Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Creative Speculation

Showing Original Post only (View all)
74 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What do structural beams sound like - from outside a building - when they fail? jonno99 Sep 2016 #1
hard to say as... wildbilln864 Sep 2016 #2
I never say never - especially if an external force exceeds the design specs...nt jonno99 Sep 2016 #3
the WTC structures were built with a redundancy factor of 5 times wildbilln864 Sep 2016 #4
There are many, many, sites that explain why the towers fell - without the jonno99 Sep 2016 #5
A 747 at 400 mph? Right. Nt hack89 Sep 2016 #7
Correct nationalize the fed Sep 2016 #8
Another nationalize the fed Sep 2016 #10
The buildings sustained the impacts. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #25
"redundancy factor of 5 times" whitefordmd Oct 2016 #12
Seriously? Buildings with steel beams fail too often in India and Bangaladesh. marble falls Sep 2016 #6
NIST WTC 7 FAQ nationalize the fed Sep 2016 #9
"No fire codes changed." You really believe that? hack89 Sep 2016 #11
Exactly Separation Jan 2017 #13
Doesn't fit the narrative so it won't be responded to. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #22
seems questionable captain queeg Jan 2017 #14
Lol, is that 747 statement in there? jberryhill Feb 2017 #15
707 AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #24
Yep..the B-25 crash into the Empire State Building in 1945 was their design motivation. sdfernando Jun 2017 #27
FYI - It also wasn't part of the design marylandblue Jun 2017 #28
Thanks, I did not know that. /nt sdfernando Jun 2017 #40
Of course it fell uniform MosheFeingold Feb 2017 #16
I see your point captain queeg Mar 2017 #17
It did. BOTH towers fell, slighly biased in the direction from which they were hit. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #23
redundancy factor captain queeg Mar 2017 #18
What is redundancy factor?how is it defined in stucture? Ptah Mar 2017 #19
Are you an engineer, or just look stuff up on the internrt to troll people? captain queeg Mar 2017 #20
You asked - Also, what the hell is a redundancy factor? Ptah Mar 2017 #21
Post counts are so meaningful when you're given accurate, source-able information in response AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #26
Grenfell Tower London gyroscope Jun 2017 #29
Because it's made of concrete, not steel. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #30
So steel-framed buildings should collapse from fire? gyroscope Jun 2017 #31
See this building in Denmark marylandblue Jun 2017 #33
But it didn't collapse gyroscope Jun 2017 #34
It's a partial collapse marylandblue Jun 2017 #38
Madrid Tower fire. All the upper floors are framed in steel and they collapse two hours into the AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #41
Hard to believe gyroscope Jun 2017 #32
Different issue in structures marylandblue Jun 2017 #35
You're ignoring the heatsink issue gyroscope Jun 2017 #36
Structural steel is usually insulated, per fire code marylandblue Jun 2017 #37
Seriously? gyroscope Jun 2017 #39
Go look up the definition of progressive collapse marylandblue Jun 2017 #43
Explosives brought down the OKC building gyroscope Jun 2017 #45
REpeat: Go look up the definition of progressive collapse marylandblue Jun 2017 #47
OKC: Progressive collapse caused by massive explosions at the base of the building gyroscope Jun 2017 #48
See post 47 marylandblue Jun 2017 #50
This message was self-deleted by its author marylandblue Jun 2017 #51
WTC7 straddled the con-edison substation. Have you ever heard an electrical transformer blow? AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #61
Interesting theory gyroscope Jun 2017 #65
I didn't say anything about fire. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #69
Your first sentence is true. However, it bears no relation to the WTC impacts/fires. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #62
It's a temperature thing. Watch the video of the Madrid Tower fire. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #42
Picture of what fire can do to structural steel marylandblue Jun 2017 #44
Good gyroscope Jun 2017 #46
Think about it this way marylandblue Jun 2017 #49
Comical analogy gyroscope Jun 2017 #52
Not really.sure how you can watch a video of a collapse marylandblue Jun 2017 #54
Madrid Tower Fire. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #60
Cardington fire tests disprove official collapse theory gyroscope Jun 2017 #53
So tell me marylandblue Jun 2017 #55
For a total collapse to be plausible gyroscope Jun 2017 #56
Sorry that is not the correct answer to my question marylandblue Jun 2017 #57
Your own link disproves the official fairy tale gyroscope Jun 2017 #58
You did not answer my question marylandblue Jun 2017 #63
The mass sitting above the fire on the South Tower was equal to the Yamato. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #59
I suggest we assign an exercise to.the conspiracy theorist marylandblue Jun 2017 #64
The thread topic is about WTC 7 gyroscope Jun 2017 #66
Well WTC 1 and 2 did come up earlier in the thread marylandblue Jun 2017 #67
Long span steel beams. AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #68
Well for WTC 7thinking of a different feature that isn't in WTC 1 or 2 marylandblue Jun 2017 #70
Look up Newton's third law of motion gyroscope Jun 2017 #71
How did you get from marylandblue Jun 2017 #72
So much smoke and mirrors gyroscope Jun 2017 #73
All I've done on this thread is asked questions you can't or won't answer marylandblue Jun 2017 #74
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»Explosions Before The Col...»Reply #0