• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:178]

Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

The floor slabs in region outside the core were designed to support 58 # / SF live load... if the load is more... the slabs "fail"... they crack and shatter.. and break free from the column/axial system... they land on the floor below and the process repeats... THIS IS DRIVEN BY GRAVITY. These floors were not even designed for warehouse loads let along concrete slab (sections) dropping from a min 12'.

Yes, and some strange force managed to blow large pieces horizontally hundreds of feet. That force was NOT gravity.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Yes, and some strange force managed to blow large pieces horizontally hundreds of feet. That force was NOT gravity.

What force was it?

Quit being vague.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Pretty simple demonstration. and no nuclear bombs were involved in the presentation.:lamo


 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Yes, and some strange force managed to blow large pieces horizontally hundreds of feet. That force was NOT gravity.

It wasn't nukes either. But that's only because what you describe never happened and if you could think logically it would take you only a few seconds to figure out why. But of course this has been explained to you endlessly and you still don't get it, so,...
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Pretty simple demonstration. and no nuclear bombs were involved in the presentation.:lamo




This is so self evident it's hard to imagine what a truther expects a building collapse of that size to look like.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

What force was it?

Quit being vague.

Quit being obtuse.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

It wasn't nukes either. But that's only because what you describe never happened and if you could think logically it would take you only a few seconds to figure out why. But of course this has been explained to you endlessly and you still don't get it, so,...

Thank you for obeying the authorities Mark.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Quit being obtuse.

Explain how the beams could only be ejected to the distance your concerned with by the use of a nuclear bomb? You have made it clear the wtc was nuked.

I will make even easier for you. explain how the beams could only be ejected by use of any explosives.

No comment from you on the vid that basically shoots down your not "gravity" statement.
 
Last edited:
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Thank you for obeying the authorities Mark.

Thank you for not using that thing between your ears Henry.

Please identify one specific multi-ton object which was laterally projected hundreds of feet, describe how it got there, identify it flying laterally in any of the hundreds of video's of the collapse and explain why, if sections of steel weighing many tons can be laterally projected hundreds of feet small fragments and bits of debris were not laterally projected thousands of feet, killing hundreds, if not thousands of people below and destroying every window and peppering every building in a 10 block radius with shrapnel.

Your weasel-like evasion is highly anticipated.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Explain how the beams could only be ejected to the distance your concerned with by the use of a nuclear bomb? You have made it clear the wtc was nuked.

I will make even easier for you. explain how the beams could only be ejected by use of any explosives.

No comment from you on the vid that basically shoots down your not "gravity" statement.

Are you really that obtuse Mike, that you do not know what explosives do? Maybe you've stood too close to a few fires in your career? Explosives blow things up, down and sideways, depending upon how any given explosive is designed.

Maybe they used C4 to blow it up, but there is no evidence to support that theory. Maybe they used dynamite, but there is no evidence to support that theory.

Given all the strange goings-on, Tartaglia's comments, 90 days worth of molten iron, hot spots visible from space, strange reports of dripping skin, strangely burned vehicles, first responders displaying symptoms of radiation poisoning--all those things would explain the nuclear event.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Are you really that obtuse Mike, that you do not know what explosives do? Maybe you've stood too close to a few fires in your career? Explosives blow things up, down and sideways, depending upon how any given explosive is designed.

Maybe they used C4 to blow it up, but there is no evidence to support that theory. Maybe they used dynamite, but there is no evidence to support that theory.

Given all the strange goings-on, Tartaglia's comments, 90 days worth of molten iron, hot spots visible from space, strange reports of dripping skin, strangely burned vehicles, first responders displaying symptoms of radiation poisoning--all those things would explain the nuclear event.

Funny how you shift based on when you get pinned down. Nope, HD it is very clear you do not have a consistent opinion of what happened.

It is interesting when the medical professionals disagree with you regarding the first responders health issues, yet you keep saying radiation.
It is tiresome your lack of knowledge regarding fire behavior and how you down play the fires intensity and duration even when shown what "office" fires can do.

Come back when you have solid sources. I don't see any evidence provided by you that it was C4 or dynamite or maybe it was Santa Custer that was used.:lamo
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Funny how you shift based on when you get pinned down. Nope, HD it is very clear you do not have a consistent opinion of what happened.

It is interesting when the medical professionals disagree with you regarding the first responders health issues, yet you keep saying radiation.
It is tiresome your lack of knowledge regarding fire behavior and how you down play the fires intensity and duration even when shown what "office" fires can do.

Come back when you have solid sources. I don't see any evidence provided by you that it was C4 or dynamite or maybe it was Santa Custer that was used.:lamo

I know you seldom get something based upon first telling, so I'll repeat Mike: all I am really certain of is that the OCT is a bright and shining lie. Can you dig it sir? ;)
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

I know you seldom get something based upon first telling, so I'll repeat Mike: all I am really certain of is that the OCT is a bright and shining lie. Can you dig it sir? ;)

We all got that the first time, just like we all get that you are fundamentally wrong.

Can you dig it sir?
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

I know you seldom get something based upon first telling, so I'll repeat Mike: all I am really certain of is that the OCT is a bright and shining lie. Can you dig it sir? ;)

I am sure you have been duped by whatever resources your "free thinking" used. Can you dig it , sir?

Again, nothing to backup what you state., no surprise.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

I am sure you have been duped by whatever resources your "free thinking" used. Can you dig it , sir?

Again, nothing to backup what you state., no surprise.

No, I was duped on 11 September 2001, just like you and most others. It took me about 4 years to realize I was duped. You still have not realized it. :peace
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

No, I was duped on 11 September 2001, just like you and most others. It took me about 4 years to realize I was duped. You still have not realized it. :peace

Incorrect. I was not duped and have not fallen for the bs Gage, Prager, DRG puts out. :peace
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Incorrect. I was not duped and have not fallen for the bs Gage, Prager, DRG puts out. :peace

The difference between you or I and Henry is that you or I can not only explain why we are right but also why Henry is wrong. Henry can't even explain why he is right and he doesn't know it. Henry is a believer.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Incorrect. I was not duped and have not fallen for the bs Gage, Prager, DRG puts out. :peace

Thank you Mike, that's very much the point--almost 15 years later you still don't realize you were deceived.

As Mark Twain observed more than a century ago, it is easier to fool people than it is to explain to them how they have been fooled. People are funny.
 
Re: MIT Prof Kausel - Structures Like WTC does not Collapse into its own Footprint[W:

Thank you Mike, that's very much the point--almost 15 years later you still don't realize you were deceived.

As Mark Twain observed more than a century ago, it is easier to fool people than it is to explain to them how they have been fooled. People are funny.

Funny. Thanks for your uninformed opinion.

and yes, Gage , et.al. has been able to dupe you. You still believe the bs from them.

Since your into old sayings , "There's a sucker born every minute" a phrase closely associated with P. T. Barnum,,

Fits the CT crowd quite well.

Noted. you did not respond to the vid that demonstrates how beams can be ejected without explosives.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom