That's an opinion of what 'could' have happened, that's not the same as the people who designed it saying, it was built to withstand such an attack. Plus as a lot of people believe, the vast majority of the jet fuel burnt out in the huge fireballs that were created when the planes hit - and looking at the footage, that does stand to reason. Why would some of the fuel remain and burn at a steady rate inside the building, weakening the steel work, while the rest was projected out in a fireball? If it's flamable, it's going to burn rapidly in such circumstances.
ok so a professor of engineering at MIT doesnt know what hes talking about in your opinion. His opinion is just as good as those from the men who built it - and heres my point - people keep saying the initial fuel would have burnt as you say "in huge fireballs" on initial impact but then cooled off considerably. Why wouldnt these initial "fireballs" have created enough heat to weaken the steel?
Just one thing about that photo though. For a plane that pretty much disapeared on contact, do you find it in the least a little odd that although pretty mangled it has not one shread of evidence of having been anywhere near fire?
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.
ok so a professor of engineering at MIT doesnt know what hes talking about in your opinion. His opinion is just as good as those from the men who built it - and heres my point - people keep saying the initial fuel would have burnt as you say "in huge fireballs" on initial impact but then cooled off considerably. Why wouldnt these initial "fireballs" have created enough heat to weaken the steel?
There are pleanty of other people like controlled demolition experts or engineers who have a view that differs from the offical story that people on here take no notice of, so what make the proffessors of engineering at MIT more inportant?
There all just opinions.
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.
ok so a professor of engineering at MIT doesnt know what hes talking about in your opinion. His opinion is just as good as those from the men who built it - and heres my point - people keep saying the initial fuel would have burnt as you say "in huge fireballs" on initial impact but then cooled off considerably. Why wouldnt these initial "fireballs" have created enough heat to weaken the steel?
Because they were projected OUTSIDE the buildings, of course most oft he fuel would have burst outside because that's where the oxygen is.
In terms of conspiracy theory, I don't think anybody WANTS to think that the government could be capable of carrying something like that out, but unfortunately, their complete unwillingness to provide plausible explanations for a vast number of unexplained things, means that people are going to be seeking answers elsewhere.
And about terrorists taking responsibility, why wouldn't they?! Taking responsibility for something that strikes fear in the hearts of an entire nation, is a brilliant way of furthering your political cause. Whether they had anything to do with it, is totally besides the point.
according to you, the plane vaporized. was this piece planted? like the bloody glove?
According to THEM the plane vaporized. The wreckage found bares all the hall marks of a smaller plane. In fact in one doc I watched the makers actually compared up close pictures of some of the plane parts they found at the pentagon, which were not used on huge commercial planes, but WERE used in much smaller military planes.
Like someone else said, this is just gonna go round in circles. My final position goes like this, if I'm going to believe something, I need 100% convincing, and since Bush and co haven't even addressed half the bizarre and unexplainable stuff that happened that day, I'm not buying their version of events.
i want evidence. i worked as a mechanical engineer for years and without evidence; opinions are like arseholes; everybody has one.
Uhm...it's there, you just have to look at it.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
ok so a professor of engineering at MIT doesnt know what hes talking about in your opinion. His opinion is just as good as those from the men who built it - and heres my point - people keep saying the initial fuel would have burnt as you say "in huge fireballs" on initial impact but then cooled off considerably. Why wouldnt these initial "fireballs" have created enough heat to weaken the steel?
My Movie/Music Reviews & Sports Blog
Just one thing about that photo though. For a plane that pretty much disapeared on contact, do you find it in the least a little odd that although pretty mangled it has not one shread of evidence of having been anywhere near fire?
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.
There are pleanty of other people like controlled demolition experts or engineers who have a view that differs from the offical story that people on here take no notice of, so what make the proffessors of engineering at MIT more inportant?
There all just opinions.
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.
Because they were projected OUTSIDE the buildings, of course most oft he fuel would have burst outside because that's where the oxygen is.
In terms of conspiracy theory, I don't think anybody WANTS to think that the government could be capable of carrying something like that out, but unfortunately, their complete unwillingness to provide plausible explanations for a vast number of unexplained things, means that people are going to be seeking answers elsewhere.
And about terrorists taking responsibility, why wouldn't they?! Taking responsibility for something that strikes fear in the hearts of an entire nation, is a brilliant way of furthering your political cause. Whether they had anything to do with it, is totally besides the point.
According to THEM the plane vaporized. The wreckage found bares all the hall marks of a smaller plane. In fact in one doc I watched the makers actually compared up close pictures of some of the plane parts they found at the pentagon, which were not used on huge commercial planes, but WERE used in much smaller military planes.
Like someone else said, this is just gonna go round in circles. My final position goes like this, if I'm going to believe something, I need 100% convincing, and since Bush and co haven't even addressed half the bizarre and unexplainable stuff that happened that day, I'm not buying their version of events.
i want evidence. i worked as a mechanical engineer for years and without evidence; opinions are like arseholes; everybody has one.
Uhm...it's there, you just have to look at it.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")