SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: redfish who wrote (7177)3/22/2004 4:06:10 PM
From: Raymond Duray  Respond to of 173976
 
Re: Only way to put it to the test is to fly a Boeing full of fuel into a very large office tower at 490 mph.

Nonsense. We are able to simulate atomic bomb explosions with computer simulation. We are able to calculate the fuel's potential energy by calculation. We are able to mock up any number of ingenious simulations on test tracks.

One thing that we know for certain is that the impact of the planes did not bring the towers down. What did bring them down is still an open question. Your conjecture about the jets is a moot point in the case of WTC 7, which suffered no significant mechanical damage, yet somehow mysteriously caught fire and was destroyed late in the afternoon of 9/11.

Here is what I consider to be an excellent analysis of the fuel and its potential to cause the damage that the WTC structures suffered:

Message 19936157

The author concludes, as I do, that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC towers is about as full of holes as the Swiss-cheese like samples that got shipped to WPI - Worchester Polytechnic Institute and which have yet to be properly analyzed and explained.

I have found that spending some time at this website is very enlightening and very troubling as well. But worth the time and your attention, IMO.

911research.wtc7.net

***

Cui prodest scelus, is fecit: "He who profits by villainy, has perpetrated it." --Seneca