Wrong. The Windsor Tower was mostly concrete. The only steel part was the outer sections of the top floors. This part of the Windsor Tower collapsed, while the concrete parts remained standing, as concrete is not weakened by heat. The WTC, on the other hand, was entirely steel. Therefore, the only thing that the Windsor Tower demonstrates about this is that steel structures can collapse when weakened by extreme heat, which is somewhat obvious anyway.
Well both built of steel. One burnt for 90 minutes and collapsed into its footprint , The other burnt for 20 hrs and remaining perfectly upright and supporting the weight of a crane on its roof
"The Windsor Building's resilience to fire is in stark contrast to that apparent for the WTC Towers"
Actually no, it helps prove their collapses because the steel-framed sections of the Windsor tower collapsed. Only the concrete section was left standing.
thats funny how this building burns for dayd and it does not fall but we are made to believe that the twin towners were broght down by just fire. the towers were made to withstand more than one plane to hit so that the building would reman sound but the officeial story would make you think other wise because the government has something to hide.
There is now an independent,documented and fully credible study of all the events about 9/11.'9/11 AND AMERICAN EMPIRE - INTELLECTUALS SPEAK OUT'As a good study should it covers ALL the problems and presents a sound scientific explanation that knocks the NIST report into a 'cocked hat' where it belongs.Time has exposed the shambles that is the official story.Now is the time for factual information to take its place.ALL REFERENCES FULLY ENDORSED.
"Well built both of steel"
Wrong. The Windsor Tower was mostly concrete. The only steel part was the outer sections of the top floors. This part of the Windsor Tower collapsed, while the concrete parts remained standing, as concrete is not weakened by heat. The WTC, on the other hand, was entirely steel. Therefore, the only thing that the Windsor Tower demonstrates about this is that steel structures can collapse when weakened by extreme heat, which is somewhat obvious anyway.
LegoFan970 2 years ago
Well both built of steel. One burnt for 90 minutes and collapsed into its footprint , The other burnt for 20 hrs and remaining perfectly upright and supporting the weight of a crane on its roof
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
question: what does this have to do with WTC?
LegoFan970 2 years ago
locotronix (2 years ago)
some stupid with a flaregun?
burned the place to the ground
meshif420 2 years ago
I guess some people don't realize not all building are built with the same blueprint an materials.
arkivx1 2 years ago
"The Windsor Building's resilience to fire is in stark contrast to that apparent for the WTC Towers"
Actually no, it helps prove their collapses because the steel-framed sections of the Windsor tower collapsed. Only the concrete section was left standing.
thedman113 4 years ago
thats funny how this building burns for dayd and it does not fall but we are made to believe that the twin towners were broght down by just fire. the towers were made to withstand more than one plane to hit so that the building would reman sound but the officeial story would make you think other wise because the government has something to hide.
txmuslim84 5 years ago
There is now an independent,documented and fully credible study of all the events about 9/11.'9/11 AND AMERICAN EMPIRE - INTELLECTUALS SPEAK OUT'As a good study should it covers ALL the problems and presents a sound scientific explanation that knocks the NIST report into a 'cocked hat' where it belongs.Time has exposed the shambles that is the official story.Now is the time for factual information to take its place.ALL REFERENCES FULLY ENDORSED.
stratocaster539 5 years ago
some stupid with a flaregun?
locotronix 5 years ago