Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Empire State Building VS WTC


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#1    ZELDAR

ZELDAR

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 106 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SO CAL

  • CURIOSITY KILLED THE HUMAN

Posted 21 August 2010 - 08:02 PM

So I was reading an article about the Empire State Building having bedbugs in its basement. I noticed it said it withstood a B-52 Bomber crashing into it at 200 mph.  So, how could a building built in 1931 be made to take a hit from a plane, and the World Trade Centers went down after 56 minutes? All of these buildings (WTC) were built between 1975 and 1981. Surely the architects would have built it with the ability to withstand multiple plane crashes at over 200 mph and more weight. I mean... it was almost 50 years later. If this doesn't prove that there were explosives in the damn buildings, and that this was an inside job. WTF does? Also don't know if this should be posted here but it seems like a modern mystery to me.

Edited by ZELDAR, 21 August 2010 - 08:29 PM.

"God" is human belief. Personification of the Sun. The one thing in this entire universe that keeps us alive."

#2    Princess Serenity

Princess Serenity

    ❝ ♔ Beauty

  • Member
  • 8,230 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Moon Kingdom

  • "There's nothing to fear but fear itself." Franklin D Roosevelt.

Posted 21 August 2010 - 08:29 PM

The plane that hit the Empire State Buildng wasn't a Boeing 757 (correct me if I'm wrong about the number) and not going at high fast speed. And the building was still unoccupied. The plane didn't have the fuel like the planes that hit the towers. Not to mention that the plane was much MUCH smaller than the two 9/11 planes.

When the towers went up, no one thought THAT could happen. It's not like people could see the future or anything.

Edited by Moon Princess, 21 August 2010 - 08:30 PM.

Av by me.


#3    Supermanfan77

Supermanfan77

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dalton, Georgia

Posted 21 August 2010 - 08:30 PM

View PostZELDAR, on 21 August 2010 - 08:02 PM, said:

So I was reading an article about the Empire State Building having bedbugs in its basement. I noticed it said it withstood a B-52 Bomber crashing into it at 200 mph.  So, how could a building built in 1931 be made to take a hit from a plane, and the World Trade Centers went down after 56 minutes? All of these buildings (WTC) were built between 1975 and 1981. Surely the architects would have built it with the ability to withstand multiple plane crashes at over 200 mph and more weight. I mean... it was almost 50 years later. If this doesn't prove that there were explosives in the damn buildings, and that this was an inside job. WTF.

Yup, someone probably planted a bomb set to go off when the planes hit at the same time, Bush knew about the destruction of the Towers before hand, he caused it all.  The Government covered it all up, by saying it was terrorist, radical Muslims. Bush was in control of the whole operation.  I just know it!


#4    ZELDAR

ZELDAR

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 106 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SO CAL

  • CURIOSITY KILLED THE HUMAN

Posted 21 August 2010 - 08:43 PM

View PostMoon Princess, on 21 August 2010 - 08:29 PM, said:

The plane that hit the Empire State Buildng wasn't a Boeing 757 (correct me if I'm wrong about the number) and not going at high fast speed. And the building was still unoccupied. The plane didn't have the fuel like the planes that hit the towers. Not to mention that the plane was much MUCH smaller than the two 9/11 planes.

When the towers went up, no one thought THAT could happen. It's not like people could see the future or anything.

The building WAS occupied, here is a link to the story: bomber crash .  After that happened you would have to expect it to happen again. That should have been an eye opener to architects everywhere. What if it did fall down? You must make sure it never happens. Plus this is 50 years later, that is years and years of structural advances. When you build a skyscraper, it's in the sky. Where the planes are. Gotta expect the worse.



Also to SupermanFan, I believe the owner of all the WTC buildings is behind it. Why would you demolish WTC7 on the same day for no reason? The have to demolish all other WTC buildings. Wikipedia it, the WTC complex was fully demolished. The guy was covered by billions of insurance and those buildings going down would make him rich. He demolished the complex to build BIGGER skyscrapers. Bigger buildings = more business = more money.

