Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: atm_prophet who wrote (14477)	9/4/2006 12:06:22 PM
From: inchingup	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

atm: "And btw, Tower 7, was not hit by a plane .... it was on fire for hours and they could not contain the fire, so they made a decision to "pull it"....(bring the building down)... big deal ...." ...and just how does one go about "pulling" a 47 story steel core construction building without using some form of detonation device to weaken the structural integrity so the building can collapse? I suppose you twist is that a couple of dozen demolition personnel were sent into the building, placed the charges, tied all the detonators together, and then "pullled" it in a matter of a couple of minutes...right? Your assesment is ludicrous. ...and then the building came down just like every other building we have watched come down on TV. Get serious! You just don't "pull" a building without pre-planted explosives being present.

To: atm_prophet who wrote (14477)	9/4/2006 12:12:50 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

9 researchers and reporters was the Popular Science team? Researchers of what? How many researchers??? One? The other 8 being reporters? You call that a "real" team? I bet you also bought a bridge from Popular Mechanics. Did this "team" address the freefall of the towers? That building 7 fell at the speed of freefall in a vaccuum? No? Why not? What kind of "real" team would omit that? Did this "team" address the minimum disparity of 14.4 million KwH of energy expended in the collapse and pyroclastic flows vs the energy available in a gravity-only collapse? No? Why not? What kind of "real" team would omit that? Over 100 PhDs, most in physics and structural engineering, have assembled to show that you live in a fantasy world. st911.org