• tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 minutes ago

    I used to think that it was a hoax because of WTC7 but I did something that people don’t usually do: challenge my own views and yeah, it was burning for the entire time + rubble hitting it. The steel bar exceeded the containment of concrete causing a structural collapse

      • W98BSoD@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        32 minutes ago

        The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.

      • Shindo66@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 minutes ago

        Theres been so many studies by incredibly reputable people. They aren’t going to believe no matter how much is said. At this point they’re worse than the maga people. Their believing in the lie has cost millions of deaths in the middle east through global imperialism. They dont want that blood on their hands and its finally gone into a war with Iran that will never end. The people who you are asking to tell you the truth wouldnt even tell you that the building was so full of hazardous building materials that it was going to give untold amounts of people cancer.

    • ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      75
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Bullshit. Don’t lie to me. You think “fire” can just “burn” a building and it will collapse because “gravity”? I bet you believe in other fairy tales too, like public healthcare and the moon

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It was also smacked by debris from the falling tower that ended up damaging several support trusses and simultaneously igniting like a dozen floors on fire at the same time. Tbh it’s kinda amazing the building lasted as long as it did.

    • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I don’t think you’re reading into this joke correctly. I take it as “people only ever talk about the two towers, but other shit was destroyed too and nobody cares”

      • PattyMcB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        At the risk of repeating the deleted comments (be gentle if I am, please), I read it as the US government telling us to remember the twin towers, then not telling us to remember wtc7 (FBI involvement and rule of threes for the joke), and to totally forget the Epstein files.

        • crispbacon99@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          No we’re just waiting for you to elaborate or get downvoted to oblivion.

          Trolls/bots too often post vague and broad statements without providing details so here we are again. Asking for details

      • TheRealKuni@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        That 9/11 was a false flag attack and the buildings were demolished by the government. It was a meme even. “Jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” etc.

        WTC-7 was seen by these people as proof of the conspiracy because it fell without being hit by a plane.

        • disorderly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I always found that particular angle to be hilarious. Like, if you didn’t know the towers were sorta built like a bundle of wires on end and that deforming even the tip of the bundle with heat could cause the roof to fall in and split the whole thing open, then the argument from the conspiracy theorist that it was a controlled demolition sounds plausible. How could that tiny plane hitting so high on the tower knock it down, twice?

          Suddenly the WTC-7 guy appears. He’s wearing a literal tinfoil hat and he hasn’t showered in a week. He hijacks the entire conversation to explain how a building that was slapped by the (burning) tallest building in the world couldn’t have possibly collapsed after 7 hours of uncontrolled fire.

          By now you’re probably realizing you have somewhere else to be, and that’s fine, because the two crazies are now shouting over each other about why the Pentagon didn’t collapse, how the entire attack was cover for UA 93 to flee for South America, or whether it was the CIA or aliens who orchestrated the whole thing.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Like, if you didn’t know the towers were sorta built like a bundle of wires on end and that deforming even the tip of the bundle with heat could cause the roof to fall in and split the whole thing open

            Yeah… The wtc was basically supported by a center frame tube support structure tied together with a couple hundred perimeter support beams by giant hat truss. If the hat truss is damaged the whole thing collapses under its own weight.

            how a building that was slapped by the (burning) tallest building in the world couldn’t have possibly collapsed after 7 hours of uncontrolled fire.

            But but, no sky scraper had ever been brought down by fire before… They always forget the part where a giant chunk of building fell on it doing a ton of structural damage before a multi floor uncontrolled fire burnt for 7 hours straight. Plus, there have been several buildings of similar size that have collapsed due to fire since 2001.

            People who think 9/11 was a controlled demolition simply do not not know enough about engineering to have an educated opinion. There are only a few demolition companies in the world large enough to take on a project that size, and it would have taken months of hundreds if not thousands of civilian workers and engineers working onsite around the clock to execute.

            • Shindo66@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              27 minutes ago

              Free fall speed? Into its own footprint? There have been hundreds of structual engineers who have come forward calling it a controlled demolition.

            • Serinus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 hour ago

              I don’t know. If you’re not worried about casualties or collateral damage then it gets a lot easier.

          • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I don’t think the person you replied to believes the conspiracy, they’re just answering the question about what the conspiracy is.