Edited by ZELDAR, 21 August 2010 - 08:48 PM.

"God" is human belief. Personification of the Sun. The one thing in this entire universe that keeps us alive."

#5    Princess Serenity

Princess Serenity

    ❝ ♔ Beauty

  • Member
  • 8,230 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Moon Kingdom

  • "There's nothing to fear but fear itself." Franklin D Roosevelt.

Posted 21 August 2010 - 08:45 PM

View PostZELDAR, on 21 August 2010 - 08:43 PM, said:

The building WAS occupied, here is a link to the story: bomber crash .  After that happened you would have to expect it to happen again. That should have been an eye opener to architects everywhere. What if it did fall down? You must make sure it never happens. Plus this is 50 years later, that is years and years of structural advances. When you build a skyscraper, it's in the sky. Where the planes are. Gotta expect the worse.

Not as occupied the towers were.

I saw a documentary regarding the event. That incident was an complete and total accident. It wasn't on purpose.

The two incidents are totally different.

Av by me.


#6    ZELDAR

ZELDAR

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 106 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SO CAL

  • CURIOSITY KILLED THE HUMAN

Posted 21 August 2010 - 08:54 PM

View PostMoon Princess, on 21 August 2010 - 08:45 PM, said:

Not as occupied the towers were.

I saw a documentary regarding the event. That incident was an complete and total accident. It wasn't on purpose.

The two incidents are totally different.

Just because one was an accident and one wasn't doesn't make them different. A plane hit the ESB, and a plane hit the WTC. SAME THING. The 50 year advancement of structural integrity is the point. The amount of people in the building has no relevance at this time. What i'm trying to get across is that the WTCs had to be made to withstand all types of hits. Especially being built 50 years after a plane smashed into the Empire State Building. Also the fuel in the planes that hit the WTC's don't burn hot enough to burn through the supports.

Edited by ZELDAR, 21 August 2010 - 08:59 PM.

"God" is human belief. Personification of the Sun. The one thing in this entire universe that keeps us alive."

#7    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 7,824 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 21 August 2010 - 09:00 PM

It depends on the type of fuel, the plane weight, height,width and what is made of


#8    ZELDAR

ZELDAR

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 106 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SO CAL

  • CURIOSITY KILLED THE HUMAN

Posted 21 August 2010 - 09:01 PM

View PostPompey_Lad_18, on 21 August 2010 - 09:00 PM, said:

It depends on the type of fuel, the plane weight, height,width and what is made of

I saw a video of some tests done with the fuel from the planes and it was about 1000 degrees TOO COLD to burn the supports, I'll try to find the video. If anyone has it please post it. Also, the beams looked like they were cut with wire explosives, used by demolition teams. the beams sticking up looked like this /|

Edited by ZELDAR, 21 August 2010 - 09:05 PM.

"God" is human belief. Personification of the Sun. The one thing in this entire universe that keeps us alive."

#9    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 3,561 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 21 August 2010 - 09:22 PM

I don't have any facts to back me up, but I presume the Empire State Building was probably better built than the WTC.  The ESB is built of 60 thousands tons of steel, 10 million bricks, 62 thousand cubic yard of concrete, 200 thousand cubic feet of limestone and granite, 10 thousand square feet of marble.  (Plus, it was designed to be beautiful and elegant, unlike the WTC.)  Just an aside.  

How all this would stand up to two Boeing 767's at 575mph and 450 mph and a combined 20 thousands gallons of jet fuel I don't know.  I think the two impacts were enough without bombs being placed in the building to accomplish the task.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225

#10    danielost

danielost

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 28,630 posts
  • Joined:26 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the only known inhabited planet in the universe

Posted 21 August 2010 - 09:34 PM

View PostMoon Princess, on 21 August 2010 - 08:29 PM, said:

The plane that hit the Empire State Buildng wasn't a Boeing 757 (correct me if I'm wrong about the number) and not going at high fast speed. And the building was still unoccupied. The plane didn't have the fuel like the planes that hit the towers. Not to mention that the plane was much MUCH smaller than the two 9/11 planes.

