may day

[Gumby]

now that you know gravity, please explain how the buildings fell faster than gravity??

and pyroplasitc flow isn't it... it isn't a word... and if you meant pyroclastic, try again, would only work it they blew up...

[Gumby]

no, 9.8 is earth gravity, not the accleration of gravity... there is a big difference... but none the less... go ahead with the timing and the amount of time needed for a piece of steel to drop 110 stories, much less the time needed with 109 stories of steel underneath it...

[Bong30]

they didnt.......... you just twist the facts to fit you commie objectives

YOU DONT FUCK WITH PHYSICS BOY.... not even gw

my thoghts on the pyroplastic flow (sp) <is that better for you dick head) i wll never correct your spelling cause it is a pussy cock move got it gumby)

my thoughts are... when the planes hit the buildings the exo skeleton of the building was damaged then some fire and time AHHH time. yes it took a little while for physics to happen.

Faster than gravity...uhh no but once the top floors drooped onto the bottom floors the Force (F=ma)
force that the top of the building hit the bottom part of building is way to much to hold. so the bottom let loose easy

building 7 when the debris from the building fell there is this thing called friction, and when all that rock and metal was falling it was getting hotIE my version of pyroplastic flow).... it hit the bottom of the building and caused structural damage, and after time and fire it fell

easy............

[Bong30]

no, 9.8 is earth gravity, not the accleration of gravity... there is a big difference... but none the less... go ahead with the timing and the amount of time needed for a piece of steel to drop 110 stories, much less the time needed with 109 stories of steel underneath it...

it will be hard for you gumby... your as dumb as a stick when it come to math

Acceleration DUE (dumbass) to gravity read my above post numbskull

[Gumby]

i post 5 hours of professional lectures proving what I say and you post this and expect me to believe you?? I think I'd rather take the professors telling me what happened... here's a two hour lecture about it... not a 2 minute response... watch it and then come back here and explain your theory one more time... next time just try to make sense...

http://filmstripinternational.com/fi...lmstrip=jones2

[Breukelen advocaat]

I'm not educated in architecture, or engineering, at all - but I met someone on a NYC subway on 9/11 that was. He predicted the rapid collapse of both WTC towers - because he knew that they were built to have that reaction in an exteme case of damage to their structural integrity.

This is about the 200th time I've written this. I'd believe a professional architect that was near the scene in of the crime, in NYC on 9/11, over amatuers, burn-outs, paranoids, and people with agendas.

As for building 7, I have no idea about that. It was probably destroyed deliberately because it was deemed dangerously unstabe by experts on the scene.

[Bong30]

I'm not educated in architecture, or engineering, at all - but I met someone on a NYC subway on 9/11 that was. He predicted the rapid collapse of both WTC towers - because he knew that they were built to have that reaction in an exteme case of damage to their structural integrity.

This is about the 200th time I've written this. I'd believe a professional architect that was near the scene in of the crime, in NYC on 9/11, over amatuers, burn-outs, paranoids, and people with agendas.

As for building 7, I have no idea about that. It was probably destroyed deliberately because it was dangerously unstabe.

Thank you thank you thank you.....

[Gumby]

they didnt.......... you just twist the facts to fit you commie objectives

YOU DONT FUCK WITH PHYSICS BOY.... not even gw

I didn't change anything... you can look it all up, the collapase and time leading up to and after are all caught on many videos... please watch the ones I've posted..

my thoghts on the pyroplastic flow (sp) <is that better for you dick head) i wll never correct your spelling cause it is a pussy cock move got it gumby)

my thoughts are... when the planes hit the buildings the exo skeleton of the building was damaged then some fire and time AHHH time. yes it took a little while for physics to happen.

The problem with your thoughts... the building was made like a screen, it was able to take hole in the exoskeleton.. up to 4 or 5 jumbo jets... it was designed to withstand the impact...

