Posting mode: Reply
[Return]
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Verification
Get a new challenge Get an audio challengeGet a visual challenge Help
File
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • このサイトについて - 翻訳


  • CAPTCHA added to reports due to tons of abuse. people were botting reports in an attempt to get posts deleted/overwhelm the reports queue. just like with the spam, this is the best way we have of dealing with the issue.

    File : 1289922379.jpg-(93 KB, 634x625, 1289922156611[1].jpg)
    93 KB Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:46 No.2887891  
    A 27 story apartment building in China was completely gutted in a huge fire, from ground level to story 27. Lots of people died. Good pics at the following link.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330095/Shanghai-apartment-block-killed-53-started-unlicense
    d-workmen.html?ITO=1490

    For some reason, the building did not collapse.

    A 52 story building in NYC collapsed into a pile of dust after a office fires confined to a couple floors burned for a few hours. And I quote, the official reason FEMA gave for the collapse of WTC 7 "Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors."

    So what is it /new/?

    Do the dirt poor Chinese have better engineering than top tier cities like NYC?
    >> fuck captcha get !IbVInx3YSI 11/16/10(Tue)10:47 No.2887897
         File1289922461.jpg-(15 KB, 406x288, 460-berlusconi_792155c.jpg)
    15 KB
    i guess china strong
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:49 No.2887905
    A plane didn't crash into the tower

    /thread
    >> Ozymandias Drakes !!kDcaRolvTz+ 11/16/10(Tue)10:49 No.2887908
    >>2887891
    40th day did 11-16
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:49 No.2887909
         File1289922590.jpg-(24 KB, 218x203, derp (2).jpg)
    24 KB
    >dirt poor Chinese
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:50 No.2887911
    Jet fuel burns hotter than peanut oil from chink food.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:52 No.2887925
    >27 story building
    >vs. a 110 story building
    Don't EVEN start.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:53 No.2887934
    >>2887905
    Plane didn't crash into the WTC 7 tower either

    >>2887911
    Valid point, even though WTC 7 didn't get too much jet fuel action, seeing as how no airplanes crashed into it.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:54 No.2887937
         File1289922848.jpg-(226 KB, 600x474, youheardme.jpg)
    226 KB
    dear op, we all know 9/11 was bullshit and the rest of the faggots on here are employed to feed us all bullshit. please stop giving them opportunities to smear their shit.

    thank you
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:54 No.2887940
    dizzam people, learn 2 read

    op is talking about wtc7, a building that collapsed on 9/11 many hours after the 2 large main wtc building collapsed.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:55 No.2887944
    Only shows the Chinese have shitty fire codes.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)10:57 No.2887954
    PULL IT
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:25 No.2888088
    >>2887891
    Chinese buildings are stronger than American buildings
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:32 No.2888130
    >>2887891
    >Do the dirt poor Chinese have better engineering than top tier cities like NYC?
    Well, obviously. And what on earth makes you think their engineers are "dirt poor"?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:38 No.2888164
    The WTC fires were insanely hot. Everything fucking melted.
    >> Anomynous 11/16/10(Tue)11:41 No.2888178
    >For some reason, the building did not collapse.
    Did it use truss structural elements?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:44 No.2888192
    >>2888164
    this

    A fire burning aircraft fuel will be several times hotter than a fire burning furnishings and building materials.

    OP is a dumbfuck.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:46 No.2888209
    >>2888164
    nothing melted, it just got really hot and metal is softer when hot
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:47 No.2888211
    Because a 27 story apartment building has the same loads as a 100+ skyscraper.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:47 No.2888219
    >Do the dirt poor Chinese have better engineering than top tier cities like NYC?

    How old was the building in China? How old was the building in NYC?

    Do you think that the NYC building was twice as high might have something to do with it?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:49 No.2888230
    the terrorsist must have used thier ali baba magic. amiright?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:50 No.2888238
         File1289926231.jpg-(336 KB, 1600x1200, 6d43bd6ejw6dbem3d5v32j[1].jpg)
    336 KB
    cool pics
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:50 No.2888241
    I was under the impression reptile communists from beyond the moon sent the cloverfield monster to destroy the world trade centre buildings from the sewer, as ordered by the jews and neo anarchists in a fiendish plot to eliminate the meal of dinner.

    I may be mistaken though.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:51 No.2888249
    >>2888241
    pretty close brah
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:52 No.2888256
    WTC7 was demolished
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:52 No.2888261
    >For some reason, the building did not collapse.

    because it wasn't "terrorism" (wink wink) only a fire that doesn't melt steel
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:53 No.2888265
    >>2888192
    >aircraft fuel
    >WTC 7

    cool story bro.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:55 No.2888289
         File1289926523.jpg-(48 KB, 379x500, thunder_thunder_thunder.jpg)
    48 KB
    >>2887891
    Oh? What's that? A building half the height of the one that fell in NY which was also built in an earthquake prone zone and thus built to take quakes didn't collapse?

    Why am I not surprised, hmm?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:58 No.2888311
    WTC 7 was much larger than this building and was also somewhat poorly designed. Failures at a few critical points were credited for collapse.

    Depending on when this building was built, it's also probably better engineered than WTC7, which was built in the early 80s'. All Chinese skyscrapers are designed by western architects or Chinese trained by western architects.

