Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
10 Comments
NicoleBeesays...Having one side ravaged by the debris from a falling skyscraper probably didn't help much, either.
marblessays...>> ^NicoleBee:
Having one side ravaged by the debris from a falling skyscraper probably didn't help much, either.
If falling debris caused any structural damage, then the building would've fell over toward the side with the damage--the path of least resistance.
As seen here:
http://videosift.com/video/Dumb-dangerous-building-demolition-inevitably-ends-in-fail
http://videosift.com/video/Building-demolition-goes-a-little-bit-wrong
therealblankmansays...Hilarious. *comedy
siftbotsays...Adding video to channels (Comedy) - requested by therealblankman.
Trancecoachjokingly says...What the scientists don't know is that Building 7 was built upon a unique gravitational vortex which made it possible for it to collapse symmetrically on its own footprint, essentially defying the laws of physics which exist everywhere else in the known universe.
(it was also built on a foundation of toothpicks.)
marblessays...>> ^therealblankman:
Hilarious. comedy
poor taste.
marblessays...
Thalliumsays...In before the "WTC 7 was blowed up by splosives hurr" people.
Yogisays...>> ^marbles:
>> ^therealblankman:
Hilarious. comedy
poor taste.
Shut up Faggot. And I say that in the Louis CK way...you're not gay you're just being a faggot.
FlowersInHisHairsays...You know that building that rolled over wasn't WTC 7, right? It was a different building. Built differently and destroyed in a different way, under different circumstances.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.