Skip to main content

Reply to "9/11 - The Anniversary, The Legacy"

quote:
I consider the first school of thought to be of rationalists and realists, and the second school to be of irrationalists and fantasists. 'Faith-based' is a synonym for irrational, and a strong belief in conspiracies


This is the hilarious thing about this situation.

People who claim to believe in rationalism but they won't address the physics of 9/11, they just want to make fun of conspiracies. I say they have to prove they have the brains to be rational.

Getting to the moon was a physics and engineering problem. Designing the World Trade Center was a physics and engineering problem. Designing the plane that hit the World Trade Center was a physics and engineering problem.

Figuring out whether or not a 200 ton airliner can LEVEL a 500,000 to building in less than 2 hours is a physics and engineering problem.

Now how do we solve this problem without knowing how many tons of steel and concrete were on each level of the tower? Have you heard how many tons of steel were on the 79th, 80th and 81st floors of the south tower? If not, then how do you believe the fire could start the collapse in 56 minutes?

If you need to figure out how much time and what temperature to set to cook a frozen turkey don't you need to know the size of the turkey?

umbra
×
×
×
×