    Chinese buildings actually ARE stronger than American buildings, because ours are almost all 50-20 years old while theirs are 25-brand new years old. That's what you get for not updating infrastructure I guess.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)11:59 No.2888320
    werent wtc 1 and 2 designed to withstand plane impacts? why did debri magically pass the other surronnding buildings to only hit 7. cool story disinfo agents
    >> S.T.A.L.K.E.R. !!LMxbg8EyIsb 11/16/10(Tue)12:00 No.2888325
         File1289926800.jpg-(95 KB, 500x559, lolamericans.jpg)
    95 KB
    >Do the dirt poor Chinese have better engineering than top tier cities like NYC?
    short answer: yes they do
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:08 No.2888389
    Is anyone thinking "Great, less Chinks polluting now?". I feel horrible but the Chinese aren't gonna be quite friendly when we're in a much dirtier planet with less fossil-based fuels.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:10 No.2888401
    this is why we dont use bambo as scaffolding
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:12 No.2888422
         File1289927540.gif-(799 KB, 320x240, facepalming.gif)
    799 KB
    >mfw people think that they're not arguing with a troll
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:33 No.2888595
    >>2888320

    Wat? A bunch of other buildings around the WTC were also destroyed by debris.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:35 No.2888609
    >>2887891
    Asia has modern infrastructure we are still stuck using infrastructure from the 40s-70s its time we modernize it....
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:42 No.2888651
    >>2888609

    Yeah, let's tear down those ugly old Art Deco buildings and replace them with some beautiful, modern, giant boxes!!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:47 No.2888677
    >>2888320

    You missed the point where the whole WTC complex (7 buildings in total) were completely destroyed.
    Oh, and the part that 4 other buildings were destroyed, and a further ~10 received damage ranging form excessive to minimal.


    But i wasn't expecting something else from someone that supports a 9/11 "truth" movement. The only ability you have is to repeat things you saw on youtube videos.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)12:53 No.2888706
    >>2888241
    >communists
    China is authorian capitalistic.
    Communism failed already in China Mao Zedong saw that and scrapped the communistic utopia idea.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:13 No.2888841
         File1289931202.jpg-(98 KB, 300x300, expert.jpg)
    98 KB
    Because the fire proofing wasn't blown off by a fuck huge explosion before hand. And the reason that the Trade Centers collapsed is due to loss of structural integrity on the burning floors caused the floors above to fall down and crush the floors beneath them with their weight and acceleration due to gravity.

    There have been sky scrapes that caught on fire just like the Chinese one and they still didn't collapse. If you rip the asbestos jacket off the steel supports they will heat up and loss tensile strength quickly.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:16 No.2888862
    OMG, guys, an Norweigan ship hit an iceburg but didn't sink!!! Titanic was caused by the Jews!!!
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318969,00.html
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:18 No.2888875
    >>2888311
    The WTC7 collapse was due to it having a series of trusses as it's primary support structure. The fuel for buses that was stockpiled in the building caught fire and managed to heat up the trusses enough to cause the collapse. This could have been prevented with a more conventional design since more structural members would have had to be softened by heating to cause a collapse. In this case it was due to shit tier design, but not for WTC 1 and 2.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:18 No.2888876
    I assume since the fire took the entire building, the building weighs less? And as such is less prone to collapse?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:19 No.2888889
    >27 story building
    >a plane didn't crash into it

    That's about it.
    also
    >poor chinese
    >Implying china isn't the most powerful country, with some of the worlds best engineers
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:21 No.2888903
    >>2887891
    It was a lower temperature fire(not fueled by 2000 degree burning jet fuel). The building is newer than thus had better fireproofing on the beams. The fireproofing was also not stripped by a plane ramming the building at 500mph.

    The fireproofing was there, and it worked, simple as that.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:22 No.2888918
    I AM NOT KNOWINK WHY CHINA BILDING NO FALL DOWN !
    ALL BILDING EVERY PLACE MAKE EXACTLY SAME WAY EVERY TIME LIKE COOKIE CUTTER.

    IT IS A MYSTERY!

    27 STORY BILDING SAME SAME ALL OTHER BILDING ALL OVER WORLD SAME SAME ME NOT UNDERSTAND!

    IT IS A MYSTERY!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:23 No.2888921
         File1289931787.jpg-(14 KB, 260x326, 260px-Empirestate540.jpg)
    14 KB
    The B-25 Empire State Building crash was a 1945 aircraft accident in which a B-25 Mitchell piloted in thick fog crashed into the Empire State Building. While the structural integrity of the building was not compromised, fourteen people died (three crewmen and eleven in the building) and one million US dollars' damage was done.

    And still standing 65 years after that.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:40 No.2889047
    >>2888921

    Nice concrete building bro
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:45 No.2889084
    Hi I'm a retard who doesn't understand what stone slab construction is and how that affects what happens to a building when it's damaged. Should I post on the internet about how I think that a cabal of Jewish aliens are trying to trick us into believing climate change?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:45 No.2889089
    >>2888921

    >Comparing a B-25 to a 747

    fullretard.jpg
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:46 No.2889095
    >>2888921
    looks legit
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:48 No.2889107
    >>2888921

    >compares a accidental hit by a propeller driven plane with a deliberate crashing by a fully laden jet plane
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:48 No.2889109
         File1289933321.jpg-(23 KB, 310x349, after_twin_collapses.jpg)
    23 KB
    >>2889089
    >comparing no plane hit at all to a 757 strike
    >fullretard.png.gif.sh.bat.exe.7z.tar.gz
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:51 No.2889123
         File1289933470.jpg-(103 KB, 556x375, 1288599143836.jpg)
    103 KB
    A plane crashed into WTC7?

