Study Backs Up Feds' Theory of Why World Trade Center Collapsed on Sept. 11

[mtm1963]

i've always thought that was the case.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007
AP

INDIANAPOLIS — A computer simulation of the 2001 World Trade Center attacks supports a federal agency's findings that the initial impact from the hijacked airplanes stripped away crucial fireproofing material and that the weakened towers collapsed under their own weight.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,284816,00.html

mtm1963

[rjamortega]

And still the Rosies of the world will wonder how steel can burn (or whatever convoluted thing it was she said). I am no expert but the moment the towers crumbled to the ground I understood the basic physics (as did millions of others). Once the weight of those upper floors released on top of the next floors below there was nothing else the towers could do. The only thing I wasn't thinking about was damaged fireproofing. However, I imagine it will be very difficult for even our best standards in fireproofing to successfully counteract so much force and heat.

[towski]

Crap. I just bought stock in tin foil hats.

[JD3]

Crap. I just bought stock in tin foil hats.

Don't worry, there'll be another conspiracy (real or not)!:D ;)

[Riddley]

There was a BBC TV programme that did a simulation type thing about 2 years ago and sort of accounted for what happened. The programme pointed out the lack of fire retardent stuff. It didn't stop any CT's and I don't think this one will either.

[Hero]

Purdue study helps put Rosie to shame.

http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html

[towski]

Hero, I'm going to merge this with the thread on the topic created earlier, FYI.

[mataj]

http://www.whistlestopper.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1016623&postcount=30

[mtm1963]

http://www.whistlestopper.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1016623&postcount=30

Awww, c'mon, stop mixing physics and politics already, will you! It's pretty simple, really.

If you support Bush, you will presume his 911 theory correct, and demand 100% ironclad proof to the contrary.

If you don't support Bush, you will presume any other 911 theory correct, and demand 100% ironclad proof to the contrary. Or, better yet, presume 911 was some sort of inside job, as terrorism usually is, and wait for the evidence to the contrary.


the writng is on the wall!! :)

mtm1963

[steveksux]

the writng is on the wall!! :)

mtm1963Writing on the wall is no match for radio waves through the tinfoil!

The more the official story makes sense, the more intricate the conspiracy becomes! :lol:

Randy

[Dutch]

Purdue study helps put Rosie to shame.

http://www.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html

Only if you put any trust in a world class organization like purdue university. :cool: