Creative Speculation

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)

7. And one of them died in the collapse.

Mon Jul 8, 2013, 10:39 PM

Jul 2013

Also, the scenario envisioned by the builders was a 707 on one engine, failing to reach the airport. The reality of it was a 767-223ER fully loaded, and at full military thrust, traveling beyond VNE.

The scenarios are not comparable on velocity alone, let alone mass and materials.

Edit: Also, as the building designers envisioned, the buildings withstood the 7.7 million foot-tons of torque on impact, it was the fires that brought the buildings down, not the impacts. The destroyed support columns only shortened the amount of time required for the fires to bring it down, by reducing the carrying capacity of the supports from the outset.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

9/11 Conspiracy Solved - Names, Connections, & Details Exposed... [View all] Indi Guy Jun 2013 OP

Like Rove said: We make history..... dougolat Jun 2013 #1

Great video Politicalboi Jun 2013 #2

Yep BobbyBoring Jun 2013 #3

The plane could have been made of AtheistCrusader Jun 2013 #4

actually the building's designer said.... wildbilln864 Jul 2013 #6

And one of them died in the collapse. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #7

wrong! wildbilln864 Jul 2013 #9

Bullshit. Both towers were ALREADY under construction when the first prototype 747 took to the sky. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #10

my error..... wildbilln864 Jul 2013 #11

That's right. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #12

The Port Authority White Paper anticipated a 4-engine 707 jetliner Ace Acme Oct 2013 #13

And like most capitalists, they said whatever the hell they wanted to get something built. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #14

John Skilling, Leslie Robertson's boss, said the towers would survive the fires Ace Acme Oct 2013 #15

If you actually read the link/google book I provided, on the pages I specified you would find that AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #16

I probably read City in the Sky years before you did. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #17

Where do you get this bullshit from? AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #18

Robertson says fires were not factored in when he did the studies Ace Acme Oct 2013 #19

The full quote from Skilling, plus more background context is on the page I specified in the book. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #20

Skilling said the buildings were designed to take the fires. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #21

Oh yes, Skilling is going to admit in 1993 that he lied about the buildings when getting the plans AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #23

Mr. Skilling did not reference the 707 study in 1993 Ace Acme Oct 2013 #24

LOL. Hoist by your own petard. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #25

"We looked" is past tense. You're just sinking deeper. nt Ace Acme Oct 2013 #26

Read what I said, again, very carefully. I'll wait. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #27

You're just blowing smoke because you cannot admit when you are wrong. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #28

Ok, I'll spell it out for you. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #29

"We looked" is past tense. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #30

He didn't particpate in the Robertson study. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #31

How do you know? You just make stuff up. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #32

I have accepted the 'evidence' of unsubstantiated allegations. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #33

You don't know the difference between an "allegation" and a qualified "observation" nt Ace Acme Oct 2013 #34

I allow for the possibility of an honest mistake. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #35

It's not an honest mistake when a reporter writes something that's not true Ace Acme Oct 2013 #36

I do, and reporters/journalists make mistakes. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #37

They're not honest mistakes when there's a reckless failure to verify. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #38

It is an extraordinary claim. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #39

It can't be both. Ace Acme Oct 2013 #40

You are attempting to artificially define 'honest mistake'. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #41

Knowing the melting point of steel, he had to know it would be controversial. nt Ace Acme Oct 2013 #42

Why? AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #43

He would know from his access to experts that fires can't produce those temperatures Ace Acme Oct 2013 #44

Consider: dougolat Oct 2013 #22

By the way, in your stunning analysis you neglected to mention AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #8

Follow the money! Frank_Norris_Lives Jun 2013 #5