    THERE WAS A THIRD PLANE?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:52 No.2889136
    >>2889109
    Tell us more about how you believe that there was a massive conspiracy to destroy the building with a controlled demolition, and how you believe this with no evidence whatsoever and in the face of all evidence to the contrary, and how this informs your general political stance.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:53 No.2889138
    >>2889109
    >Shows picture of side of building facing away from WTC.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:53 No.2889147
    >>2889109
    Good thing that building was built on solid ground and not on top of some kind of underground parking structure which collapsed, where in the "ground surface level" surrounding it was actually the ceiling of a larger structure. And that larger structure had not suffered any damage from say... a couple skyscrapers collapsing?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:53 No.2889150
         File1289933636.jpg-(35 KB, 400x400, 1289369638938.jpg)
    35 KB
    >>2889136
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:55 No.2889159
    >>2889136
    Who said anything about massive? Odds are, less than a dozen.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:56 No.2889167
    >>2889047
    Actually that stuff that looks like stonework is all iron and steel. No concrete in the Empire State.

    Faggots cannot into engineering school.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)13:57 No.2889174
    >>2889159
    What well-developed paranoid fantasies you have. I bet you even know the terrorists' names!
    >> Red and Black !!j5nJtwIUFuN 11/16/10(Tue)13:57 No.2889176
    The building had its fire protection intact, and didn't have burning jet fuel on its supports.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:10 No.2889709
    Damn OP you finally uncovered it. Time to take off all our jew masks and reveal our reptilian nature.

    Hissssss damn you hissssssssssssss
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:20 No.2889753
    guys

    guys

    listen here

    guys

    listen

    what if

    no seriously pay attention

    what if terrorists did 9/11?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:25 No.2889784
         File1289939142.gif-(682 KB, 320x240, 1288758061272.gif)
    682 KB
    SO THERE WAS A PLANE THAT HIT WTC7, NOPE!!!!

    CAUSE THE FUCKING JEWS BLEW THEM UP SO THEY COULD HAVE A "REASON" FOR WAR.

    HERE IS LARRY SILVERSTEIN ADMITTING THEY DEMOLISHED THE BUILDING:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100

    FALSE FLAG ATTACK!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:27 No.2889797
    uhm not hit by plane but didn't collapse in free fall? is it a wizard?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:29 No.2889805
    Basically what you're saying is...
    2 different kind of buildings which were built differently and set on fire in 2 different ways (one of them had generators with alot of fuel in it) have to behave completely the same way. Yeah, go and fuck yourself you retarted piece of shit.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:31 No.2889825
    >>2889753
    that changes EVERYTHING
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:31 No.2889826
    >>2889176
    That "fire protection system"? 2-100 gallon water-tanks on every other floor. They had no system.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:34 No.2889860
    >guy posts a story about chink building burning and not collapsing
    >mentions WTC 7
    >/new/ quickly fights back by saying WTC 7 was hit by a plane as well (lolwut?)

    NEVER CHANGE /new/
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:37 No.2889873
    THIS JUST IN: WTC 7 WAS NOT HIT BY A PLANE AND DID NOT HAVE JET FUEL ALL OVER IT
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:42 No.2889910
    >>2887911
    >>2889856
    >>2889176
    >>2888903
    >>2888211
    >>2888192
    >>2888164
    >>2887925

    Tribute to the idiots that think:

    A) An airplane crashed into WTC
    B) The fires inside WTC 7 were jet fuel

    No joke, look this shit up.

    Noobs always be noobs
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:44 No.2889930
         File1289940282.jpg-(45 KB, 468x404, 1266847488119.jpg)
    45 KB
    lol this thread just shows how ignorant and how political correct people on this fucking board are. No planes hit the building, the building had some fires a couple of floors for a long time, suddenly the building collapses in its own footprint in freefall speed.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:44 No.2889932
    >>2889147
    That's assuming WTC 7 frame didn't go 100 feet underground, way deeper than whatever underground spaces there were.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:45 No.2889936
    >>2889873

    But it did have back up generators powered by large supplies of diesel fuel.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:46 No.2889944
    >>2887891
    You mean a building that actually had people working to save it didn't burn down?

    I'm shocked.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:46 No.2889947
    >>2888289
    >>2888289
    >>2888289
    >>2888289
    >>2888289
    FUCKING THIS!

    ARE YOU ALL RETARDED?!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:47 No.2889949
    >>2889947
    Don't try to reason with them.

    Conspiracy theorism is a mental disorder.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:50 No.2889968
         File1289940602.jpg-(90 KB, 600x458, 1288793947059.jpg)
    90 KB
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

    >>2889949
    Blind faith in authority is a mental disorder.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)15:52 No.2889991
         File1289940772.jpg-(54 KB, 327x500, art_citicorp.jpg)
    54 KB
    Did someone say shoddy engineering thread? 'Cause I thought I heard someone say shoddy engineering thread!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)17:49 No.2890895
    >>2889991
    Why are you posting this building? I work for the company that owns this building! LoL, never thought i would see something like this on /new/.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)17:57 No.2890930
    The NSA is busy today i see.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:11 No.2891000
    9/11,inside job, sheeple,etc..
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:18 No.2891026
    >>2890895
    Look up the history of the citicorp building. It almost tipped over due to a design mistake and would have taken out several city blocks with it.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:20 No.2891033
    what is the point of all this bullshit? oligarchy? i hope you slip in the shower.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:21 No.2891036
    itt sheeple defend their tyrannical government
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:23 No.2891044
    >>2890895

    You work for Citicorp?

