+Deep Fried Phlegm ""the video evidence is clear"" - It is. In close-ups one can see the floors detaching and column buckling taking place. "if it can melt steel" - loaded civil structural steel deforms plastically and continuously over time (it creeps), when subject to half the temperatures associated with an office fire. This means that tall all-steel buildings will always fail _by buckling collapse_ if subjected to a sustained internal fire. In steel, melting occurs at a temperature 1,000 degrees Celsius higher than the point at which creep begins. "the steel only needs to be weakened by the heat" - indeed so. There were hundreds of tons of metals present at the WTC which would have been liquid at cherry-red temperatures. Steel is completely SOLID when that colour, and yet quite malleable, as any blacksmith could tell you. There was no molten steel at the WTC, nor was there any ALUMINA - the byproduct of thermite. Buckling is a quiet process. Etc., etc.
Dear Tony Duncan - I noticed you used italics for the words “learn“ and “see“ - - by any chance could you explain how I might be able to do that? (I know how to create *bold text* - but not italics)
@@_BreakdownFor ITALICS, press SHIFT and the button to the right of Zero, type your thing, then press SHIFT and the button to the right of Zero. This works for me because my keyboard is set to Spanish. I am not sure whether this advice works for you. (!)
Why hasn't Charlie Thorton and Leslie Robertson questioned 3 buildings going down semetrical and one not being hit?? Plus turning concrete into powder not to mention molten steel.
MICHAEL DAVIS he did explain why the towers came down... he built the fucking things. He said flaws were exposed, flaws that were never really considered flaws. Simple as that. He is not a conspiracy idiot like you
@@Pontiac2001GT He did help build the WTC but his engineering firm LERA is openly a Government contractor he's not exactly impartial he has everything to personally lose and nothing to gain by standing against the official narrative. A multitude of "Conspiracy theories" have later been proven to be factual the term means nothing.
“I thought I was really through, through, through, through - forget it! Who is going to want this guy whose building got taken down by a simple airplane?” -Les Robertson
he subscribes to the "there's no way they could have been rigged without detection, so therefore they just fell down" logical fallacy pseudoscience school of thought.
What a lovely chap.
From the country of pioneer engineer dr.fazlur rahman khan who made first skyscraper
Very nice!
You have to _learn_ to _see_ things.
+Deep Fried Phlegm
""the video evidence is clear"" - It is. In close-ups one can see the floors detaching and column buckling taking place.
"if it can melt steel" - loaded civil structural steel deforms plastically and continuously over time (it creeps), when subject to half the temperatures associated with an office fire. This means that tall all-steel buildings will always fail _by buckling collapse_ if subjected to a sustained internal fire. In steel, melting occurs at a temperature 1,000 degrees Celsius higher than the point at which creep begins.
"the steel only needs to be weakened by the heat" - indeed so.
There were hundreds of tons of metals present at the WTC which would have been liquid at cherry-red temperatures. Steel is completely SOLID when that colour, and yet quite malleable, as any blacksmith could tell you. There was no molten steel at the WTC, nor was there any ALUMINA - the byproduct of thermite. Buckling is a quiet process. Etc., etc.
Dear Tony Duncan - I noticed you used italics for the words “learn“ and “see“ - - by any chance could you explain how I might be able to do that? (I know how to create *bold text* - but not italics)
@@_BreakdownFor ITALICS, press SHIFT and the button to the right of Zero, type your thing, then press SHIFT and the button to the right of Zero. This works for me because my keyboard is set to Spanish. I am not sure whether this advice works for you. (!)
@@tonyduncan9852 thanks - I’ll try it out on my desktop keyboard 🙂👍🏼
Why hasn't Charlie Thorton and Leslie Robertson questioned 3 buildings going down semetrical and one not being hit?? Plus turning concrete into powder not to mention molten steel.
MICHAEL DAVIS he did explain why the towers came down... he built the fucking things. He said flaws were exposed, flaws that were never really considered flaws. Simple as that. He is not a conspiracy idiot like you
@@Pontiac2001GT He did help build the WTC but his engineering firm LERA is openly a Government contractor he's not exactly impartial he has everything to personally lose and nothing to gain by standing against the official narrative.
A multitude of "Conspiracy theories" have later been proven to be factual the term means nothing.
“I thought I was really through, through, through, through - forget it! Who is going to want this guy whose building got taken down by a simple airplane?” -Les Robertson
he subscribes to the "there's no way they could have been rigged without detection, so therefore they just fell down" logical fallacy pseudoscience school of thought.
@@Pontiac2001GT It's pathetic that this even has to be explained
52:00
Get a masters!
Or a Structural/Civil PE license.
Look this guy is cool! He help build the World Trade Center but got dam this guy has a smart ass remark for every question she gives...
He learned to see things.