Pretty funny Lording.

Check this out.

Starship Troopers Propaganda:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtoffvEhNkg

Ahhh yes! "Do you want to know more?"
And my personal favorite, "Service Guarantees Citizenship!!".

http://youtube.com/watch?v=q8XToX7aSdg

http://representativepress.org/BowingDebunksExplosives.html

I cant except that those buildings fell as they did without exlosives or that it was a major engineering disaster and if it was it should have been treated as such and investigated by metalurgist and engineers and architects

They didn't think
the 35W bridge up
here in Minneapolis
was going to collapse
either.

Now they're suspect
that the trusses used
to hold up the bridge
were too thin.

The engineering at
the time was not
advanced to see
the flaws in the
structural integrity
of the bridge.

I'm sure the engineers
who designed the World
Trade Center didn't imagine
planes flying into it.

The did anticipate that and built to withstand the impact of a fully loaded 707 fuel and all. the 767 that hit the towers were not fully loaded and to argue the differance between a fully loaded 707 and a half empty 767 would be splitting hairs as the differances are slim and not worthy of argument. Now if they felt it was not sound engineering they would have to prove it and that cannot be done so they never even tried.............

Again we forget 40,000 pounds of differance between a 707 and a 757 empty. That's minor? As mass acellerates it picks up more mass. The 100 MPH speed differance of the two is not enough to make up for an extra 40,000 pounds. In 1976 they had little clue what would actualy happen in this scenerio. Been debunked over & over & yet it's still the core arguement;^]

there was little differance in the mass of the two planes being that a fully loaded 707...again fully loaded 707 compared to a half empty 757 is insignificant.. they dont build these modern skyscrapers to collapse if the load bearing limit is exceeded by a hundred pounds..think over kill and safty. I can hear the engineers now "yep we built it to withstand a fully loaded 707 but if it gets slightly over that expect the whole works to come crashing down at free fall speed"

No big differance? The passengers don't make up the differance of the JET mass. 40,000 pounds is a pretty big differance, and 1976 isn't exactly modern anymore, the design was THEORETICAL. Here we go with this nonsense again, can't explain anything to some;^]

there is no 40,000 pound difference one being fully loaded and one half empty....lets get real here........that little amount of wieght could be as simple as a full gas tank and an empty one on a jumbo jet.........again I suggest that it is impossible for those towers to collapse at near free fall speed....against the laws of physics and gravity.....your right you wont convince me the impossible is possible

You obviously know nothing of physics, so I'll let you back off to your fantasy world again where 40,000 lbs. of Jet mass (not passenger mass) doesn't make a differance. Say hi to santa claus for me;^]

The above image is taken from Chapter 1 of the WTC Report [FEMA PDF of report]. To see how willing to "stretch the truth" the authors of the report are, compare the above image to the original (which can be found here). Notice that they have "accidently" quoted the length, height and wingspan of one of the early 707's (possibly the Boeing 707-120) and the weight, fuel capacity and speed of the more common Boeing 707-320B (the aircraft that most people associate with the name, Boeing 707). The above graphic has been edited to give a more accurate picture.
To summarize the aircraft:

The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds.
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds.

The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet.
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.

The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet.
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet.

The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel.
The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel.

The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s,
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s.

The Boeing 707 and 767 are very similar aircraft, with the main differences being that the 767 is slightly heavier and the 707 is faster.

Since the Boeing 707 had a higher thrust to weight ratio, it would be traveling faster on take-off and on landing.

The thrust to weight ratio for a Boeing 707 is 4 x 18,000/336,000 = 0.214286.

The thrust to weight ratio for a Boeing 767 is 2 x 31,500/395,000 = 0.159494.

In all the likely variations of an accidental impact with the WTC, the Boeing 707 would be traveling faster. In terms of impact damage, this higher speed would more than compensate for the slightly lower weight of the Boeing 707.

In conclusion we can say that if the twin towers were designed to survive the impact of a Boeing 707, then they were necessarily designed to survive the impact of a Boeing 767.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/boeing_707_767.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
again that small amount of weight compared to the sheer mass of the twin towers is the differance between your car window getting hit with a pregnant robin as oposed to one that isnt say hi to jesus and the easter bunny for me

Indeed the modern windshield is made to withstand the impact of a Robin at 100 miles an hour without damage, but if you are going a hundred and one miles per hour and the robin is pregnant your auto will burst into flames and collapse into a pile of ash

Is that an American Robin
or a European Robin?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1loyjm4SOa0

Perhaps this will be of some help:

http://www.style.org/unladenswallow/

I think it is actually the common cuckoo you are speaking of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2R3FvS4xr4