Penn and Teller's take on 9/11. Can you debunk what they have to say?
Penn and Teller's take on 9/11. Can you debunk what they have to say?
My 2 cents is that, according to this logic, anybody with a blow torch can knock down sky scrapers and steel buildings by just setting one or two floors on fire, since WTC 7 just had a small fire with no jet fuel or a giant whole and just imploded the way it did....the 9/11 experts here will debunk the rest.
If I am not mistaken, Penn and Teller are magicians. When they get a few years under their belt CONSTRUCTING buildings have them get back to me. In the meantime, I have no use for two people who KNOW NOTHING about what it makes to keep a building standing or making one fall down.Originally Posted by jetsetlemming
Penn and Teller are pulling out some of the more outlandish theories as strawmen. You don't have to believe that the planes were fake to question the official story. We don't cite the melting point of steel as proof. We do however point out that no steel-frame skyscraper has collapsed due to fire before or after 9/11/01, and we ask how the WTC towers could have fallen straight down at near freefall speed. There are many sources that address these points in more detail.
At one point they suggested in the video that if you see anyone carrying a copy of Eric Hufschmid's book Painful Questions, you should push them down a flight of stairs. Was that supposed to be comedy? Sorry guys, I enjoy your magic tricks, but you owe Mr. Hufschmid an apology.
The link is to a site not written by Penn and Teller, but a debunking site with scientific evidence. It, in turn, has a video of Penn and Teller talking about 9/11. I haven't heard about anyone here with a few years of constuction, either.
Everyone knows Nastrodamus was the real deal, everyone exept Penn & Teller. There argument against him was that if he's accurute then people should have been able to stop 9/11 and predict things in advance.
12 Years in commercial building construction and 4 years as a building maintenance engineer. What would you like to know?
1) Did you have to learn about steel's melting point, the temp. at which it's weak enough under the pressure of the building on top of it brings it down anyway, and the effects the concussion from the enitial explosion would have? And 2) Do you doubt that the fire and pressure and force of the two planes could bring down the twin towers? I don't have any more knowledge than laymen, just like most everyone else, but the explaination of the fires and the beams weakening and how it spread seems to make sense.
someone mentioned the WTC7, but I don't know anything about it. Until seeing the info on this site, I didn't even know anything but the twin towers and a couple building right next to them collapsed.
WTC7 was a controlled demolition after the two towers were hit and collapsed. Five hours after. The guy that owns the property (don't remember name, help plz) Is in an interview that i saw saying he was contacted on 9/11 by the feds after the initial hit, telling him they were gonna "pull" WTC7. "Pulling it" is a demolition term which usually means to demo the building. Usually it takes weeks to rig a building of that size with enough explosives to successfully "pull it". On 9/11 they did it less than 5 hours and somehow had enough incite to know immediately that is was going to be needed after seeing the initial damage to WTC1 and WTC2.
I'm not very good at linking shit and what not... but i believe it was in InPlaneSite.com...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote