Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello

So this is not here to get things heated just a general question.

I was at my uncles house and someone showed the 911 clips on the tv of the towers falling. He said to bad they did not bring the towers down sooner.

I looked at him confused and he said well by the looks of things and all my years in taking down trees and buildings, that was a controled collapse. I said why do you think that and he gave me a large list of reason as to why it was a controled demo.

I said the only reason I can think of for that would be because they could not save the people in the tower they knew there was no way so rather then letting everyone see them die slowly then the buildings falling dangeriously was to demo them.

He said exactly, then I can't help but ask the question. If this really did happen why not tell people? Why would you not tell them, they had to come down to prevent further loss of life.


I guess I was just wondering if this did happen this way would people be ok if they knew their loved one had no chance so they took down the towers? Or would be be more upset knowing the goverment made the call?

So how would they be able to plant the charges that would ensure minimal damage to nearby buildings?


Any suggestion that the towers fell for any reason other than having a plane crashed into them is just wishful thinking.

Tower 7 didn't have a plane fly into it. How did that fall?

Ditch the tin foil hats and read the Popular Mechanics article:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a49/1227842/

Portions relevant to Tower 7 on this page:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

Jet fuel can't melt plasteel beams!

One, its naive to think that if a body is prepared to kill a substantial number of people that they'd also want to mitigate collateral damage (the CIA's a wonderful thing).

Two, the answers are out there if you don't cloud you're opinion (everyone wants to think they're the one who knows the "real story")- thanks CptJake for the link.

Three, UFOs were a conspiracy created by the US government to cover up helicopter trials, but people still go out to the desert with "I want to believe" T-shirts.

 Hollow wrote:
Tower 7 didn't have a plane fly into it. How did that fall?

Structural damage caused by a raging inferno.

This is well established, and some links have been provided above.

For myself, as an engineering freshman in college when the towers collapsed, one of our upperclassmen courses involved a thorough study of the mechanics of the failure. It is not in dispute, and so I'm going to close this thread and point you to the links above, as well as these:

A summary:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html

An in-depth analysis of the steel:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0711/banovic-0711.html