Tuesday, September 13, 2011

9/11 Explained Finally

1 comment:

  1. Truthers. You gotta love 'em. Ann Barnhardt, on Truthers...

    1. It is a miracle that the Twin Towers stood for as long as they did. Those buildings PERFORMED. If you had laid out a scenario to me before 9/11 in which two fully-loaded and fully-FUELED 757 or 767s were crashed into the upper thirds of those buildings at full-throttle, I would have guessed that the force of the impact would have caused the buildings to buckle and snap at a point below the impact, and then the portions above would have instantly collapsed, taking the entire building and all of its occupants out within a matter of seconds. I suspect that this is what the musloids thought, too. The fact that the buildings were able to absorb those impacts and that the structure was robust enough to hold the higher floors in place for over an hour is, in retrospect, a triumph of engineering. Pretty much everyone below the impacts was able to get out. It could have been so much worse. It could have been 30,000 dead.

    2. Bad things happen to steel when exposed to prolonged, intense fire. Having a fricking fully-fueled 767 burning inside a skyscraper constitutes a prolonged and intense fire. So does any other building sitting and catastrophically burning for hours on end. I have especially magnified contempt for people who claim to be "engineers" arguing that an inferno isn't sufficient to "melt steel". Real engineers (and apparently mildly well-read commodity brokers) know that the steel needn't be anywhere near the MELTING point to fail in a structure. It didn't need to get to the LIQUID stage. The strength of steel is massively reduced when it is heated to temperatures that are nowhere near melting to liquid. The strength profile nosedives at temperatures that would result in little-to-no visible change.

    3. Do you have any fathom how much energy would be required to make a building fall in any direction OTHER than straight down? And that energy would have to be applied WHILE the collapse was happening. In order for those buildings to fall "off axis", there would have to be a constant, massive energy application to one side of the structure for the duration of the collapse in order for the axis of gravity to be overcome. You show me ANY demonstration of an object falling in any vector other than toward the center of the earth without a massive outside energy application, and we'll rename Newtonian physics after you. Seriously. Most people in this nation couldn't pass a 5th grade science test.

    4. Speaking of 5th grade science, have we forgotten about potential and kinetic energy? How much potential energy is there in a super-massive skyscraper? What happens when you convert that potential energy into kinetic energy in the space of a fraction of a second? I'll tell you what happens. That building is going to fall, pancaking, straight down VERY, VERY FAST.

    5. What kind of sound do failing steel joints make? Explosive sounds.

    6. How, exactly, does a nefarious cabal rig three of the largest and most heavily trafficked office buildings in the world to collapse without ANYONE seeing or hearing any of the drilling and installation of the explosives or the required MILES of wiring that would be required to demolish said buildings?

    7. If this is the result of a controlled demolition, how did they get the explosives on EXACTLY the right plane to correlate with the jet impact? Additionally, how were the wires leading to the explosives able to function after being exposed to a jetfuel inferno for over an hour? Why didn't the wires and their casings melt?

    Gotta love that gal. She's not afraid to speak up against democrats who are also commies.