    GTFO, banker parasite.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:23 No.2891045
    It's a different building + the damage was different

    You can't use a completely different building and completely different situation as a control group. That's entirely unscientific and also pretty stupid.
    >> atheismIsGay !vGv2tTtlQg!!9mqbryF59RE 11/16/10(Tue)18:25 No.2891053
    >>2891045
    >derp derp ill ignore that no plane ever hit wtc 7 and that it had less fire for less time than this chinese building

    itt sheeple literally programmed to deny obvious reality for comforting lies
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:27 No.2891059
    >>2891053

    So the amount and location of damage needed to collapse a building doesn't vary between buildings?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:31 No.2891078
    >>2891053

    >no plane hit wtc7

    You're right. A building hit wtc7.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:31 No.2891080
    the government has been bought by special interests
    >> atheismIsGay !vGv2tTtlQg!!9mqbryF59RE 11/16/10(Tue)18:31 No.2891082
    >>2891059
    so youre literally trying to explain how a building with more fire and damage in almost every single floor is less likely to collapse than one which only had it on 2 floors because of "location and extent of the damage"

    ...do you realize how that makes zero sense? liberals these days will say just about anything to continue living in their fantasy world
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:32 No.2891089
    >>2887891
    "A completely different building caught fire under completely different circumstances than the WTC and didn't fall down! That means 9/11 was an inside job!"

    Really? This is what 9/11 conspiracy theorists use to validate their beliefs?

    e.e
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:34 No.2891100
    >>2891082
    >implying there where only fires on 2 floors of WTC 7
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:35 No.2891102
    >>2891080
    Rupert Murdoch and David and Charles Koch financed the Tea party during the last election.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:36 No.2891107
    >>2891102
    Dude, you're gonna get v&.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:36 No.2891108
         File1289950574.jpg-(10 KB, 480x360, hqdefault.jpg)
    10 KB
    >4chan engineers

    Niggers, the lot of you.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:38 No.2891118
    >>2891082

    Think about it. The maximum amount of thought you've put into seeing how was wtc7 fell was seeing a few pictures where there appears not to be much damage and then concluding that the building could not have possibly fallen.

    There's some specific damage that happened on floor 13 that largely contributed to the collapse.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:38 No.2891128
    >>2891108
    more like a handful of 2nd year engineering students with no real world experience and barely any idea how to actually apply what they know.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:39 No.2891133
    You took photographs?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:40 No.2891136
    >>2891102
    supreme court allowing corporations to give unlimited anonymous campaign contributions. you'll never know again.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:40 No.2891139
         File1289950829.jpg-(6 KB, 180x191, 1289549677404.jpg)
    6 KB
    >Firehouse: Other people tell me that there were a lot of firefighters in the street who were visible, and they put out traffic cones to mark them off?
    >Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o�clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o�clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

    >my face when people assume they must have paid off the firefighters to keep quiet about it, the same ones who rushed in the buildings and died
    >> atheismIsGay !vGv2tTtlQg!!9mqbryF59RE 11/16/10(Tue)18:41 No.2891148
    >>2891118
    and i suppose you have a wonderful explanation for the fact that all 4 black boxes were supposedly not found even though only about 10 in world history have ever been not found, and i suppose you have a wonderful explanation for why the government releases no video from the pentagon attack even though there are cameras everywhere.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:41 No.2891149
    http://conspiracyscience.com/articles/911/building-seven/

    YO DAWG, I HEARD YOU LIKE CONSPIRACY THEORIES, SO I PUT SOME FACTUAL DEBUNKING ON YOUR INTERNET SO YOU CAN HERP WHILE YOU DERP
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:41 No.2891152
         File1289950901.jpg-(114 KB, 1000x1000, designall.jpg)
    114 KB
    1. the building was still under construction and the heat could escape out the sides

    2. the steel uses chinese grade (asbestos) fire protection.

    and the most important point:
    3. since the building was unoccupied, there wasn't anything to burn hot enough to weaken steel.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:43 No.2891162
    >>2891149
    >leading edge damage on single corner
    >fell directly into own footprint

    >two other buildings
    >asymmetric damage
    >also fell directly into own footprint

    >the odds of this are incalculable, and you know it.
    >> sage 11/16/10(Tue)18:43 No.2891163
    >>2887905
    >IMPLYING A PLANE CRASH INTO WTC7
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:44 No.2891166
    >>2891148

    Why do you say they weren't found? Are you seriously implying that people other than terrorists were the ones who flew the planes into the towers? Who would do that?
    >> atheismIsGay !vGv2tTtlQg!!9mqbryF59RE 11/16/10(Tue)18:45 No.2891170
    >>2891166
    dont worry about what im >implying

    worry about the fact that there are a million coincidences
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:46 No.2891177
    >>2891148

    >all 4 black boxes were supposedly not found
    http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/penn.attack/
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:48 No.2891193
    >>2891177
    So they found the black box at the crash site where nothing else plane crash related was found.

    Stay classy US Govt.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:48 No.2891195
    This is what happens when a building isnt wired with explosives
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:48 No.2891196
    >>2891026
    Engineers fixed this problem years ago. You can look into how they fixed balance issue yourself, it is quite a marvel of engineering.

    >>2891044
    Faggot, Citi doesn't own this building. BXP, the company i work for owns it :) along with many many other Class A office buildings in big cities. Companies pay a premium to rent our buildings.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:49 No.2891207
    >>2891177

    Also, they're still finding remains from the other crashes even recently, in case you didn't know, there was quite a bit of rubble. And not all of the flight recorders you mention were found within the first few years of the crash, and most of them they didn't have much to sort through in terms of debris.
    >> atheismIsGay !vGv2tTtlQg!!9mqbryF59RE 11/16/10(Tue)18:50 No.2891214
    >>2891177
    talking about the world trade planes. there were 2 boxes in each plane
    >> FALCON !!uZwyOWwqjT7 11/16/10(Tue)18:50 No.2891215
    >>2888320
    yep, they were designed to stop planes that were around when it was build, modern jets are much larger
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:51 No.2891221
    >>2891170

    You're proposing a theory with holes in it in order to refute one that relies merely on coincidences.

