View Single Post
  #4  
Old 09-06-2006, 04:30 PM
Ari's Avatar
Ari Ari is offline
I read some of your foolish scree, then just skimmed the rest.
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area
Gender: Male
Posts: XMDCCCLV
Blog Entries: 8
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perry
My hypothesis (which I cannot evaluate): Al Qaeda did hijack airplanes, they did crash them into the Twin Towers, but they got a little assistance on the inside to make it more dramatic by collapsing the entire buildings. With this theory, the U.S. Government still has reasonable evidence that Al Qaeda "did it," which draws attention away from the assistance that even Al Qaeda didn't know about.
There was a program on PBS about this, unfortunately I didn't get to see much of it.
In what I did see they said a poorer structure would have collapsed quicker but the strength of the tower stood up long enough to allow more people out.

When it comes to the conspiracy theorists still towing the "jet fuel couldn't have done it" line I start to wonder. Now as The Lone Ranger and I mentioned in the other thread, steel is effected by heat, heat is used by smiths to adjust the property of steel. It can be made extremely hard and brittle as glass, or extremely soft and malleable. All of this is done by heating and cooling. It is rarely heated to melting temperature.
To suggest that the fire from the fuel doesn't matter because it isn't hot enough to melt steel suggests that either A) They don't understand what they are talking about and probably shouldn't be making conspiracy theories or B) they are lying for some other reason (book sales?).

I find it interesting that people seem to have a need to find something "more" to the answer.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.26480 seconds with 11 queries