can't definitively disprove they were there. Here's why:
Perhaps. Regardless, you haven't inspected enough steel to determine if residue actually did exist.
Remote detonation is certainly possible. But timed detonation would be much more likely.
It isn't "magic". It's science.
Certainly! But that seems fairly irrelevant considering the required morality of anyone who would destroy a building full of innocent people. If WTC was an implosion, it did fail considering the fact that the outer shell of the building fell outwards instead of inwards.
since explosives EXPLODE; i would expect residue everywhere. if you fire a gun you're behind it and still get plenty of residue on your body.
remote detonation is used all the time; but 30 to 50 charges per floor means they would need almost 1000 frequencies not used by anyone else to detonate those charges and it would need to be timed requiring hundreds of people to sequence the detonations.
timed detonation? i have several clocks in my house all set to the same time at the same time yet they all say something different. too much risk of mechanical failure. you also have failure due to the vibrations from the previous explosions.
what blew outwards is the easiest to explain. as the metal weakened; the weight of the cement floors above caused the metal to bend forcing the glass and wall material outwards. the floors themselves fell straight down. did you notice the bent framing in the debris? if you put a similar piece of metal in a vise; apply heat; then close the vise to immitate the weight of the floors; it will bend exactly the way the beams were bent in the rubble. the bends were relatively uniform because they bent until the rivets gave out.
i can't prove there wasn't explosives but too much evidence exists to show there wasn't.
since explosives EXPLODE; i would expect residue everywhere. if you fire a gun you're behind it and still get plenty of residue on your body.
Certainly. But if you only examine 1 square inch of your left calf, you're not likely to find a lot of gun powder.
remote detonation is used all the time; but 30 to 50 charges per floor means they would need almost 1000 frequencies not used by anyone else to detonate those charges and it would need to be timed requiring hundreds of people to sequence the detonations.
This is silly. You wouldn't need 1000 frequencies. You could easily design a remote detonation system where all nodes operate on a single frequency and where various nodes await queues from preceding nodes.
timed detonation? i have several clocks in my house all set to the same time at the same time yet they all say something different. too much risk of mechanical failure. you also have failure due to the vibrations from the previous explosions.
Certainly the probabilities of success for any kind of event like this would be incredibly low. We're not talking about high chances of success though -- we're talking about theoretical plausibility.
what blew outwards is the easiest to explain. as the metal weakened; the weight of the cement floors above caused the metal to bend forcing the glass and wall material outwards. the floors themselves fell straight down. did you notice the bent framing in the debris? if you put a similar piece of metal in a vise; apply heat; then close the vise to immitate the weight of the floors; it will bend exactly the way the beams were bent in the rubble. the bends were relatively uniform because they bent until the rivets gave out.
Slow down man. You're not arguing with someone who believes in the conspiracy crap.
i can't prove there wasn't explosives but too much evidence exists to show there wasn't.
that's it? that's obvious from the beginning. i can only show scientific evidence which leads to the conclusion that there wasn't. no one will ever prove one way or another. be it explosives or aliens.
It wasn't obvious when you said to the other poster: "i already proved it."
i'm sorry. i meant that i already proved that it was not likely to be explosives. and i also presented evidence why.
i won't assume that my meanings are clear and try to write more specificly.
thanks, that was very interesting...i first read about it in a book by gore vidal...for those who don't want to click on the link:
On October 6, 2001, a senior-level U.S. government official told CNN that U.S. investigators had discovered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (Sheik Syed), using the alias "Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad" had sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta. "Investigators said Atta then distributed the funds to conspirators in Florida in the weeks before the deadliest acts of terrorism on U.S. soil that destroyed the World Trade Center, heavily damaged the Pentagon and left thousands dead. In addition, sources have said Atta sent thousands of dollars -- believed to be excess funds from the operation -- back to Saeed in the United Arab Emirates in the days before September 11. CNN later confirmed this. [4]
The 9/11 Commission's Final Report states that the source of the funds "remains unknown."