    Coincidences happen, but holes generally don't.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:52 No.2891231
    >>2889930
    >Richard Gage

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)18:54 No.2891244
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFVoencqfZw

    Meant this
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:00 No.2891283
    >>2891196
    I'm not implying the engineering faults still exist. But it was a big fuckup that such a huge flaw was overlooked to the point that it was present in the construction.

    It should have been noticed in any of the dozens of design and engineering meetings that took place between the design and construction phases of the project.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:01 No.2891289
         File1289952088.jpg-(652 KB, 907x1053, WTC7.jpg)
    652 KB
    >>2891078
    LOL
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:05 No.2891318
    >>2891221
    NO!!!!!!
    HOLES HAPPEN YOU BLIND SHEEP!!! HOLES THAT LEAD TO THE HOLLOW EARTH IN THE 5TH DIMENSION INSIDE OUR PLANET, RULED OVER BY THE LIZARD KINGS OF ILLUMNAIT BORN IN ROSWELL!!! 9/11 WAS CAUSED BY EVIL JEWISH STAR MEN FROM BEYOND TIME WITH THE POWER OF THE EVIL LIBERAL MEDIA TO SEND US ALL TO SLEEP!!!! BUZZ ALDRIN IS A ROBOT THEY BROUGHT BACK FROM HITLERS SECRET NAZI MOON BASE AND THE MOON IS THE RESULT OF A PROJECTION BUILT BY THE ROTHSCHILDS TO DISGUISE THE ALIEN MOTHERSHIP!!!!!

    WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!

    WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:11 No.2891346
         File1289952719.jpg-(21 KB, 300x300, Statler and Waldorf.jpg)
    21 KB
    >>2891318
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:13 No.2891353
    build falls on WTC 7

    WTC 7 burns and collapses hours later

    ITS A CONSPURCY MANG
    >> Alpharius 11/16/10(Tue)19:18 No.2891396
    CHINESE BUILDING WAS MADE OF CONCRETE.
    CHINESE BUILDING WAS ALSO SMALLER THAN BUILDING 7.

    TALL THINGS COLLAPSE EASIER THAN SMALL THINGS.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:21 No.2891412
    >>2891396
    NO!!!!!!!!!!!! TALL AND SMALL MEAN NOTHING!!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE ILLUSIONS AND LIES FILTERED INTO OUR MIND BY THE PRESERVED BRAIN OF NIKOLAI TESLA, NOW IN THE THRALL OF THE SECRET MASTERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:21 No.2891413
    Can a conspiracy theorist explain why "they" would bother executing a controlled demolition of WTC 7?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:26 No.2891462
    >>2891413

    the cia had offices there with tax records of a bunch of corporations and other field office shit. plus new yorks crisis meeting room was there.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:32 No.2891518
    >>2891413
    TO KEEP US ASLEEP!!!!!!
    FALSE FLAG TO TAKE AWAY OUR SACRED BILL OF RIGHTS!!!!!
    TO OPEN UP THE DOORS OF BABYLON FOR THE INVASION FROM SATAN!!!!!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:34 No.2891537
    >>2891462
    "Hey bill, got a few offices full of evidence we don't need leaking... What can we do with it...?"
    "We could burn it I guess..."
    "Nah, that's too sensible... I know, how about we crash a plane or two into the building it's in, set the building to explode, also attack the pentagon and THEN blame it on the towelheads....?"

    FUCKING GENIUS
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:38 No.2891566
    >>2891537

    >well we could burn it i guess

    implying thats not what actually happened.

    also the insurance payouts on this shit was huge
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)19:40 No.2891579
    >>2891566
    Ok, so burning a few polaroids of mothman will bring down a building, but a plane crashing into it won't....?
    Fuck your Ikeian logic.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:08 No.2891761
    >>2891289
    >>2891289
    >>2891289
    >>2891289
    >>2891289
    >>2891289
    >>2891289
    >>2891289

    Everyone please shut the fuck up
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:15 No.2891800
    because it wasn't hit by a plane dipshit.

    /thread
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:21 No.2891830
    >constantly sound like an idiot for years yelling about how a jet airliner wouldn't take down a building.

    >notice you kinda do sound nutty

    >switch argument to another building.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:23 No.2891837
    >>2891830
    >sidestep or outright ignore inconvenient facts
    >lol science
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:24 No.2891846
    >also the insurance payouts on this shit was huge

    So what? You think insurance companies won't investigate themselves or read reports on such big payouts? Of course not. The fact that Silverstein got the money in an event that everyone had their eye on is further proof that there was no foul play involved.

    Furthermore, Silverstein is still paying for the lease Ground Zero AND he rebuilt WTC7.

    That isn't exactly one calls "profit"
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:26 No.2891858
    Dear conspiracy fucktards.

    Buildings are different inside, like people, and consequentially similar events can cause vastly different results.

    PS you are all crazy and stupid

    -A sane person
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:31 No.2891885
    >>2891858
    >which explains without a shadow of a doubt why they all fell directly into their own footprints.
    >thanks
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:33 No.2891897
    According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

    only person here to provide a source that isn't tinfoil hat, as well.

    Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center#wtc7
    >> Ausfag !!gAVDY1puR3J 11/16/10(Tue)20:34 No.2891904
    >>2891858
    >Every single support beam would have to be cut simultaneously for WTC7 to fall like it did.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:34 No.2891907
    >>2891858
    dear sheep
    bahaahhahahah ........................................
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:35 No.2891910
    >>2891904
    >THEREFORE, EXPLOSIVES
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:36 No.2891922
    >>2891885
    >>2891885

    If it fell on its own footprint, how did it damage nearby buildings...?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:37 No.2891924
    >>2891897
    >popular mechanics
    >credible source
    >choose one
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:38 No.2891933
    >>2891924
    >National Institute of Standards and Technology
    >vs
    >ANARCHYWTCJEWSCOMMUNISTS.COM
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:40 No.2891944
    >>2891922
    it leap frogged over building 6 and jumped on WTC7's head!

    But seriously - how do you think? "Collapsing into its footprint" describes the direction of the fall through the path of greatest resistance. But... you know what? Even a standing building has a footprint on its ground floor. So when the whole building collapses into its own footprint, there is no room for all the debris from every floor to remain in the same place so it billows out. "Falling into its footprint" describes the action of the collapse - ie it didn't topple, snap, slide, sheer etc. You need to watch the moving images to see what is described.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:42 No.2891956
    so who is the terrorist? The muslim who flew the planes, or the US building contractors who failed to build towers as stable as the chinese build 'em?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:42 No.2891964
    Selective Reading: The thread
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:46 No.2891988
    >>2891933
    >>2891897
    senior researcher of the "debunking" article was .... Benjamin Chertoff who is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

    in case you didn't know ... the DHS (a department that operates with disregard to the constitution and established law) was formed BECAUSE of 9/11.

    the "senior researchers" cousin is one of the biggest puppets in the US government right now.

    nope no conflict of interest here.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:50 No.2892014
    because collapse will destroy all the evidence
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:50 No.2892015
    >>2891988
    No way..

    Chertoff group is responsible for airport scanner security. They employ Lord John Reid as a director. John Reid was the guy who appeared on BBC news saying that we should NOT remove security from airports the day BEFORE the printer cartridge bomb was found.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:51 No.2892025
    >>2891988
    >>2891988
    he is no longer serving - one of the jewish ZOG clowns that obama actually replaced.

    Chertoff has been an advocate of full body scanners at airports. In 2010 he admitted that a client of his security firm, the Chertoff Group, is Rapiscan Systems, one of the two manufacturers of this technology.[21]

    hes also the same fag with a vested interest in body scanning tech.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:54 No.2892045
    >senior researcher of the "debunking" article was .... Benjamin Chertoff who is the cousin of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

    Ad hom argument, if this were true. Too bad it isn't, as the source is just a nutty Neo Nazi who actually scared other neo nazis. Chris Bollyn, look him up.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)20:56 No.2892057
    >>2892045
    Not ad hom. In legal terms it would be identifying a conflict of interest as the guy earns actual money from taking the stance that he has. Anyway he DID write the article:

    >Benjamin Chertoff is a journalist, photographer and video producer. He is most known for his work on the Popular Mechanics article 9/11: Debunking The Myths.
    >> Natural Ice !YbM21CSaro 11/16/10(Tue)20:59 No.2892078
    >>2892057
    In any case, nobody ITT seems to be arguing about the actual science involved. Instead they're devolving into pointless Jew bashing just like every other thread on /new/.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:00 No.2892081
    >>2892045
    wrong.

    nice try though.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:02 No.2892098
    >>2892078
    only you bro. only you.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:06 No.2892126
    >>2892078
    That's all there is in this case- cite an unbiased, objective scientific look at the collapse itself as well as the economic and societal relationship of everyone who stood to gain and lose from such an event.

    Nightmare mode:
    Nobody doing the investigating in your cited article is politically connected or stood to gain / lose.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:15 No.2892196
    the government spent more money on investigative panels when bill clinton got his dick sucked as president, and when the space shuttle blew up.

    the 9/11 commission in addition to being underfunded, omitted critical evidence and had conflicts on interest on the panels.

    it was an inside job, I know you like to think your government is better than the rest, but they aren't - they have A LOT of blood on their hands.

    cover ups and white washes happen in all governments, for example the katyn forest massacre was used as leverage by the soviet union to murder innocents and blame someone else.

    history is written by the victor.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:37 No.2892356
    >>2891904
    >Every single support beam would have to be cut simultaneously
    >simultaneously

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkOGkdNq13k
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:38 No.2892361
    WTC 7????
    stupidest conspiracy ever.
    it fell 7 HOURS after the first hit.
    7 hours. if they wanted to detonate it they would do it much sooner.
    second. the theory that it was a controlled demolition is bunk. when the building is collapsing they try to say the "white smoke" coming out of the bottom is a bomb going off.
    white smoke doesn't come from a bomb and the "smoke" is actually dust from the building COLLAPSING and pushing it out of the bottom.
    Illuminati conspiracy are much more solid than any of these 9/11 theories.
    if you have a dollar bill try and find the Owl on the back. it is in the top right corner. find the 1 in the top right corner. now look at the left corner of that 1. can you see it? bohemian grove?
    trippy.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:40 No.2892371
    >>2892361
    OWL ON DOLLAR BILL = WTC7 WAS HIT BY A PLANE

    you heard it here first folks. The sleepers are so desperate and full of self-doubt these days! It's great!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:43 No.2892397
    >>2892057
    he just references other sources.

