the other mike
Diamond Member
I rest my case.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You have no case.I rest my case.
Explain Angelo.No sign of resistance at all when they started collapsing......
Weird.
I'm not a truther, or a conspiracy theorist. I'm a truth seeker and a conspiracy analyst.Explain Angelo.
How does something falling due to gravity and experiencing no resistance fall at -6.31 m/s2! I supposed that's free fall to a truther eh?
The same reason the Surfside building collapsed when pieces of the building fell. The beams were not designed to support the weight of the impact.Now that we've settled that, what happened to the missing jolts ? Why was there no resistance from the underlying columns when the collapse initiated?
Your house of cards is an illusion.
Your statement is illogical at best.The same reason the Surfside building collapsed when pieces of the building fell. The beams were not designed to support the weight of the impact.
Thanks for your unsubstantiated opinion. Now, all you need do is support it with valid arguments. Have any?Your statement is illogical at best.
"Withstand the weight of the impact" is an illogical statement. Grow a few more brain cells and you may understand.Thanks for your unsubstantiated opinion. Now, all you need do is support it with valid arguments. Have any?
Concrete pieces falling in the Surfside building is what brought down the rest of the building. The pieces must have been pretty heavy."Withstand the weight of the impact" is an illogical statement. Grow a few more brain cells and you may understand.
Concrete pieces falling in the Surfside building is what brought down the rest of the building. The pieces must have been pretty heavy.
The planes must not have had enough force when compared to the strength of the building. And, once the collapse started, it continued under its own weight.So if 1 plane hit at the top and the other plane hit in the middle , then how did they collapse almost identically the same way ?
Newton's Third Law of Motion
Newton's third law of motion describes the nature of a force as the result of a mutual and simultaneous interaction between an object and a second object in its surroundings. This interaction results in a simultaneously exerted push or pull upon both objects involved in the interaction.www.physicsclassroom.com
All you need do is remove some wooden blocks for the rest to fall.You can balance a 35lb cinder block on 4 toothpicks and even if you stood on top of it , the toothpicks would break but they wouldn't collapse straight down..... illustrates the strength of vertical columns.
If a fully loaded 18-wheeler had a head-on collision with an SUV, each traveling at 80 mph, both vehicles would come to a stop at the impact point. ( the suv would be pushed back a hundred feet or so, but it would stop the semi) .The planes must not have had enough force when compared to the strength of the building. And, once the collapse started, it continued under its own weight.
Not if the inner core was made with an erector setIf you had a pellet gun and shot out some of the blocks, the rest of the block tower would
A small caliber firearm could do it. Sufficient force is all it requires.Not if the inner core was made with an erector set
Out of curiosity, did you read the title of this thread ?A small caliber firearm could do it. Sufficient force is all it requires.