More than a month after the money transfer was discovered, the head of ISI, General Mehmood Ahmed resigned from his position. Indian news outlets reported the FBI was investigating the possiblity that Gen. Ahmed ordered Saeed Sheikh to send the $100,000 to Atta, while most Western media outlets only reported his connections to the Taliban as the reason for his departure. [5]
The Wall Street Journal was one of the only Western news organizations to follow up on the story, citing the Times of India: "US authorities sought [Gen. Mehmood Ahmed's] removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 [was] wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mehmood."[6] Another Indian newspaper, the Daily Excelsior, quoting FBI sources, reported that the "FBI’s examination of the hard disk of the cellphone company Omar Sheikh had subscribed to led to the discovery of the "link" between him and the deposed chief of the Pakistani ISI, Gen. Mehmood Ahmed. And as the FBI investigators delved deep, sensational reports surfaced with regard to the transfer of 100,000 dollars to Mohammed Atta, one of the kamikaze pilots who flew his Boeing into the World Trade Centre. Gen. Mehmood Ahmed, the FBI investigators found, fully knew about the transfer of money to Atta."[7]
The Pittsburgh Tribune notes that "There are many in Musharraf's government who believe that Saeed Sheikh's power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA."[8]
Sheikh rose to prominence with the 2002 killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who at the time was in Pakistan investigating connnections between the ISI and Islamic militant groups. In Pakistan, Sheikh was sentenced to death for killing Pearl, however his complicity in the execution and the reasons behind it are in dispute.
A Wall Street Journal review of Bernard-Henri Levy's book “Who Killed Daniel Pearl?” notes, “It is a fact that Gen. Mehmood Ahmed, then head of the ISI, wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta before 9/11 through an intermediary."[9]
wtf is this all about???? i thought hte pakistani's were our friends? :rolleyes:
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
does anyone have any links about the hologram theory? not that i believe it's credibile (i'm undecided between a few theories), i'm just curious about their rationale for believing this...so are theys aying the gapping holes were holograms, too?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
i think we're forgetting that all things must be taken into consideration. the first investigation of any incident is done quickly because people want answers. after that investigation; those who do not accept it will question those results. this brings more testing of the evidence and sometimes rebuffs the original conclusion. this comes mostly from scientists and forensic experts doing controlled experiments to prove or disprove theories.
after 5 years the experiments are done and the results are in. if you look at ALL of the experiments you can come to an educated and informed decision. one group saying explosives does not cancell out the current evidence. hell; conspiracy sells books and brings attention to someone. i can throw a spin on this and manipulate the evidence to show aliens were responsable. it would make a hell of a book and i'm sure it would be a top seller. that's what people want to hear.
does anyone have any links about the hologram theory? not that i believe it's credibile (i'm undecided between a few theories), i'm just curious about their rationale for believing this...so are theys aying the gapping holes were holograms, too?
The hologram theory is that the planes were holograms that disguised missiles that hit the buildings. A bit too Star Trek for me.
One question I have is that if the heat was burning as hot as they say it was, why didn't the people hanging out of the windows near the hole not burn up?
The hologram theory is that the planes were holograms that disguised missiles that hit the buildings. A bit too Star Trek for me.
One question I have is that if the heat was burning as hot as they say it was, why didn't the people hanging out of the windows near the hole not burn up?
they did. many bodies were creamated in the fire; thus explains the missing bodies.
they did. many bodies were creamated in the fire; thus explains the missing bodies.
Yes, but on the videos there are people hanging out the windows up until the time the buildings collapsed. If a fire was burning that intensely as they say, how were those people alive to sit in the windows to begin with? At that heat wouldn't they all have been incinerated (and therefore not be able to hang out the windows)?
Yes, but on the videos there are people hanging out the windows up until the time the buildings collapsed. If a fire was burning that intensely as they say, how were those people alive to sit in the windows to begin with? At that heat wouldn't they all have been incinerated (and therefore not be able to hang out the windows)?
and where were these people in relation to the epicenter? when beams designed to hold up a floor of (let's say 50 tons) of concrete fails and that floor lands on the lower floor making the load weight 100 tons (doubling the carrying capacity); those beams will fail no matter how hot or cold they are. it's simple science and physics. when that floor falls onto the next it triples the carrying capacity and so on. this gives the "straight down" effect we saw.
and where were these people in relation to the epicenter? when beams designed to hold up a floor of (let's say 50 tons) of concrete fails and that floor lands on the lower floor making the load weight 100 tons (doubling the carrying capacity); those beams will fail no matter how hot or cold they are. it's simple science and physics. when that floor falls onto the next it triples the carrying capacity and so on. this gives the "straight down" effect we saw.
