towers bush knocked down
In fifteen seconds the huge permanent steel structure disintegrated from top to bottom into a growing cloud of dust. Do buildings really fall through themselves like that, turning to dust in seconds? Is that really supposed to happen to a steel structure because of impacts and fires near the top? Perhaps not too many people were asking such questions because none of the series of events leading up to that were supposed to happen. We witnessed an increasingly improbable series of events, from a hijacking with knives, to a jet hitting a World Trade Center tower, to multiple hijackings, to a second jet hitting the other tower, to yet more hijackings, and a plane hitting the heart of the nation's military establishment. Each event in this series was more improbable than the last. So by the time we got to the collapsing skyscrapers part, we were conditioned to expect the unbelievable.
A rational look at the Twin Tower collapses reveals that the official story contradicts the laws of physics and the most basic knowledge of the behavior of steel structures, and matter itself.
The towers were designed to survive jet impacts of the type that happened on September 11th.
The fires were not very severe in the South Tower and were diminishing. Even severe fires would not have initiated a collapse.
The towers underwent explosive disintegrations that didn't look anything like the way such buildings would fall.
There are relatively simple proofs that the buildings did not fall of their own weight.
In fifteen seconds the huge permanent steel structure disintegrated from top to bottom into a growing cloud of dust. Do buildings really fall through themselves like that, turning to dust in seconds? Is that really supposed to happen to a steel structure because of impacts and fires near the top? Perhaps not too many people were asking such questions because none of the series of events leading up to that were supposed to happen. We witnessed an increasingly improbable series of events, from a hijacking with knives, to a jet hitting a World Trade Center tower, to multiple hijackings, to a second jet hitting the other tower, to yet more hijackings, and a plane hitting the heart of the nation's military establishment. Each event in this series was more improbable than the last. So by the time we got to the collapsing skyscrapers part, we were conditioned to expect the unbelievable.
A rational look at the Twin Tower collapses reveals that the official story contradicts the laws of physics and the most basic knowledge of the behavior of steel structures, and matter itself.
The towers were designed to survive jet impacts of the type that happened on September 11th.
The fires were not very severe in the South Tower and were diminishing. Even severe fires would not have initiated a collapse.
The towers underwent explosive disintegrations that didn't look anything like the way such buildings would fall.
There are relatively simple proofs that the buildings did not fall of their own weight.
bush knocked down the twin towers
Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
---The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.
----No one had anticipated the towers being hit by jumbo jets.
IN FACT: The 767-222s that impacted the towers were similar in size to the 707-340s whose impact the towers were designed to survive.
--The jets spilled 24,000 gallons of jet fuel into each tower.
IN FACT: The 767-222s had no more then 10,000 gallons of fuel when they hit the towers, and the impact fireballs consumed much of that in seconds.
--Engineers failed to anticipate the fires following the impacts.
IN FACT: It's the job of an engineer to consider all such possibilities. They would have considered fuel loads based on a 707-340's capacity of 23,900 gallons.
--Damage to insulation was fatal to the steel structure.
IN FACT: Fires have never damaged a vertical column in a steel-frame highrise, with or without insulation.
--We are fortunate the towers stood as long as they did.
IN FACT: Since the towers withstood the crashes they should have stood indefinitely. The structural steel -- an excellent conductor of heat -- would have regained most of any strength lost once the jet fuel burned out in about five minutes.
Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
---The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.
----No one had anticipated the towers being hit by jumbo jets.
IN FACT: The 767-222s that impacted the towers were similar in size to the 707-340s whose impact the towers were designed to survive.
--The jets spilled 24,000 gallons of jet fuel into each tower.
IN FACT: The 767-222s had no more then 10,000 gallons of fuel when they hit the towers, and the impact fireballs consumed much of that in seconds.
--Engineers failed to anticipate the fires following the impacts.
IN FACT: It's the job of an engineer to consider all such possibilities. They would have considered fuel loads based on a 707-340's capacity of 23,900 gallons.
--Damage to insulation was fatal to the steel structure.
IN FACT: Fires have never damaged a vertical column in a steel-frame highrise, with or without insulation.
--We are fortunate the towers stood as long as they did.
IN FACT: Since the towers withstood the crashes they should have stood indefinitely. The structural steel -- an excellent conductor of heat -- would have regained most of any strength lost once the jet fuel burned out in about five minutes.
by Dong Woo September 29, 2005
by agitprop27 March 27, 2010
by Dose February 15, 2006
a.k.a World Trade Centering
it basically is being in a spitroast, but one guy comes and collapses and the other guy comes 2 hours and 18 minutes after.
a.k.a coming way earlier than the other guy in a devils threesome
it basically is being in a spitroast, but one guy comes and collapses and the other guy comes 2 hours and 18 minutes after.
a.k.a coming way earlier than the other guy in a devils threesome
""Me and my homie where riding a train on this thot, when I was fully twin towering all over her face"
by Guster Brown November 28, 2020
The guy despised most of the posters on the Forum, and in full knowledge that he'd get banned, deliberately blasted everyone with an avalanche of insults. "Yep, I twin-towered those jerks!" he said laughingly.
by lunamor November 23, 2010
The action of having both your legs broken. The word came from the 9/11 incodent, in which case the buildings look like two legs.
by Chris Aucoin June 13, 2004
When two gents are hitting it from the back of two girls who are facing each other and they high five. When climax is achieved they collapse to the ground just like the twin towers collapsed.
Yes, Daniel and I did the twin towers on those two hot girls last night, the best experience of my life.
by thebloomscale March 9, 2021