Pretty sure this is sarcastic, but we do know that jet fuel doesn’t melt steel beams and even if it did, the entire building wouldn’t collapse in on itself. “Pancaking” is the same science as masks working.
Steel doesn’t retain its strength all the way up until melting, but steel reinforced concrete isn’t just steel.
Controlled demolition and a hefty insurance policy! Oodles of $$$$$ + a mass ritual blood sacrifice + emotionally traumatizing a population of people, how could ((they)) resist?
Rebar has very little influence on the structural integrity of a skyscraper; almost all the load bearing is done by a steel framework. And if they simply bend out of their triangular setup, you are fucked and an entire floor will just instantly get crunched.
What all you "the planes didn't really bring down the towers" crowd needs to explain is not the physics, but that if some entity has the means and the will to bring the towers down, and knew that crashing jets into them would not be enough of a statement, why wait until most, but not all, people had evacuated? If you are ruthless and want a maximum statement with max casualties, then you would set off your destructive sequence as soon as the planes hit, or soon after. If you are more humane and you just wanted to cause massive damage and disrupt trade and economic activity, but with as few collateral casualties as possible, you would have waited longer until the buildings had been cleared. The timing doesn't make sense.
What all you "the planes didn't really bring down the towers" crowd needs to explain is not the physics
Actually, this is the most important thing that needs to be explained. If the physics don't work (and are not even remotely close), nothing else about a theory of investigation matters.
You are suggesting understanding motivations and being able to read minds is more important than physics. Such thinking is detrimental to investigation. First you determine whether or not a theory is possible (like a little bit of plane fuel melting an entire buildings worth of steel and concrete LOL) then you can try to fit in the motivations.
I don't believe the physics are impossible. The steel frame didn't have to melt. It only needed to soften a relatively little. The molecular movement within the structural elements increases steadily with increased heat, becoming less densely packed and less able to hold the weight it was designed to hold.
It was never about the deaths, it was about the money. You could hear and see when they actually came down way after the planes, there were explosions all the way down.
I don’t know exactly why they waited, but it isn’t right to judge intent without knowing as that can be circumstantial, it’s right to judge the physics and the money that was tied to it.
We do know for certain that more than just a few random people knew about it. Following the money shows that it was well coordinated as far as the money is concerned.
I didn't disagree with the notion that the whole thing could have been orchestrated by interests hoping to achieve monetary and political gains, or to cover something up. They could accomplish those ends and conduct the attacks just as they appeared to be.
I didn't say anything about the official story. We know there is much cover up in there. I'm saying that the actual attack methods did not have to be faked in order for Q theory to work. Not everything is faked. If you are going to blow up some buildings in a terrorist attack, just set explosives and blow them up. Why fly planes into them, if they will not achieve the desired result, but then fake it to make it look like the planes did it? If they knew planes would not do it, just set explosives and do that.
Pretty sure this is sarcastic, but we do know that jet fuel doesn’t melt steel beams and even if it did, the entire building wouldn’t collapse in on itself. “Pancaking” is the same science as masks working.
Steel doesn’t retain its strength all the way up until melting, but steel reinforced concrete isn’t just steel.
Controlled demolition and a hefty insurance policy! Oodles of $$$$$ + a mass ritual blood sacrifice + emotionally traumatizing a population of people, how could ((they)) resist?
Rebar has very little influence on the structural integrity of a skyscraper; almost all the load bearing is done by a steel framework. And if they simply bend out of their triangular setup, you are fucked and an entire floor will just instantly get crunched.
All it needs to do is weaken it.you can evaporate steel with a vacuum and propane.
If you don't think steel can burn light a match under extra fine steel wool
What all you "the planes didn't really bring down the towers" crowd needs to explain is not the physics, but that if some entity has the means and the will to bring the towers down, and knew that crashing jets into them would not be enough of a statement, why wait until most, but not all, people had evacuated? If you are ruthless and want a maximum statement with max casualties, then you would set off your destructive sequence as soon as the planes hit, or soon after. If you are more humane and you just wanted to cause massive damage and disrupt trade and economic activity, but with as few collateral casualties as possible, you would have waited longer until the buildings had been cleared. The timing doesn't make sense.
Actually, this is the most important thing that needs to be explained. If the physics don't work (and are not even remotely close), nothing else about a theory of investigation matters.
You are suggesting understanding motivations and being able to read minds is more important than physics. Such thinking is detrimental to investigation. First you determine whether or not a theory is possible (like a little bit of plane fuel melting an entire buildings worth of steel and concrete LOL) then you can try to fit in the motivations.
I don't believe the physics are impossible. The steel frame didn't have to melt. It only needed to soften a relatively little. The molecular movement within the structural elements increases steadily with increased heat, becoming less densely packed and less able to hold the weight it was designed to hold.
There was no planes! Only chopper 5, some poor compositing and Pinocchio's nose
It was never about the deaths, it was about the money. You could hear and see when they actually came down way after the planes, there were explosions all the way down.
I don’t know exactly why they waited, but it isn’t right to judge intent without knowing as that can be circumstantial, it’s right to judge the physics and the money that was tied to it.
We do know for certain that more than just a few random people knew about it. Following the money shows that it was well coordinated as far as the money is concerned.
I didn't disagree with the notion that the whole thing could have been orchestrated by interests hoping to achieve monetary and political gains, or to cover something up. They could accomplish those ends and conduct the attacks just as they appeared to be.
Are you real? You're simultaneously defending the moon landings and the official 9/11 story. Dude, you're either a shill or brainwashed.
I didn't say anything about the official story. We know there is much cover up in there. I'm saying that the actual attack methods did not have to be faked in order for Q theory to work. Not everything is faked. If you are going to blow up some buildings in a terrorist attack, just set explosives and blow them up. Why fly planes into them, if they will not achieve the desired result, but then fake it to make it look like the planes did it? If they knew planes would not do it, just set explosives and do that.