I understand this, but the people I'm referring to were on the same floors as where the fire was burning. They were in quite close proximity to the fires which were burning at 1000 degrees (I can't remember the number), but wouldn't the heat have killed them almost instantly?
Comments
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
Yes. He denied involvement 5 days after the attacks.
Yes he denied involvement in the attacks 6 days after the attacks.
Yes he denied involvement 17 days after the attacks.
I said that 100 posts ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Omar_Saeed_Sheikh#Alleged_connection_to_9.2F11
you're right! the government conspired with aliens and the crash was meant to make it look earthly. the aliens used their high tech lasers to weaken the steel and used telepathy to direct the entire opperation.
the aliens are also using chemicals in the water to make people gay in an attempt to cause human extinction.
oh; and the russians killed kennedy so that's solved now.
Wow, I wasn't expecting a response like that.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=265576
Prove it wasn't wired with explosives.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
read back and see i already proved it.
YOU PROVE IT WAS!
no way to truck in 2 semis of explosives; no residue; no outward explosion; no detonation when the plane hit; and it goes on and on.
Such a proof is impossible, even if the official version is definitively proven correct. The building could have been "wired with explosives" since 1980 that never were detonated.
This doesn't disprove a claim explosives existed.
This was on PBS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETtkGnc7EHE
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=265576
Don't know how to make my words look sarcastic. That was exactly what I was expecting to see.
How about this. Lets see what kind of response I can get from this. http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=211549
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=265576
Not only does it take weeks to prepare a skyscraper for demolition, but the preparation makes the building completely unsafe to operate. It's not a matter of just placing charges on a few supports and walking away. The rest of your points have already been touched on in this thread.
of course not. secret explosives that don't leave residue have been invented but the knowledge has not yet been released to the public. and each charge was independently set with remote detonators so there wouldn't be miles of wire in the buildings. anyone trying to hide wires for an entertainment system knows it would take months if not a year to hide all the wires.
oh; and it was magic that caused the charges to detonate in proper succession to drop the building straight down. if you know anything about implosions; one charge misfiring or out of sequence will cause the implosion to fail.
Perhaps. Regardless, you haven't inspected enough steel to determine if residue actually did exist.
Remote detonation is certainly possible. But timed detonation would be much more likely.
It isn't "magic". It's science.
Certainly! But that seems fairly irrelevant considering the required morality of anyone who would destroy a building full of innocent people. If WTC was an implosion, it did fail considering the fact that the outer shell of the building fell outwards instead of inwards.
since explosives EXPLODE; i would expect residue everywhere. if you fire a gun you're behind it and still get plenty of residue on your body.
remote detonation is used all the time; but 30 to 50 charges per floor means they would need almost 1000 frequencies not used by anyone else to detonate those charges and it would need to be timed requiring hundreds of people to sequence the detonations.
timed detonation? i have several clocks in my house all set to the same time at the same time yet they all say something different. too much risk of mechanical failure. you also have failure due to the vibrations from the previous explosions.
what blew outwards is the easiest to explain. as the metal weakened; the weight of the cement floors above caused the metal to bend forcing the glass and wall material outwards. the floors themselves fell straight down. did you notice the bent framing in the debris? if you put a similar piece of metal in a vise; apply heat; then close the vise to immitate the weight of the floors; it will bend exactly the way the beams were bent in the rubble. the bends were relatively uniform because they bent until the rivets gave out.
i can't prove there wasn't explosives but too much evidence exists to show there wasn't.
Certainly. But if you only examine 1 square inch of your left calf, you're not likely to find a lot of gun powder.
This is silly. You wouldn't need 1000 frequencies. You could easily design a remote detonation system where all nodes operate on a single frequency and where various nodes await queues from preceding nodes.
Certainly the probabilities of success for any kind of event like this would be incredibly low. We're not talking about high chances of success though -- we're talking about theoretical plausibility.
Slow down man. You're not arguing with someone who believes in the conspiracy crap.
Thank you. That's all I was looking for.
that's it? that's obvious from the beginning. i can only show scientific evidence which leads to the conclusion that there wasn't. no one will ever prove one way or another. be it explosives or aliens.
