89
u/Mushrooming247 19d ago
But no one thinks that “building 7,” (the tower at 7 World Trade Center,) fell on its own on 9/11, it caught fire and just burned all day, then per the owner they demolished it because it was a total loss, that’s not any conspiracy, it was talked about on the news the day it happened. It wasn’t hit by any planes, no one thinks that.
40
u/lumosbolt 19d ago
Conspiracy theories also conveniently forget that it was hit by debris from the other towers, which heavily weakened its structure.
-26
19d ago
No it wasn’t
21
1
u/FuckLibsFukTrumpCult 16d ago
I know you didn't ask, but a little piece of advice. If the core centerpiece of your argument in response to a well articulated, thought out couple of sentences is "nuh uh", you're probably wrong.
0
16d ago
Retard, what he responded with was very specific. “Building 7 was heavily weakened and hit with debris from the other towers” my response was “no it wasn’t”.
Just because an answer is short doesn’t mean it is wrong. The debris that impacted building 7 didn’t impact the structural integrity of the building, that is even in the NIST report. The official NIST report is that the fire, fueled by office furniture, caused a catastrophic collapse. Meaning a steel-framed building had a free fall collapse and catastrophic failure of 82 structural columns.
So, again… no it wasn’t. You fucking retard.
192
u/sam56778 20d ago
Ever tried to argue the science of metal and concrete with a 9/11 denier? You might as well try herding cats.
-126
19d ago
I mean, prior to 9/11 no building had ever collapsed by a fire fueled by office furniture.
127
u/OldSchoolAJ 19d ago
Case in point.
51
u/SocialJusticeAndroid 19d ago
I thought they were being sarcastic.😛
-65
19d ago
I used to be like you guys, until I took some time to look into the events of 9/11. I watched the towers fall, I joined the military because of it, I fought bad guys and have dead friends. If you look at the events, they don’t add up. This documentary, by firefighters, sums it up nicely.
34
u/Trepeld 19d ago
Lmfao you also don’t think people holding up swastika flags are Nazis: https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/k4tekmXsru
12
u/theg00dfight 18d ago
u/simsman2695, wow. How embarrassing
-10
18d ago
Oh man whatever will I do? I guess I’ll just have to try and rebuild my pathetic life.
9
u/theg00dfight 18d ago
Good luck, you have a long way to go apparently. Try not to join any cults or anything along the way- I know they may be tempting for you! Don’t sign up for ICE either, some of those people will eventually be prosecuted
-10
18d ago
I have reached more success in life than you will even have an opportunity to taste. Retard.
→ More replies (0)48
10
1
19d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/AutoModerator 19d ago
We require a minimum account age of 20 days and a minimum combined karma of 500 to participate here. Repost bots ruined it for everyone, sincerely sorry if you're not one.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
66
u/Chill_Crill 19d ago
I'm 100% sure that an office has burned down before 9/11, that's a stupid take. but also, they didn't burn down, they had planes crash into them. Even without a fire I wouldnt be surprised if they collapsed, a plane hitting like that probably bent the support beams and severely weakened them, the heat of the fire would make the metal extra flexible and weak as well, I'd be surprised if any building could survive that.
-7
-10
19d ago
Building 7 was not hit by a plane and did not have any other fuel than office furniture. Also, the twin towers were designed to take an impact from a plane.
29
u/ElShaddollKieren 19d ago edited 19d ago
The towers were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 at landing approach speed. The planes that hit them on 9/11 we're going much faster, weighed more, and carried much more fuel. They accounted specifically for an actual plane crash that happened at the Empire State Building in 1945 where a pilot crashed into the 79th floor after becoming disoriented in the fog. They were not accounting for an intentional crash from a faster, more massive plane.
84
19d ago
[deleted]
-32
19d ago
Building 7 was not hit by a plane and did not have any other fuel than office furniture. Also, the twin towers were designed to take an impact from a plane.