    If the government truly committed all these crimes, why don't they just kill people like you? They killed thousands of Americans in one day, what's one guy?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:48 No.2892428
    >>2892397
    /thread
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:48 No.2892429
    >>2892397
    why waste the price of a bullet? While nobody does anything there is no reason to provoke them by starting to execute the civilian population.

    Seriously, if that is what the sleeper argument has come to then I have never been so optimistic about the future - seems the sleepers are losing.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:49 No.2892441
    >>2892429
    >the price of a bullet
    >yeahokay.tiff


    You have no real answer.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:55 No.2892476
    >>2892441
    If i have no real answer it is because you have no real question.

    I mean... REALLY? You think the best reason for 9/11 being 19 saudi nationals hijacking planes with penknives and flying them into two buildings that causes the 3 most important buildings in the area to collapse in on themselves with minimum collateral damage is that the US government does not execute people who post on 4chan pointing out the holes in their propaganda? Really? You are so filled with doubt these days, sleepers.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:55 No.2892477
    >>2892045
    Benjamin Chertoff and Michael Chertoff are not related.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)21:58 No.2892493
    >>2892477
    >Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the new Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin."
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:00 No.2892509
    Say these people who suggest Building 7 was built badly and its design was terrible which led to its completely inprobable collapse are correct...

    When to the lawsuits start?

    Because surely a building that does something that no other building had ever done until that point - and it did it due to design failings - someone is gonna get sued?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:01 No.2892525
    >>2892509
    hey man my BRO died from 911 and now you want to SUE him? Fuck you bro!
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:09 No.2892581
    >>2892493
    >Here's the story, as best as I know: I'm not related to Michael Chertoff, at least in any way I can figure out. We might be distant relatives, 15 times removed, but then again, so might you and I. Bottom line is I've never met him, never communicated with him, and nobody I know in my family has ever met or communicated with him.

    >As for what my mom said: When Chertoff was nominated to be head of homeland security it was the first I'd heard of him, and the same for my family (and, FYI, we'd already sent the 9/11 issue to the press by then!). My dad and I thought there might be some distant relation. When Chris Bollyn called and asked my mom if there was a relation (introducing himself as only "Chris"), she said "they might be distant cousins." Like much in the conspiracy world, this was taken WAY out of context. (Another case in point: Bollyn called me earlier and asked "Were you the senior researcher on the story?" I said, "I guess so," -- that's not a title I have ever used, nor is it at all common in magazine journalism, but I was the research editor at the time, so it kinda made sense.) Nonetheless, I was one of 9 reporters on the story, not counting editors, photo researchers, photo editors, copy editors, layout designers, production managers, fact-checkers, etc., etc., etc. who worked on this story.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:12 No.2892614
    >>2892493
    The source being a neo-nazi who was rejected by other neo-nazis. BTW, he is a fugitive now because he was arrested for assaulting an officer and was intoxicated. His own wife testified against him.

    Amazing source
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:18 No.2892672
    >>2892614
    brett stephens editor of the jerusalem post and wall street journal columnist? Ok try to smear away with godwin's law if you want...
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:21 No.2892700
    >>2892672

    You're telling me a guy who writes for a paper that advocates giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Hitler, assaulted a POLICE OFFICER while drunk on his front lawn, and ran away from a court date labelling him a fugitive...

    is someone we can trust as a primary source?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:25 No.2892724
    >>2892700

    I dunno, you had a president who was a drunk, duty dodging corrupt oil handling, war monger who invaded two countries because... well... oil and location?

    So you had no problem with colourful backstories then.

    Oh and a vice president who ran one of the most corrupt fucked up companies in the history of the planet.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:25 No.2892725
    >>2892397

    because ridicule and mass propaganda is far more effective in silencing truth.

    It's easy to trigger the sheeples default programming.

    look at this thread. regardless of whether or not the "9/11 was an inside job" meme is false or not i've seen at least 7 people in this thread claim that wtc 7 was hit by a plane.

    Now how could so many uninformed people be so adamantly certain about something they know nothing about?


    Because of course the goverment/media said x events happened in x way so of course it's true has to be true. Never mind the details.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:25 No.2892733
    >>2892700
    Not a defense of the Nazi alcoholic cop killer, but rather a scathing indictment of both sides:

    Feel free to find me someone on the 9/11 commission report panel that's more credible.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:26 No.2892739
    >>2892700
    No this guy:
    >He supports military action against Iran and has urged Obama to support Israel. He wrote "Why Hasn't Israel Bombed Iran (Yet)?" and wrote that Israel is in "frightful peril". [5]
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:52 No.2892881
    Truthers: continuing to amuse.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:56 No.2892905
    >>2892733
    Richard Clarke

    Besides, do you honestly believe the 9/11 Comission Report was beneficial to Bush?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)22:59 No.2892932
    Because an airplane didn't smash into it.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:00 No.2892941
    "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:01 No.2892949
    >>2892905
    Yes, it was beneficial to him

    Citing a lifelong federal employee with connections to the State Department, Reagan and by proxy Bush is not citing someone who is credible.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:04 No.2892983
    >>2892949
    Try reading the 9/11 Commission Report sometime then. It shows Bush didn't give much attention to Clinton's warnings or Al-Q in general.

    As for Richard Clarke, are we talking about the same one that said to the victims "The Government failed you" and wrote a book that included how Bush dropped the ball on 9/11? The same Richard Clarke that was character assassinated by conservative groups and media organizations, such as Fox News?

    And despite all the shit Bush administrator put him through, he still thinks 9/11 deniers are full of shit?

    I loled, hard.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:06 No.2892996
         File1289966787.jpg-(92 KB, 429x575, building7.jpg)
    92 KB
    >For some reason, the building did not collapse.

