HappySqurriel said:
SOLIDSNAKE08 said:
that sounds ridiculous. i dont know wheter to cry or laugh, thats how bad your theory is.
|
Which part is ridiculous?
- Buildings lose structural strength when a plane crashes though them, breaking walls and destroying the steel structure that makes up the building
- Heat weakens the structural strenght of steel; being that it is a well known fact that steel loses half its strength at 800 degrees, far below its melting point.
- When the building starts to collapse when multiple floors don't have the strength to support the building above them, the upper part of the building will gain speed until it begins to hit the building that hasn't been weakend by the crash or fire.
- When the upper part of the building has accelerated until it has similar momentium to free falling 1 to 2 stories it will have a high enough momentium that the force required to stop it is an order of magnitude greater than the force the floor it hits was ever designed to support
|
in order to disprove this, he would have to give a logical, and mechanically sound reason explaining another theory and disproving yours. and not say "I'm laughing blah blah blah"
I'm not with the conspiracy people
but, one theory could possibly be was a plane crashed, and a bomb was set. (which might have been his argument or I think I've read that before) But the pancaking still applies.
But then you've got to prove who set the bomb and why. If the U.S. did it why?
With the terrorists crashed into the trade center belief. And the reason that they would do it is believing that then the U.S. would go on freedom wars acting like a jack ass, hurt U.S. international relations, and would destabilize the U.S. economy.
The bottom makes more sense to me... but just me.
Then one has to decide
