Thanks for the photo. Very interesting. I had thought the building used the heretofore standard curtain wall approach. The windows (dark spaces) comprise about 50% of the wall and are non-structural. I presume the rest are columns (light-colored surfaces), which are structural, and carry vertical loads---along with the interior columns. They are not designed to withstand lateral loads (an airliner crash).
In any case, the collapse of the building was the result of failure throughout the column array, not just from the exterior columns.
They do that for nuclear reactor containment structures, which results in a fortress. Any evidence that they do that for skyscrapers? You could say that, insofar as the collisions themselves were concerned, the Twin Towers withstood them. It was the fire that precipitated the collapse.
What is it you think I don't know about? Nearly every "truther" doesn't understand structural failure, so far as I have experienced. The presence or absence of the columns in the exterior wall doesn't really make a difference in what happened, since the core columns were also necessary to carry the building loads.
Are the outer walls structural or not? That sounds like a big thing you ought to be sure of before you start pontificating.
You also don't seem to know whether high rise buildings are stressed for plane strikes. So what do you know, exactly?
As for fires, have you managed to find a single similar structure that collapsed into its own base at free-fall speed due to fire? As an example this one is still standing.
If you watch 57:45 the cars look like they've been through same "toasting" process like the cars in Maui. I'm certain that DEWs was used during 9/11 on both buildings. I used to think that it was thermite, but it doesn't explain the dustification of both buildings. There is barely any debris on the site after the buildings went down.
Thanks for the photo. Very interesting. I had thought the building used the heretofore standard curtain wall approach. The windows (dark spaces) comprise about 50% of the wall and are non-structural. I presume the rest are columns (light-colored surfaces), which are structural, and carry vertical loads---along with the interior columns. They are not designed to withstand lateral loads (an airliner crash).
In any case, the collapse of the building was the result of failure throughout the column array, not just from the exterior columns.
What is your point?
My main point now is that you do not seem to know what you are talking about!
Another thing you seem to have missed: The buildings WERE stressed to combat collisions with planes.
They do that for nuclear reactor containment structures, which results in a fortress. Any evidence that they do that for skyscrapers? You could say that, insofar as the collisions themselves were concerned, the Twin Towers withstood them. It was the fire that precipitated the collapse.
What is it you think I don't know about? Nearly every "truther" doesn't understand structural failure, so far as I have experienced. The presence or absence of the columns in the exterior wall doesn't really make a difference in what happened, since the core columns were also necessary to carry the building loads.
Are the outer walls structural or not? That sounds like a big thing you ought to be sure of before you start pontificating.
You also don't seem to know whether high rise buildings are stressed for plane strikes. So what do you know, exactly?
As for fires, have you managed to find a single similar structure that collapsed into its own base at free-fall speed due to fire? As an example this one is still standing.
Is he still going at it? Watch out! Either his ignorant or purposely muddying the waters.
https://youtu.be/vadSaWyiozg
If you watch 57:45 the cars look like they've been through same "toasting" process like the cars in Maui. I'm certain that DEWs was used during 9/11 on both buildings. I used to think that it was thermite, but it doesn't explain the dustification of both buildings. There is barely any debris on the site after the buildings went down.