The entire building was made of steel?! I had no idea, even the floors where steel? The walls? Surely a plane flying into the building didn't weaken the structure a bit? What about the weight of the burning aircraft? THE INTERNETS! EVERYONE IS AN EXPERT! c1: I'm done with this, this whole argument is completely inane.
That photo turned out to be fake and it was done/displayed on Pakistan TV. DNA test results are coming in few days. Source in Finnish: http://www.hs.fi/ulkomaat/artikkeli/Erikoisjoukoilla+oli+käsky+tappaa+bin+Laden/1135265804030 EDIT: Duh, did not see Pete1989's post
Actually almost the whole build is steel, just because you think something is wrong doesnt make it so. And if the official story is correct and the floors pancaked on each other, what happened to the steel core columns after the collapse?
Oh Please , you sound like Rosie o'donnell You don't have to Melt the steel all you have to do is heat it up , Heating steel changes the molecular structure (AKA) It weakens it , You ever seen a steel metal building after a fire ?? , I have and It turns that red iron into spaghetti
aslo bill clinton was the one to start the hunt for osama not bush http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYNI5RPOlp4&feature=related
1) Those photos of him above were over the web well before the 1st May so are BS. 2) The heat from fuel burning did weaken the twin towers structure as they did stay intact after an aircraft strike as they were designed to. Some peeps need to sit in the corner with a tinfoil hat on or just jump off a bridge and get it over with.
Ah, i believe the point was that there was melted steel on the site after the buildings fell. Wich was one of the main points for the "conspiracy theorists". Melted steel when the steel shouldnt have melted at all.
So there is not yet any 100% proof if this person was Osama? Yet Obama must have been 100% certain to do a public announcement surely? "Yeah looks like 'im, albeit with a bullet in his head. Must be him. Now lets chuck him in the ocean and announce to the world 'Justice is Served'".
having done a degree partially based on metallurgy, all these consipiracy theories are lacking strong evidence to back up their claims based on the failure of the metal in the structure. when you heat a metal, the metals strength against buckling decreases expodentially as temperature increases. therefore there is more chance of buckling than a uniformed bending of the metal in a specific point. hence the metal structure under such weight, is more likely to crush straight down than topple over. just think of crushing a can, its not temperature related but when you stamp on a can with all your might, it will crush it straight down, this is buckling. when it doesnt, its know as uniformed bending of the metal, typically occurs in metals when specific areas of the metal are not as strong as other areas, could be because of temperature or damage to the metal. BUT buckling will happen withiout temperature increases if the force acting on the metal increases significantly. all it takes to create a buckling affect is like a snow ball rolling down a hill, the intial force and increasing momentum gives the possiblity of the structure to buckle completey straight. why would it collapse to one side? if it had been controlled, explosives etc to make one side WEAKER it would. this was not the case.
+1 Also, the trade center was built with a revolutionary space saving design, with most of the building being "hung" off the sides and center. So if you take out even one column, you severely weaken the structure.
Just here to chime in to say, **** you with the conspiracy theory on the WTC. My ****ing Father was there during 9/11, and your "theories" are ****ing disrespectful. --------- PS; how long will it take before real pictures get leaked out? (not the fake ones that are already out)