"Frank A. DeMartini, Manager, WTC Construction and Project Management, discusses the fact that the WTC towers were designed to take multiple hits from airliners and not collapse, comparing it to poking a pencil through fly netting, DeMartini was adament that the towers would not collapse. DeMartini died in the towers on 9/11, this interview clip was taken from video shot in January 2001."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...gnedtotake.htm

and fire doesn't melt steel... specially after and hour of burning... That physics....

"We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...ywithstood.htm

Faster than gravity...uhh no but once the top floors drooped onto the bottom floors the Force (F=ma)
force that the top of the building hit the bottom part of building is way to much to hold. so the bottom let loose easy

That's just stupid... I don't need to source anything to prove how dumb that is.... you don't think it takes longer than 9 seconds for 90 floors to fall one at a time until the reach the last one?? that's 10 storys a second... go look at a ten story building and honestly think it can fall flat in one second... a three story house can't even do that... much less a 90 story building...

building 7 when the debris from the building fell there is this thing called friction, and when all that rock and metal was falling it was getting hotIE my version of pyroplastic flow).... it hit the bottom of the building and caused structural damage, and after time and fire it fell

easy............

Because you think pyroclastic flow is something it isn't doesn't mean it's right, it means you're wrong... "Photos taken moments before the collapse of WTC 7 show small office fires on just two floors." Two floors on fire to drop a 70 story building... it would have to be the first ever... and even before the other buildings next to it that were damaged much more than WTC7 was... building 7 is a joke... if you think debris that caused two floors to catch fire caused the building to collapse on itself is the reason, then please tell me how a bomb can be placed under the Oklahoma City building, or even the WTC before this attack and not completly fall?? You've seen oklahoma right? half the building is gone, blown up, but the other half... still standing... cause fire doesn't cause them to fall.... that's why they use steel and concreate...

but next time please do try... and let me know when you get that million dollars ok... you're fucking pathetic Bong and I'm glad I have good weed and can tollerate posting this shit for you... I just wish you'd take 5 minutes to look at it rather than come attack me for some other stupid thing...

http://www.reopen911.org/Contest.htm <---- incase you forgot where to get that million... please let me know that they think of your pyroplastic bullshit...

[Bong30]

you are qouting prison planet................hahahahahahhahahahahaha

[Gumby]

I'm not educated in architecture, or engineering, at all - but I met someone on a NYC subway on 9/11 that was. He predicted the rapid collapse of both WTC towers - because he knew that they were built to have that reaction in an exteme case of damage to their structural integrity.

This is about the 200th time I've written this. I'd believe a professional architect that was near the scene in of the crime, in NYC on 9/11, over amatuers, burn-outs, paranoids, and people with agendas.

As for building 7, I have no idea about that. It was probably destroyed deliberately because it was deemed dangerously unstabe by experts on the scene.

Don't believe me... believe the guy who built it - "Frank A. DeMartini, Manager, WTC Construction and Project Management, discusses the fact that the WTC towers were designed to take multiple hits from airliners and not collapse, comparing it to poking a pencil through fly netting, DeMartini was adament that the towers would not collapse. DeMartini died in the towers on 9/11, this interview clip was taken from video shot in January 2001."

A BYU Professor - "...glaring weaknesses in the [US Gov't] 'final' reports ...The â??explosive demolitionâ?� hypothesis better satisfies tests."

Sixty out of sixty academics agree a new investigation is needed...
â?� â??Prof. Steven E. Jones


Someone who was there at the time - http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/...bombsinwtc.htm

This article from Chief Engineer magazine presents eyewitness account of the moments after the first plane crash, and describes evidence of large explosions in the lobby, parking garage and subbasement levels of WTC-1 at the time of the crash
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...explosions.htm

someone who taped the entire day....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...61603&q=9%2F11

The highjackers... cause they are still alive...

http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html#hijackersalive

The group of people looking over the computers found in the wreckage...
http://www.prisonplanet.com/german_f...nter_deals.htm
Or was it coincidence that unusually large sums of money, perhaps more than $100 million, were rushed through the computers as the disaster unfolded?