It wasn't obvious when you said to the other poster: "i already proved it."
i'm sorry. i meant that i already proved that it was not likely to be explosives. and i also presented evidence why.
i won't assume that my meanings are clear and try to write more specificly.
thanks, that was very interesting...i first read about it in a book by gore vidal...for those who don't want to click on the link:
On October 6, 2001, a senior-level U.S. government official told CNN that U.S. investigators had discovered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (Sheik Syed), using the alias "Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad" had sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta. "Investigators said Atta then distributed the funds to conspirators in Florida in the weeks before the deadliest acts of terrorism on U.S. soil that destroyed the World Trade Center, heavily damaged the Pentagon and left thousands dead. In addition, sources have said Atta sent thousands of dollars -- believed to be excess funds from the operation -- back to Saeed in the United Arab Emirates in the days before September 11. CNN later confirmed this. [4]
The 9/11 Commission's Final Report states that the source of the funds "remains unknown."
More than a month after the money transfer was discovered, the head of ISI, General Mehmood Ahmed resigned from his position. Indian news outlets reported the FBI was investigating the possiblity that Gen. Ahmed ordered Saeed Sheikh to send the $100,000 to Atta, while most Western media outlets only reported his connections to the Taliban as the reason for his departure. [5]
The Wall Street Journal was one of the only Western news organizations to follow up on the story, citing the Times of India: "US authorities sought [Gen. Mehmood Ahmed's] removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 [was] wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mehmood."[6] Another Indian newspaper, the Daily Excelsior, quoting FBI sources, reported that the "FBI’s examination of the hard disk of the cellphone company Omar Sheikh had subscribed to led to the discovery of the "link" between him and the deposed chief of the Pakistani ISI, Gen. Mehmood Ahmed. And as the FBI investigators delved deep, sensational reports surfaced with regard to the transfer of 100,000 dollars to Mohammed Atta, one of the kamikaze pilots who flew his Boeing into the World Trade Centre. Gen. Mehmood Ahmed, the FBI investigators found, fully knew about the transfer of money to Atta."[7]
The Pittsburgh Tribune notes that "There are many in Musharraf's government who believe that Saeed Sheikh's power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA."[8]
Sheikh rose to prominence with the 2002 killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who at the time was in Pakistan investigating connnections between the ISI and Islamic militant groups. In Pakistan, Sheikh was sentenced to death for killing Pearl, however his complicity in the execution and the reasons behind it are in dispute.
A Wall Street Journal review of Bernard-Henri Levy's book “Who Killed Daniel Pearl?” notes, “It is a fact that Gen. Mehmood Ahmed, then head of the ISI, wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta before 9/11 through an intermediary."[9]
wtf is this all about???? i thought hte pakistani's were our friends? :rolleyes:
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
after 5 years the experiments are done and the results are in. if you look at ALL of the experiments you can come to an educated and informed decision. one group saying explosives does not cancell out the current evidence. hell; conspiracy sells books and brings attention to someone. i can throw a spin on this and manipulate the evidence to show aliens were responsable. it would make a hell of a book and i'm sure it would be a top seller. that's what people want to hear.
did they claim to find plane remains in the trade center wreckage?
~Ron Burgundy
The hologram theory is that the planes were holograms that disguised missiles that hit the buildings. A bit too Star Trek for me.
One question I have is that if the heat was burning as hot as they say it was, why didn't the people hanging out of the windows near the hole not burn up?
They found bits and pieces mostly on the ground that shot "through" the WTC. I remember seeing an engine and a couple scraps of the sides.
they did. many bodies were creamated in the fire; thus explains the missing bodies.
the plane parts remaining in the building were melted in the heat. only the parts blown threw were collected.
Yes, but on the videos there are people hanging out the windows up until the time the buildings collapsed. If a fire was burning that intensely as they say, how were those people alive to sit in the windows to begin with? At that heat wouldn't they all have been incinerated (and therefore not be able to hang out the windows)?
and where were these people in relation to the epicenter? when beams designed to hold up a floor of (let's say 50 tons) of concrete fails and that floor lands on the lower floor making the load weight 100 tons (doubling the carrying capacity); those beams will fail no matter how hot or cold they are. it's simple science and physics. when that floor falls onto the next it triples the carrying capacity and so on. this gives the "straight down" effect we saw.
I understand this, but the people I'm referring to were on the same floors as where the fire was burning. They were in quite close proximity to the fires which were burning at 1000 degrees (I can't remember the number), but wouldn't the heat have killed them almost instantly?