OGCT True Believers Bullshit Excuses, Need help to sink OGCT True Believers BS Excuses Options

[1976]

[Thread title edited by d from "Non Believers Bullshit Excuses, Need help to sink Non believers bullshit excuses" for clarification]

OK... I am a member of a gaming site at OGN http://forums.ogn.com.au/forumdisplay.php?f=886

And I've been posting links to videos and sites in a thread I started there http://forums.ogn.com.au/showthread.php?t=54722 in the hope some ppl will see the truth.... anyway since I'll have to research this info which I really should do I thought some of you guys could just pump this info out off the top of your heads.

This is a quote is response to me saying tower 7 is the smoking gun, how can you overlook that this... he came back with this...

Speaking as an engineer, and having done a quick bit of reading to familiarise myself with the Tower Seven situation, my thought is "Damn, it took that long for that building to collapse?"

The damage to the building was significant. That's significant from an engineering point of view, i.e. it would have severely compromised the load bearing paths within the structure. While it's true they're still not sure why the thing collapsed, it's also true that there is only very sketchy information as to the extent of damage to the structure caused by falling debris from WTC1. The fact that they've identified a 10-storey high "gash" in the building, that completely destroyed a large chunk of two of the five rows of colums in the structure (and probably severely damaged the third) suggests some seriously unbalanced loads were acting on the building before it collapsed. It wouldn't take much to push that over the edge.

And I wouldn't call uncontrolled fires that burned from 10am until the building collapsed at 5pm "2 little spot fires"...

Not to rain on your parade or anything, but I don't see the need for explosives in any of the building collapses that day. Based on my knowledge of structural design (which is admittedly limited, as I majored in mechanical engineering, not civil), I can easily see how the structures failed in the way that they did.

Can someone destroy this guys narrow sighted conclusion so I can post a undeniable response. Its just a request and theres absolutely no obligation. thx guys

This post has been edited by dMole: Jan 29 2009, 03:01 PM

[rob balsamo]

What caused the ~90% of steel not exposed to fire in the WTC to collapse? The disintegrating ~10% of the so called weakened steel?


Saying the WTC collapsed due to gravity and fire is like saying the pentagon is only covered by a parking gate camera... err. .wait..


(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)