- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Candice Owens is a straight up lunatic.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:16 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:16 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Obtained a paper, not created the paper.
So the paper just appeared from thin air?
quote:
Structural steel is compromised by heat. We used to bend steel beams with a torch.
If you can bend beams with a torch, imagine what a jet fuel raging inferno would do.
Anyone believing the fire didnt compromise the beams to the point of failure is a non thinking person.
Except you ignore some basic facts about fires.
For example, the highest temperatures, and that to which you and others will quote, are only the temperatures above the fire, because heat rises. As you get to the side of the fires, the temperatures will drop dramatically.
You need a constant source of fuel to maintain a fire in a single spot. Fires move as their fuel source burns up.
Because the support columns are vertical, they were not in the hottest parts of the fire. It also takes time for the heat to penetrate into things. You can't cook a potato in 2 minutes. So the fires would need to be basically on the support beams, and it would need to burn for a long period of time.
Going further, in order for the building to fall as it did, this needs to be happening on ALL the beams at the same time, even those on the other side of the impact. If it was only happening on one side, the top would just have fallen off.
The lower floors did not have their beams weakened. And the total mass of the top was NOT falling on them. Much of it was somehow thrown away from the building, while still falling at near free falling speed.
You can't even drop a bowling ball on a bunch of glass floors and get them to collapse. Each floor provides resistance and slows it down. Except for on 9/11, when every floor magically collapses at the same rate as the floors above it - all the way to the ground.
3
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:17 pm to dgnx6
quote:
But in the case of the Charlie stuff it’s literally on camera. And he doesn’t need to be working with some covert group to borrow his grandfathers gun and shoot it.
Is it?
He was caught on Ring doorbells limping down the street, with the assumption being the full sized rifle was down his pants. Maybe it was disassembled, that would make it easier to somehow put the barrel and stock down his jeans. How did he get it to stay there? No idea, but we’ll stick with that assumption.
How did he get it on the roof? The video capturing him walking up the stairs shows him bending both knees. The rifle couldn’t be there.
How did he get it off of the roof? A fuzzy video shows him jumping holding “something”, but it’s not a rifle. It flexes in the middle as he’s carrying it, it can’t be an assembled rifle.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:21 pm to 3down10
quote:
Except you ignore some basic facts about fires.
You dont understand structural steel.
Heat changes the properties and weakens the steel and this is clearly what occurred.
Its not even difficult. We used to do it with one guy and a rosebud.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:21 pm to 3down10
quote:
You're lucky I even entertained your appeal to authority logical fallacy to begin with.
You don’t know how lucky I feel to have a completely insane moron entertaining me. Killing time at the airport and you have delivered.
quote:
But if you want engineers to tell you the same things, there you go.
Haha. 51 intelligence experts.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:22 pm to GumboPot
quote:
You’ll never convince the complacency theorists. They are too fat, happy and incurious in their government narrative lives.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:23 pm to 3down10
quote:
As you get to the side of the fires, the temperatures will drop dramatically.
Holy shite. 
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:25 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I see the OP wrote Owen’s instead of Owens, which is the correct spelling. Must be typing from an iPhone because my phone tried to autocorrect me to Owen’s too.
If you're going to ding the OP for punctuation, the least you could do is point out that her name is Candace, not Candice.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:25 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Haha. 51 intelligence experts.
Galileo was only 1 man, because that's how it starts.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:26 pm to Snipe
quote:
I hope she gets sued into oblivion.
I hope the 7k dollars you took from the Israeli Warlord was worth your soul.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:27 pm to 3down10
quote:
The lower floors did not have their beams weakened
Didnt need to. Ever heard of the Sampoong department store collapse? An overweight AC ari handler on the roof caused everything under it to collapse to the ground.
This post was edited on 10/25/25 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:29 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Jet fuel can melt steel beams!
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:29 pm to RogerTheShrubber
He hasn’t heard of much.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:31 pm to Errerrerrwere
Here comes another in the endless parade of dipshits.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:32 pm to the808bass
quote:
Here comes another in the endless parade of dipshits.
I own your mind. You low intelligent woman.
WTC 7
/end thread
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:34 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You dont understand structural steel.
Heat changes the properties and weakens the steel and this is clearly what occurred.
Its not even difficult. We used to do it with one guy and a rosebud.
That's not the same thing as a fire next to/near/on the steel. You're talking about apply constant heat to a single point. Not a fire next to the beam not making direct contact.
In reality, if the fires were melting the steel beams, it would have been the horizontal beams that gave way first, not the vertical beams. Parts of the floors would have started to fall long before the support columns weakened.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:35 pm to Snipe
Funny that a board that had a 5000 page Q anon thread at one point is now all “trust the experts and the FBI”. What happened to you guys?
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:37 pm to Bunkie7672
quote:
Funny that a board that had a 5000 page Q anon thread at one point is now all “trust the experts and the FBI”. What happened to you guys?
Conspiracy theorists!
Nutjob!
Antisemites!
I may be a lot of things. But I'll never be a broke dick that took chump change from another country to bash one of our own.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:38 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Didnt need to. Ever heard of the Sampoong department store collapse? An overweight AC ari handler on the roof caused everything under it to collapse to the ground.
You mean this? That's like 6 or 7 floors, and the entire building did not collapse.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:38 pm to 3down10
quote:
That's not the same thing as a fire next to/near/on the steel.
You have no idea what youre talking about here, respectfully.
You have read way too much propaganda by people who are talking out of their asses.
Posted on 10/25/25 at 12:39 pm to 3down10
quote:
You mean this? That's like 6 or 7 floors, and the entire building did not collapse.
The center structure did. All the way to the ground.
Different construction from the WTC and caused by excess weight bending the steel.
Fire does the same thing.
Page 9 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News