Events similar to 9/11: Pirelli Tower, Empire State Building

Discussion in '9/11' started by Vlad Ivx, Dec 20, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    [​IMG]

    A medium size airplane crashed Pirelli Tower in Milano in 2002, then exploded inside. Beans were bent (some were bent 250 mm), joints were cracked, but the 1950s building didn't fall:

    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]

    Empire State Building 1945 bomber crash:

    [​IMG]
    Also check out the Shanghai fire:​

    [​IMG]

    Look at the smoke... Just like 9/11:
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    Building 7 did not remotely smoke like this yet unexpectedly collapsed. The Shanghai building didn't:

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
  3. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,698
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
  4. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
  5. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,698
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    so they arent steel then?
     
  6. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You have been owned multiple times on this exact subject here over the last few weeks, do we have to do it again? How many threads exactly are going to start to say exactly the same thing over and over and over again?
     
  7. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,698
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    huh?

    Ok you cite which post you think owned me and we will take it from there.

    waiting
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Too many to list.
     
  9. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Na your not worth my time, fatigue trolls love to play these games. The people playing along at home know the real score
     
  10. Brother Jonathan

    Brother Jonathan Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Major media fooled everybody with their "experts" on building construction, Osama bin Laden, and terrorism before noon on 9/11.
    "They collapsed due to structural damage" prior to any expert analysis. The script was in.

    [video=youtube;7GDa-L4hHHo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GDa-L4hHHo[/video]
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GDa-L4hHHo
     
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,698
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    so your claim is completely bogus, cant cite even one occurrence, thanks for making that perfectly clear.
     
  12. Brother Jonathan

    Brother Jonathan Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What I see is the structures that had the more intense fires and burned longer stayed standing while the fires in WTC Towers were small in comparison and short lived.
     
  13. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,300
    Likes Received:
    249
    Trophy Points:
    0
    9/11 wasn't a simple structure fire, they were fuel fires inside of structures.
     
  14. Brother Jonathan

    Brother Jonathan Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The jet fuel burned up very quickly. The fuel fires started office fires.
     
  15. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,300
    Likes Received:
    249
    Trophy Points:
    0
    the #2 in WTC7 and the jet fuel at are motor fuels, they are supposed to burn hot and fast. it only takes that jump start to doom one rivet for the whole building to collapse when everything is tied together. like pulling a middle card from a house of cards.
     
  16. djlunacee

    djlunacee New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,489
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Show me again which buildings listed, are of a tube in a tube design. Should be no problem for a general contractor like yourself. Also, can you please point out which ones were of an all steel framework, and which ones used concrete as reinforcement? And Mr. Physics, please do enlighten us on how these materials (steel & concrete) react in fire. Then you may realize why logical people are laughing.
     
  17. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    And so was that in Pirelli Tower. After the airplane entered the fuel tank exploded making a huge hole, almost as wide as the width of the building itself so the fire had plenty of oxygen to feed on yet it kind of self-extinguished. Same happened with Empire State Building.

    The hole that airplane left in Pirelli Tower was proportionally bigger, worse, given the building's size, than that suffered by the South Tower which was more like a 2-side scar. Also keep in mind that 99% of the fuel in Flight 175 (or something like that) was consumed outside the South Tower, in the ball of fire that you see in videos as the airplane projected its mass through.
     
  18. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Different types of structures?

    The Twin Towers have been on fire before 9/11, in 1975. A multiple floor fire spread through the core of Tower 1 and lasted for hours not minutes like in 9/11.
     
  19. djlunacee

    djlunacee New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,489
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, every building you showed was a different structural design than the Twin Towers. Buildings of different designs, will behave differently in similar events. You too may wish to do the same tasks I asked another poster, it will help you understand, why your building comparisons really have bearing or relation to 9/11. As for the previous fire at the WTC and as it is invalid by comparison, is quite simple. It also the problem for most of the buildings you posted. The building was not struck by a plane moving at over 500 mph, causing massive amounts of structural damage, and more importantly, knocking the fireproofing off of the steel, exposing it directly to the fire.
     
  20. Brother Jonathan

    Brother Jonathan Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First of all I would like to know why you picked "lunacee" as the suffix of your online pseudonym? It is fitting in my opinion but I am curious about your explanation of why.

    Secondly, your representation of WTC design being a "tube in a tube" design is deceptive. It makes it sound like inferior construction of buildings are allowed when all buildings in the world have been for centuries designed, engineered, and constructed to stand while on fire specifically to allow first responders the confidence that they can go into a building to rescue people without fear of global collapse.

    Here is the design of the core structure for people interested: The Core Structure

    Here is the design of the perimeter structure: The Perimeter Walls

    Here is the use of the hat truss for interested parties: The Hat Truss

    The "tube in a tube" with a hat truss refers to a unique design but not an inferior design. Buildings must be designed by architects and engineers with safety in mind and inspected by building departments to meet minimum fire and building standards.
     
  21. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It keeps getting pointed out to you people time and time again,it wasn't JUST 'office fires' at the WTC
     
  22. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
  23. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I know what kind of structure the floors had:

    [​IMG]
    What structural damage? Compare the mass of the airplane to that of the building. The airplane was an aluminium object. One that was empty on the inside. It's
    like a robotic aluminium sparrow flying at high speed through tiny STEEL bars of a CAGE the size of a fridge. Add to that the fact that the cage also has bars (beans) on the inside and that the sparrow is aluminium empty on the inside!! It would turn into shreds and if there are floors on the inside it could slide along it would exit the other side. It would obviously bend and cut some but little overall effect. That's what your tube structure was. A steel cage. Now I know that the beans that supported floors were thin as in the picture but what difference does it make since most fuel in Flight 175 was sent outside the building through the east side because of the momentum? Your 500 mph argument actually works in favor of this. The fuel tanks of aircraft are heavy and the speed sent them towards the exit mouth together with other harder components. The tanks might have disintegrated inside the building but in that fraction of a second they didn't get the chance to ignite properly until towards the exit hole where air from the outside took its explosive energy out.

    Maybe you can tell me where was the sprinkler system? People reported both small and big fires. Despite not stopping the fire by itself it would have made a difference removing the smaller fires and slowed down to completely stopping the spread to other floors. Has anybody seen the sprinklers start at any floor? At least in Tower 2 the airplane didn't hit the core where the pipes of the system ran through so they remained intact. Also, floors that did not previously get hit or set on fire by the initial blaze did eventually catch fire so on these floors fire would have had no time to suddenly destroy the system as it was progressive.
     
  24. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,682
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you are such an expert, why cant you see the difference between this construction and the Empire State Building?
     
  25. Brother Jonathan

    Brother Jonathan Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :roflol: I have never made any claims about the difference between the construction of WTC Towers and the Empire State Building. Wizard From Oz has no idea what he is talking about. Silver shoe boy... there is a lot of difference between the construction of the Empire State Building and the WTC Towers... :lol: Do you have any idea the differences?

    You debunkers of truth need a new website to feed you information. You are failing on the laws of physics and building construction. Go Huddle.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page