LOL LOL LOL... that is the lamest debunking i have come across yet. i am embarrassed for you. come on... you said those squbs were the trusses previously. now you throw this garbage out here? F -
ok.. that is a nice small hole. clearly not capable of bringing down a modern bldg... gosh.. i wonder how fema missed such a big hole??? C-
are you trying to prove my point for me??? i see very small manageable fires. where am i wrong? if you are talking about the smoke/clouds, we have no idea when those photos were taken and what the source of the smoke/cloud is. D+
But the areas without concrete encased steel, which is similar construction as 1,2 &7, DID collapse. The steel columns above the 17th floor suffered complete collapse, partially coming to rest on the upper technical floor. http://www.concretecentre.com/main.asp?page=1095 Yes, it failed. Other photos reveal how the concrete was all that was left on the upper floors.
this is tripe. it doesnt matter who's site the video is on... the firemen are not conspiracy kooks (yet). they are just talking about their experiences and they are above reproach in doing so. dont you dare try to spin what they are saying. there are hundreds of witnesses that say the same thing. "no mention from the mainstream press". are you living under a fkn rock????? that was horrendously stupid. you should have edited that out. i am weary of your competence.
An investigation is underway between Spanish technical agency Intemac and UK authorities including Arup Fire, the University of Edinburgh and the concrete industry including Cembureau, BCA and The Concrete Centre. Preliminary findings suggest that a combination of the upper technical floor and the excellent passive fire resistance of the tower's concrete columns and core prevented total building collapse The fire is significant in terms of its potential similarities between the collapse of the building's steel frame above the 17th floor and the experience seen at the World Trade Center. Notably, one of the recommendations of NIST's interim report on the World Trade Center disaster is for tall building design to incorporate 'strong points' within the frame. http://www.concretecentre.com/main.asp?page=1095 Here, the Madrid Tower is compared to the WTC. Do you understand now why the different construction - the use of concrete in the support columns - resulted in a different outcome? And do you see where the areas that were similar to the WTC actually did fall?