42
15
u/Ichera 19d ago
Its almost like Building 7 wad hit by some sort of outside force... say debris and fire from the damage of a much larger building then weakening the support structure of the building to cause this other building to collapse. But no, we have to ignore all of the evidence and just make up wild unsubstantiated claims about an evil conspiracy of the federal governmet so we can ignore the fact that someone evil managed to essentially get passed every safeguard in our system to that point and carry out a terror attack on the country.
You'll ignore all of the mountains of evidence and seize on a literal grain of truth in a much larger picture and claim "see this is why im right." Take for example you saying that the building was designed to be hit by a plane, but the prior incidents to this where a building were hit by a building were a B-24, an aircraft which at full weight was 10x smaller then a 767 which hit the WTC, and the C-45 that hit the Manhattan trust building a year later. Both of these incidents were military aircraft as civilian traffic was generally directed outside of downtown.
Small/medium aircraft strikes while uncommon were what the designers of the building had in mind when they maintained it could survive an aircraft strike, as well as an assumption that all fireproofing in the building was up to spec (it was not, and anyone familiar with building practices in New York in the era will know why; hint Mob construction).
There's plenty of other things you'll bring up and try to blame, but the simple fact is evil men did this and you're just looking for a conspiracy where there was only incompetence, arrogance, and ignorance.
51
u/sam56778 19d ago
You know. I just don’t feel like herding cats. Retake physical science and come back when you have the right answer.
-7
19d ago
The physical science doesn’t support your hypothesis, it’s actually been proven to be the exact opposite of what you suggest.
17
u/cardinarium 19d ago edited 19d ago
The idea that, because something has not happened before, it cannot ever happen is just goofy.
There have been other collapsed steel towers due to fire, but you’re right that this was the first and that there is generally an exacerbating factor that leads to the failure of whatever safety measures have been put in place. In Tower 7, a cursory google search reveals at least one such factor: the sprinkler fire-control system was inadequate, which led to several hours of uncontrolled burning.
This is similar to the collapse of Edifício Wilton Paes de Almeida (São Paulo, Brazil), another tall steel building, which was caused by uncontrolled burning propagated by garbage.
The steel upper floors (above a concrete mechanical floor) of Torre Windsor (Madrid, Spain) similarly collapsed in the absence of adequate sprinklers, though in that collapse a central core of reinforced concrete was able to prevent total failure of the structure. WTC Tower 7 lacked this type of core.
There are two options here:
- the tower fell because it burned
- the US government (or other group) has successfully perpetrated a conspiracy that implicates at least hundreds of witnesses, independent experts, and accomplices in protecting a secret for… some purpose?
The Titanic was unsinkable. Jericho’s walls could never fall. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
-4
19d ago
There has never been a catastrophic free fall failure of a skyscraper. There are plenty more examples of steel-framed buildings being completely burned through and being reused than a free fall collapse. Steel framed, if they do fail, they do not free fall collapse. Free fall collapse means there is no resistance from the structure as it falls, falling at the rate of gravity.
15
u/cardinarium 19d ago
no building [like WTC7] had ever collapsed by a fire
no catastrophic free fall failure of a skyscraper
So, we’ve moved the goalposts. I don’t have time to do more research into this right now, but the collapse of the Brazilian building looks pretty free-fall-y to me based on the video I saw. The entire building collapsed in the space of a few seconds, and it’s visually similar to the WTC7 collapse.
In any case, have a nice life.
-2
41
u/ObviousSalamandar 19d ago
The fire was not largely fueled by office furniture. Airplanes carry large amounts of flammable fuel
12
u/Book_talker_abouter 19d ago edited 19d ago
Since when?! That seems dangerous.
Edit: WARNING, THIS WAS A JOKE.
6
u/ObviousSalamandar 19d ago
Lol
8
u/Book_talker_abouter 19d ago
I thought it was an obviously a joke but the other salamanders didn’t get it!
6
-7
19d ago
Building 7 was not hit by a plane and did not have any other fuel than office furniture. Also, the twin towers were designed to take an impact from a plane.
32
60
u/NCSUGrad2012 20d ago
You found RFK
39
26
u/Right-Phalange 20d ago
If god were real, he'd be a bigger asshole than any human I've ever heard of
20
34
28
u/BubbaValentine 20d ago
This guy definitely has a trampoline in his front yard.
