|
The towers were built with the utmost of economy...
An example of that economizing was plainly evident on 911 to some survivors who were able to punch their way through drywall and escape into the core section. The walls of the core ideally should have been reinforced concrete, but that would have added substantial expense, and taken up a bit more valuable space. And hence, drywall was used instead - one of numerous cost saving moves...
Point is the buildings for as amazing as they were, weren't indestructible - many here who are claiming the towers couldn't fall straight down, fell too fast, etc ignore the power and properties of gravity...
Imagine part of a floor weighing, say a million pounds, falling on to the floor below ... that floor below must support both itself plus that additional weight ... then, imagine a portion of next floor above those two falling on top of them ... and repeat that once or twice more, and the design limit is going to be far exceeded leading to a pancaking effect...
As for why the floors, and ultimately the entire structure, fell straight down instead of tipping over, is, in large part, due to the extreme strength of the outside walls - they were as strong, if not more so, than the core.
With all that said, as another poster above said, all this debating takes away from a more important issue being who was really behind 911 / did the U.S. government, as in Pearl Harbor, know a major attack was imminent, and purposely allow it to happen?...
It's remarkable how quick the PATRIOT Act was written and passed into law, and how quickly the TSA and Homeland Security were created. And then recall the whole Anthrax scare ... who was really behind that, and, importantly, what was that really all about? -an excuse to further control the population / push through unpopular policy? Those are 911 related issues that really need to be investigated and discussed more.
Ron
__________________
Domagon - Website Management and Domain Name Sales
|