| Viewing Single Post From: Double standards | |
|---|---|
| beantownfan247 | Jun 16 2009, 06:03 PM |
|
Bonez, I'm not trying to be confrontational, but what makes you qualified to say something like, "But the cores of the towers were nearly indestructable. Whatever was left of the planes after smashing through the exterior columns and floor trusses, would have been and were stopped by the cores of the buildings. There would have been only minor localized damage to the cores of the towers from the plane impacts. So, with the cores of the buildings still intact and the majority of the exterior columns intact, the buildings would have and should have never fallen. " Are you a structural, civil, or any kind of engineer?? My guess is not, but I could be wrong. You state that WTC was designed to stand after a plane hit them. Yes, this is correct. But, you forget to mention a few things. #1- It was designed to withstand a DC-9, not a 767. #2- It was designed to withstand a DC-9 traveling at landing speed, not at 500 + MPH. #3- it was designed to withstand a DC-9 traveling at landing speed, not fully loaded with fuel, and the fire would have been able to be extinguished within a certain amount of time. Steel looses 60% of its strenth at 50% fail temperature. This is a fairly low temperature, considering. Plus, expansion and contraction will weaken steel by almost 70%. Feel free to debate me. |
 |
|
| Double standards · Skeptics | |
5:26 AM Nov 26
