Not as long as 24 hours
It seems you aren't all that familiar with the science that proves it, just like with the last conspiracy theory you wanted to sell me.
Please, don't flatter yourself. I know better than to try to teach someone who already knows it all.
I am as familiar with the science as you or anyone else is, but I have no need to be as there are plenty of reputable scientist telling me that.
I still don't know why you think it's odd that a building that was on fire for 9 hours collapsed and fell down.
I do not think it is odd because I know that it was brought down by a controlled series of explosions because I am familiar with the science that proves it. Oh, you should be shocked if you knew that other building of the same type of construction have been engulfed in fire for 24 hours and did not collapse. Building 7 fires were mere office fires and there was no structural damage sufficient enough to bring it down.
Good, then why bother trying to say that the building was just "grazed" by the plane?
I didn't, that was a quote with a link.
So nothing ever goes wrong in the 20th/21st century? People can't be wrong. Come on now.
Yes, things go wrong, after all, George Bush was voted in a second time after being complicit in the killing of over 3000 innocent people. But in this case it went wrong twice, once for each tower that was both built to withstand a multiple impact by commercial planes. It still does not count for the speed of the collapse and the sounds of explosions as it fell, but most importantly, the thermite that was found in the dust of the twin towers and building 7. Why would you find thermite, that is used by demolition engineers, in a place like that?
I would never argue that architects and builders (or anybody else for that matter) could never be wrong. I would never argue that human beings are capable for accounting for every single scenario that could possibly ever happen.
Neither would I, however, 1,700 Architects & Engineers is good for me. This nonprofit organization represents more than 1,700 architects, engineers, and other technical experts – including Lynn Margulis, National Medal of Science winner – who are calling for a new scientific investigation into the destruction of all three WTC skyscrapers on 9/11.
Right, like in this instance.
Yes, people believe the government that they voted for. The NIST report have white washed half a nation, however, 146 million still have their heads screwed on.
You've apparently completely missed the point.
People thought at the time that it was unsinkable. Just like how you apparently feel that the Twin Towers were built so perfectly that two commercial airliners couldn't destroy them.
As I have said, a couple of times now, but you insist on repeating yourself, so I have to put you right, I have never said that I believe the Twin Towers to be built perfectly just built to withstand a strike by multiple airplane.
People thought at the time that it was unsinkable, however, that was in 1912. We are far more intellectually advance 104 years later. The comparison is very a poor one. The building’s chief engineer, John Skilling, had actually designed the whole thing to survive multiple impacts of 707’s at 600 mph, planes not much smaller than 757’s.
Why make claims about insults when you haven't been insulted?
You either need to have everything explained to you or you do it to wind me up. I did not say that you insulted me. I said "I am not that stupid, though I am sure that you will seize the opportunity to insult me." I made that judgement based on passed insults, but obviously by saying it, before you came back with an insult, stopped you from insulting me.
I've seen and heard architects say the opposite of what you're saying. So where does that leave us?
It leaves you backing the wrong horse and it leaves me continuing my support for the experts who have the truth about what happened on the 9th November 2001. It will all come out and you will kick yourself, along with millions of other blinker visions conformists will, however, by then another 911 will no doubt happen and you will think that there is smoke without fire when it comes to the authorities that govern us.
People hijacked planes and flew them into big tall towers which caught on fire and collapsed. The culprits are dead. Why is it so difficult to believe that planes hitting towers could cause their collapse?
No, they are not dead, Seven of them are alive and well living a wonderful life. Why, because they were never there.
Because it has never happened before and the building’s chief engineer, John Skilling, had actually designed the whole thing to survive multiple impacts of 707’s at 600 mph, planes not much smaller than 757’s
How did all these people supposedly carry in and set up all these explosives all around the towers without anyone ever noticing anything strange? That's just for starters.
The let me dismiss your starter and give you one back in the process. Larry Silverstein leases a nearly worthless dinosaur WTC building complex (worthless due to the
asbestos the buildings were stuffed with and needed to be cleaned up, the cost of which may have rivaled the value of the buildings themselves) weeks before 9/11, makes sure it is over insured against terrorist acts and hires an Israeli security firm. From that moment on the coast is clear to let a team of demolition experts from the Israeli army led by Peer Segalovitz into the WTC buildings. These charges plus detonators had been prepared at the premises of the Urban Moving Systems company, a Mossad front. During the weeks before 9/11 these prepared charges were loaded into vans, driven into the basements of WTC Twin Towers next to the elevator shaft, unloaded into the elevator, and lifted onto the roof of the elevator through the opening in the elevator ceiling. Next the
elevator moved from floor to floor while charges where being attached to the columns as displayed in
this video from 0:22 onwards. The detonators of these charges were radiographic controlled and finally detonated from WTC7 on the day of 9/11.
Just for starters, can you answer this dilema. Amatuer pilots navagating large airliners with pin point accuracy.
In the days after 9/11, numerous pilots and aviation experts commented on the elaborate maneuvers performed by the aircraft in the terrorist attacks, and the advanced skills that would have been necessary to navigate those aircraft into their targets. The men flying the planes must have been "highly skilled pilots" and "extremely knowledgeable and capable aviators," who were "probably military trained," these experts said.
And yet the four alleged hijackers who were supposedly flying the aircraft were amateur pilots, who had learned to fly in small propeller planes, and were described by their instructors as having had only "average" or even "very poor" piloting skills. But on their first attempt at flying jet aircraft, on September 11, 2001, these men were supposedly able to fly Boeing 757s and 767s at altitudes of tens of thousands of feet, without any assistance from air traffic control. Three of them were apparently able to successfully navigate their planes all the way to the intended targets, which they hit with pinpoint accuracy.
For such poor pilots to carry out such skilled flying would surely have been extremely unlikely, perhaps impossible. And yet this is what is claimed in the official account of 9/11.
http://shoestring911.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/911-hijackers-amateur-aviators-who.html
