Failed demolition of building

This is the video of a failed demolition. Only lower explosives detonate.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• demolition
• funny
• wrong

[Stratattack13]

Is this how they made the leaning tower of piza?

[F1R3F0X]

Epic Fail

[RoboBagons]

Where in the FUCK was the free fall implosion?? Phhhhhh, your silly american fairly tales are BULLLSHIITT, Or do you still believe in your santa clause???

[Dallasdeckard]

@sargentaaron2004 Liberal Truthers want it both ways. They claim Bush is a moron, who can't speak, but he's genius enough to pull off 9/11 without a shred of hard evidence, without anyone talking, and he did all this under the scrutiny of the press, handlers, secretaries, friends and staff. The people responsible for Watergate couldn't keep their mouth shut, but your assertion is that Bush could do all this, without anyone saying a word, and without one... single... error. Completely stupid.

[Dallasdeckard]

@sargentaaron2004 No, I'm suggesting one failed, or two and then the added weight caused the others to fail.

Ask yourself this... do you really believe that President Bush, eight months in office, concocted this plan and pulled off the worst terrorist attack in American history (one of the worst ever) utilizing literally hundreds of people and no one has talked, and no evidence has been found? It means that Bush would have had to begin planning this the day he entered office. It's absurd.

[sargentaaron2004]

@Dallasdeckard So... all the support beams failed at the same time? Seriously? Is that what you are suggesting?

[porkipig123]

The contructer of this building must have been a genius! :P

[xjx2]

Those fuckers think they can hurt me! They cant! Im bigger and stonger then them! *falls* OMG MY LEGS! HA Im still standing. You will never defeat the greta mighty legless building!

[Dallasdeckard]

Conspiracy theorists always claim to have "better" or "new" information. When you ask *what* information, all the sudden you find out it's the same B.S. that has always been out there.

Theorists claim that the 9/11 commission was "biased", that the Popular Mechanics issue was "biased". That MIT is "biased". Why? Because they don't support the nonsensical conspiracy theories that these wackos subscribe to. They aren't "biased" they are scientifically sound, accurate and overwhelmingly final.

[Dallasdeckard]

No, it wasn't in gas form. The wings broke open and spilled jet fuel, liquid jet fuel. There is no "newer and better researched information" that can turn liquid jet fuel into "gas". Haha. Sorry.

This is what conspiracy theorists do, they claim "new information" and try to argue nonsense against experts with scientific fact. Facts don't become "outdated". A fact is a fact - always. Popular Mechanics is one source, because it is SO good and SO well-researched. What's yours?

[Dallasdeckard]

No, you are wrong. Sorry. I have worked in construction for over 25 years. I know about steel and it's properties. Secondly, Popular Mechanics brought together experts in many fields to address these issues. It wasn't "biased". This is what Farid Alfawak-hiri, the senior engineer of the American Institute of Steel Construction says: "Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F,"

I think the senior engineer of the American Institute of Steel Construction knows a bit more than you do.

[Dallasdeckard]

The finest scientists in the world, many liberal and anti-Bush have shown with scientific evidence and scientific fact that terrorists with commercial jet planes brought down the towers. Meanwhile, "trombonedude" comes along and "respectfully disagrees" with the entirety of the scientific community. Ut-oh! What will we do *now*? Yawn.

There will always be a small group of people that believe in far-fetched conspiracy theories who reside on the fringes of society - exactly where they belong.