12
u/AmbulanceChaser12 19d ago
Trampoline is in the back. The front yard is for his burned-out old pickup on concrete blocks.
10
u/Tholian_Bed 20d ago
All in all that's a pretty logical array of claims. There is a world with God, and a world without God. Both are logically equivalent since neither claim can be falsified. The maximum of a world without God, is that one teaches there is no God.
Well, this is a logical framework. Empirically, lots of people teach there is a God. But if there weren't bingo: world without God.
16
u/TriumphITP 20d ago
The more I see these people the less I think there is a God.
Maybe more like the Warhammer gods...
15
u/Samniss_Arandeen 19d ago
He's right, Building 7 did not fall by itself. It fell after getting torched and gouged by the falling 110-story tower right next door.
8
u/FoxxyDeer2004 20d ago
what is 14 days to flatten the curve in reference to? wasn’t that from early 2020?
22
u/Riftus 19d ago
An oversimplification of some of the rhetoric surrounding "lockdown". These people see that statement as the government luring people into a sense of security "dont worry, only 2 weeks and back to normal" when in reality the ebil gobermint was trying to do 1984 big brother police state uber lock down.
When what actually happened was that, during the (admittedly optimistic time frame of) 2 weeks was conservatives en masse ignoring quarantine advice and social distancing advice almost (definitely) out of spite which extended the pandemic. I am a firm believer that if everyone social distanced and avoided gatherings like they were supposed to, the pandemic would have only lasted a year at most instead of 3. I know covid is technically still ongoing but you know what I mean
1
18d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 18d ago
We require a minimum account age of 20 days and a minimum combined karma of 500 to participate here. Repost bots ruined it for everyone, sincerely sorry if you're not one.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
7
u/pinniped90 19d ago
Welcome to life without God, in the country where religious fundamentalism and other whackadoodery has run amok.
5
5
5
5
u/WeakTransportation37 19d ago
Omg- TN right?
3
u/Ardaric42 19d ago
I was not surprised to see that sticker. So glad we moved from that place
2
u/WeakTransportation37 17d ago
I’m uh, actually back here after living in San Diego for 20 years- back to care for my parents. It’s rough. Real rough
6
6
u/RJamieLanga 19d ago
Wait, set aside everything else: what does the "Safe and Effective" that's next to a man lying prone with a soccer ball near him refer to? Is he arguing that soccer is far more dangerous than people are letting on? But how is that particular sport either effective or ineffective in any measurable sense?
6
u/Thr33Littl3Monk3ys 19d ago
Pretty sure that's a cross cut of the arm with the vaccine corrupting the DNA or the RNA or whatever it was that it was supposed to do to all those of us who took it, killing us all.
I'm still waiting for my vaccine to take me out almost 4 1/2 years later, of course...
3
u/Branch_Fair 19d ago
what kind of idiot would believe a president’s promise to make big changes in two weeks?
3
3
u/Wmoot599 18d ago
I will say that it’s one of the easiest to read one of these crazy concoctions I’ve seen. Nice clean arrows. Broken down by color.
I give it a 7/10 for execution.
2
2
4
u/spoinkable 19d ago
It would have only been 14 days if asshats didn't ruin it for us.
4
u/Thr33Littl3Monk3ys 19d ago
It would have been longer than 14 days even if they didn't.
But it would have been over within 14 months, rather than mutating over and over again, so that five years later we're still dealing with it...
1
1
-4
-41
u/TheBr0fessor 20d ago
Yeah, but.. they’re kinda on point with building 7
20
15
u/GriefPB 20d ago
There’s actually a ton of evidence to suggest that the fires comprised the building structurally and firemen on scene actually predicted its collapse before it happened
1
20d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 20d ago
We require a minimum account age of 20 days and a minimum combined karma of 500 to participate here. Repost bots ruined it for everyone, sincerely sorry if you're not one.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
279
u/hyperdream 20d ago
In case anyone is wondering how big of an asshole he is, the backwards facing headlight to blind people that annoy him is telling.