When the towers went up, no one thought THAT could happen. It's not like people could see the future or anything.
the rest of the reason is because the empire state building was built with cubes.  in cube would have to be taken out to destroy the building.


the towers were too tall for the cube idea to work so they basically built a tree trunk with the floors being built on branches.  i am keeping it simple.

I am a mormon.  If I don't use mormons believe, those my beliefs only.
I do not go to church haven't for thirty years.
There are other mormons on this site. So if I have misspoken about the beliefs. I welcome their input.
I am not perfect and never will be. I do strive to be true to myself. I do my best to stay true to the mormon faith. Thank for careing and if you don't peace be with you.

#11    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 31,124 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 21 August 2010 - 09:52 PM

I have absolutely no idea why ZELDAR thought that the Modern Mysteries, New Age and 2012 forum was the correct place for this.

I'm moving it to the Conspiracies & Secret Societies forum, with the dozens of other threads on this subject.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#12    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,895 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 22 August 2010 - 12:08 AM

View PostZELDAR, on 21 August 2010 - 08:43 PM, said:

The building WAS occupied, here is a link to the story: bomber crash .  After that happened you would have to expect it to happen again. That should have been an eye opener to architects everywhere. What if it did fall down? You must make sure it never happens. Plus this is 50 years later, that is years and years of structural advances. When you build a skyscraper, it's in the sky. Where the planes are. Gotta expect the worse.



Also to SupermanFan, I believe the owner of all the WTC buildings is behind it. Why would you demolish WTC7 on the same day for no reason? The have to demolish all other WTC buildings. Wikipedia it, the WTC complex was fully demolished. The guy was covered by billions of insurance and those buildings going down would make him rich. He demolished the complex to build BIGGER skyscrapers. Bigger buildings = more business = more money.
It was a B-25 that hit the Empire State building not a B-52 as you first said.  It was lost in fog trying to land, so moving much slower, with less fuel and much less mass.  The energy of the crash is magnitudes less.  Since then instrument approaches have become more common and more precise.  A pilot flying an instrument approach will not come near a building.  They also have approach radar to watch and warn planes.

If Silverstein was involved then why, when he bought the insurance, did he try to buy far less than he could have and have to be talked UP to the amount he ended up with (still less than recommended)?
From here
http://www.forbes.co...ilverstein.html

Quote

In its court papers, Swiss Re shows how Silverstein first tried to buy just $1.5 billion in property damage and business-interruption coverage. When his lenders objected, he discussed buying a $5 billion policy. Ultimately, he settled on the $3.5 billion figure, which was less than the likely cost of rebuilding.


Edited by frenat, 22 August 2010 - 12:10 AM.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#13    mrbusdriver

mrbusdriver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,520 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2007

Posted 22 August 2010 - 01:47 AM

Indeed, the B-25 that hit the Empire State Building might have been doing about 150 knots, and weighted about 25000 pounds. The 767s that hit the WTC towers were around 450,000 pounds doing around 500 kts. The energies involved are many magnitudes different.
That's the difference in the two events.


#14    Obviousman

Obviousman

    Spaced out and plane crazy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,574 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Coast, NSW, Australia

  • "Truth needs no defence. Nobody - NOBODY - can ever take the footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me."
    Gene Cernan, Apollo 17

Posted 22 August 2010 - 02:10 AM

As well as all the aforementioned, it was interesting to note that one of the engines from the B-25 when through the building and landing on the street on the opposite side of the building.

regarding the B-25, here is a breakdown of the impact forces involved:

http://www.eng.uab.e...ject/Bomber.htm


#15    mrbusdriver

mrbusdriver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,520 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2007

Posted 22 August 2010 - 08:45 AM

View PostZELDAR, on 21 August 2010 - 09:01 PM, said:

Also, the beams looked like they were cut with wire explosives, used by demolition teams. the beams sticking up looked like this /|

I'm sure the photograph you saw was taken during the dismantling of the remaining structure after the collapse. That's how they cut down the standing pieces, many days after the collapses.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users