Abbas link
$1:
Not sleeping for a week? That's apparent.
Its more of a expression my friend and I am sure, he wasn't the only one working on the video.
$1:
Steel doesn't meant. Falsely assuming it.
Falsely assuming it? How so? The person has professionals explaining to you the melting temperature of steel and what temp is needed for it to melt. The entire video is about the structure, how can you say that he falsely assumed it? lol did you even watch the whole thing?
$1:
Interesting how they have a Civil engineer from America's Society of Civil Engineers agreeing with us.
Yea, because he is trying to show both sides of the argument, thats why I picked that video because he shows you what the government claims and why their claims don't make sense, in the real world.
$1:
They say there are fired but using the Firemen's own words, then go on to say that it isn't burning because there is smoke. And yes, if it burning successfully, there can be smoke. It depends on what is burning.
Regardless of it burning or not, the temperature cannot get to a point where it starts melting steel, especially the first from the JET itself. I was flipping through News channels when it happened and I was surprised then that for the FIRST TIME ever, a building of that size fell because of fire.
$1:
This next dickwad (whoever he is, they don't tell us) says that the building could withstand a 707 crashing into it. Notice how he chooses his words. The builder's said at low speeds. This was at highest speed.
That "dickwad" is the guy who built the building. Then another "dickwad" cofirms his statements.
$1:
Now they compare wind to 300000 pounds of steel slamming into a building as fast as it possible can.
Actually, Wind can be much more deadly then any plane hitting anything. Twin towers were specially designed to stand winds that share the entire building and they make it wave throughout a windy day, but ONE PLANE smashed in to couple of floors, brought down a GIANT building?
$1:
Come in with a structural engineer again, speaking AGAINST the foilers. Then they try to go on and blame the Engineers for not building the building right.
Huh? Who said anything about not building the building right? The building was built right, thats why it went through so much tourcher and it was good as new. Thats the problem, why did it go down when a plane hit it, and it wasn't just one tower that went down, they both went down in a small interval one after another, how do you explain 2 fires, burning at the same rate, bringing down both buildings within few seconds of each other. Sounds like a demolition doesn't it?
$1:
"Never before has a steel building collapsed by fire" Well no shit, but 99.9 percent of them haven't had a airliner run into the building at the same time, a point foilers conveniently leave out.
Actually the plane did nothing to the building except make a big hole in couple of the floors and the internal beams of the building couldn't have come down, that easily. A plane would be like someone throughing a rock at you real fast. Now that may hurt you, it may even put a hole in you but it will not allow the entire bone structure to collpase.
$1:
And that's only about the first 10 minutes, and they have yet to say anything that is right. I will continue this after school if the need be.
You need to learn to believe other people, I can act like I am deaf and blind as well and just pretend that it was only Bush who did it but I tend to keep researching the situation before I have a conclusion of my own.
The person has professionals explaining to you the melting temperature of steel and what temp is needed for it to melt.