    Jet fuel burn a LOT hotter. As well this might be a bit of a shock but, A PLANE DIDN'T HIT IT.

    >WTC 7

    Oh good lord.

    Two GIANT buildings fell on it. The city lost a good deal of their firemen and woman in those two buildings. Not about to send them into a ANOTHER structurally weakened inferno. Letting it burn out was about the best thing you could do at that point.

    tldr; Building 7 was pretty badly hit.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:07 No.2892999
    >>2892996
    burns*
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:11 No.2893037
    9/11 was the only way to demolish those ugly buildings
    that's what 9/11 was about
    freeing up valuable real estate
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:13 No.2893061
    I'm surprised they're actually trying to put the fire out.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:15 No.2893077
         File1289967349.jpg-(25 KB, 260x224, guaranteed-lottery-winner.jpg)
    25 KB
    We both bought lottery tickets but he won and I didn't...

    MUST BE A CONSPIRACY
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:15 No.2893079
    if 9/11 doesn't matter...
    what does
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:23 No.2893130
    >>2893079

    Niggers!
    >> Natural Ice !YbM21CSaro 11/16/10(Tue)23:30 No.2893178
    Yet more dodging science with credibility issues, I see.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:31 No.2893191
    >>2892996

    >Two GIANT buildings fell on it.

    They really didnt fall 'on it', you could make a case of them being hit, but then you'd imagine the building would fall over. Infact you'd expect the towers to topple over at the impact site.

    But no, a building with a suspected deisel fire caused by a malfunctioning generator that turned itself off... then for no apparent reason turned itself back on again (for no reason anyones come up with other than... it did) caused a fire hot enough that it weaken the basement area struts, which then, coupled with the impact damage to one side of the building.... caused it to collapse down on its self - which had never happened to any comparable building upto September 11th... where it happened 3 times to two sets of buildings that were built at different times and to different regulations.

    But what the hell right, its only logic and physics and what good are those.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:33 No.2893210
    Also, whats the deal with Americans whining on about how much they hate the government and how they're lying and corrupt - but when people actually point out some of the lying and corrupt stuff they've done, they get ridiculed and called tinfoil nutjobs?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:35 No.2893231
    >>2893210
    Control of two key areas:
    1: Schools
    2: Media
    >> Taylor Swift is my waifu !l7kOEym1Qw 11/16/10(Tue)23:38 No.2893253
    The 27 story building in China had a fire, WTC collapsed from falling towers. Nothing in common.

    WTC 7 collapsed because of the ground shaking from WTC 1 and 2 collapsing, and seeing as how NYC isn't prone to earthquakes it wasn't built to withstand earthquake like forces.

    Take off your tinfoil hats people.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:40 No.2893270
    >>2893210

    because of the way Illuminati and Reptile overlords keep popping up in their statements.
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:42 No.2893291
         File1289968978.png-(7 KB, 327x389, 1285399715022.png)
    7 KB
    >>2893253
    >WTC Collapsed from falling towers
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:44 No.2893298
    >>2893270

    Theres plenty of people who dont the whole reptile/rothchild thing question corporate/governement ownership - its just sad they all get lumped in together.

    Much like the whole Islam/terrorist thing really :/
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:44 No.2893300
    >"Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors."


    DON'T MIND THE TWO 110 STORIES TALL BUILDING COLLAPSING RIGHT NEXT TO IT . THESE WOULD NEVER HAVE MAKE THE WTC 7 BUILDING UNSTABLE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:46 No.2893316
    >>2893300
    Still ignoring the fact that asymmetric damage of questionable extent caused a 3rd building to collapse directly into its own footprint.

    What... are... the... odds?
    >> Anonymous 11/16/10(Tue)23:48 No.2893334
         File1289969298.jpg-(30 KB, 460x288, china_1432267c.jpg)
    30 KB
    >Chinese buildings
    >good

    Pick one.

    Pic related, it's what happened in Shanghai after some moron dug a huge pit next to an apartment building without reinforcing the sides of the pit. The ground gave out and the building fell on its side.

    LOL
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:01 No.2893434
    >>2893191
    The diesel generators were a non-issue, that's the conclusion the official report came to. Even without the problems a diesel generator might cause. The damage caused by debris from the other towers in addition to the fire. Even the areas where the fire burnt out are a factor, because of what happens when steel cools. It's doubtful that the building would have collapsed if firefighters were allowed to fight it.
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:07 No.2893480
    THEY FLEW TWO HUGE PLANES INTO THE TOWERS
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:15 No.2893539
    >>2893480
    Typical sleeper, ignorant of the fact that a third building collapsed.
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:18 No.2893566
    >>2893334
    From the look of that building its still sound even on its side, the pit was a weakness to its foundation, that doesn't mean the building wasn't built well, it means some idiot dug a pit and destroyed a buildings foundation.
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:29 No.2893648
    >>2893480
    THEY TOOK OUR JERBS
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:41 No.2893769
    >>2889167
    I believe the Bible says that the 2nd Babylon will be made out of wood and steal.

    > If this wasn't made out of wood and steal, then China is not the 2nd Babylon.

    > The United States may be...

    > Maybe it's supposed to be a different nation, then?

    Look to the Bible for answers...
    >> Anonymous 11/17/10(Wed)00:49 No.2893844
    >>2893566

    The same contractor that dug said pit also built the building....



    [Return]
    Delete Post [File Only]
    Password
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]
    Watched Threads
    PosterThread Title
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]AnonymousHoly fucking ou...