As one of the top level comments say, the images are all from https://randomuser.me/ which is suspect. If you don't have a profile picture of them, then I'd suggest not using it. Or link to actual sources of feedback (Google Workspace reviews, LinkedIn posts, tweets etc)
Officials have made announcements that tie the alleged drone sightings to “capable” (e.g., foreign state) actors. How would stricter laws address that?
It’s also already illegal to fly drones above airports.
If this comment is an indication of how you approached the conversation, maybe you failed to convince your colleague due to a lack of specific arguments and an abundance of scornful conceit.
It's interesting you mention that because I'm being quite charitable to my colleague, who was actually dismissively stubborn, and who ignored my personal experiences about living in a non-wood house.
The context is that I was shopping around for houses, doing inspections and such, and was merely curious about why homes were constructed in such a way. My home country primarily makes homes out of concrete and brick for heat insulation and it works well, compared to what I have to put up with a Texas heat wave in a wooden house currently.
I'm not entirely sure why you're assuming that I had no specific arguments though - I certainly wouldn't put a whole conversation verbatim onto an internet forum.
You just might be in the right place. Asking same question, wait until someone will make a directory website to sell access to you to find those forums.
First of all, the WTC towers did withstand the impacts but collapsed due to the ensuing fires which weakened the remaining core columns (notably not due to collapsing floors, which did not in fact occur, according to Thornton-Tomasetti who have modeled the impacts and ensuing collapses as part of their forensic investigation commissioned for the insurance claim litigation).
Leslie Robertson, who lead the WTC structural engineering team along with John Skilling, is on tape making the 707 claim, but no surviving documentation has been uncovered to reveal the specific scenario that was modeled or the calculations used.
An important reason why the towers survived the impacts at all was the presence of the two hat trusses, which allowed the increasingly unsupported loads to be redistributed to the surviving exterior columns. Najib N. Abboud of Thornton-Thomasetti has given a detailed account of the findings of the forensic investigation that's available on Youtube[1].
I had forgotten about that story. Maybe UC Berkeley would reconsider given modern closed captioning tools, not that this would address the broader societal issue.
