Man, are you glowing! Or you really have no clue. But you found your way to this site. So I'm going with glowie. Everyone knows 9/11 was an inside job. Ask DJT!
"Inside job" covers a lot of territory. There could be some bad associations from the organization of the attack. But that the attack did what it did is unmistakable, and trying to invent occult reasons for the physical events is stretching bias into wish-fulfillment.
Your ineptitude also shows in that your failure to understand the physics of the collapse impels you to call me a "glowie," when all I am is an aeronautical engineer who knows better. What "everybody knows" is mostly nonsense.
What occult reasons? Huh? You are an aeronautical engineer that thinks a plane wouldn't crash into a steel building and fall to the ground leaving the majority of the building unharmed? An engineer that thinks a plane can bring down a steel skyscraper? It was a controlled demolition and the planes were made up, just like the no plane at the Pentagon. Aeronautical engineer. LOL!
What is so wonderful about your reply is that it confirms without doubt that you are not an aeronautical engineer. Nor a historian.
It may interest you to know that in 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber flew into the Empire State Building, penetrated into the building, and caused a fire. So, the reason I think that this could happen again is because it happened a first time. (And easier this time because of the way modern buildings are constructed, with non-load-bearing curtain walls.)
As for bringing down a skyscraper, all that takes is for the column strength of a given floor to drop below a critical point. Then it is a rapid chain reaction (at the speed of sound in hot steel) when all the columns buckle. The overburden (upper floors) then collapse onto the next floor, and the process repeats, except faster, all the way to the bottom.
No controlled demolition necessary, or even provable. The planes were real (engines were found, etc.). There was a plane at the Pentagon; fuselage fragments and engine components were found, etc.
Anon? LOL!!! You are great at massaging your own preconceptions, but terrible at finding out anything true.
Man, are you glowing! Or you really have no clue. But you found your way to this site. So I'm going with glowie. Everyone knows 9/11 was an inside job. Ask DJT!
"Inside job" covers a lot of territory. There could be some bad associations from the organization of the attack. But that the attack did what it did is unmistakable, and trying to invent occult reasons for the physical events is stretching bias into wish-fulfillment.
Your ineptitude also shows in that your failure to understand the physics of the collapse impels you to call me a "glowie," when all I am is an aeronautical engineer who knows better. What "everybody knows" is mostly nonsense.
What occult reasons? Huh? You are an aeronautical engineer that thinks a plane wouldn't crash into a steel building and fall to the ground leaving the majority of the building unharmed? An engineer that thinks a plane can bring down a steel skyscraper? It was a controlled demolition and the planes were made up, just like the no plane at the Pentagon. Aeronautical engineer. LOL!
What is so wonderful about your reply is that it confirms without doubt that you are not an aeronautical engineer. Nor a historian.
It may interest you to know that in 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber flew into the Empire State Building, penetrated into the building, and caused a fire. So, the reason I think that this could happen again is because it happened a first time. (And easier this time because of the way modern buildings are constructed, with non-load-bearing curtain walls.)
As for bringing down a skyscraper, all that takes is for the column strength of a given floor to drop below a critical point. Then it is a rapid chain reaction (at the speed of sound in hot steel) when all the columns buckle. The overburden (upper floors) then collapse onto the next floor, and the process repeats, except faster, all the way to the bottom.
No controlled demolition necessary, or even provable. The planes were real (engines were found, etc.). There was a plane at the Pentagon; fuselage fragments and engine components were found, etc.
Anon? LOL!!! You are great at massaging your own preconceptions, but terrible at finding out anything true.
Hey, dont forget 'dem intact passports bruh