With more than perfect conditions, if each floor pulverized on impact with the falling floor above it would take 96 seconds to collapse. The towers fell in less than 10 seconds. EACH FLOOR TURNED TO DUST =!!! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!!! Think! Douche whoever put this vid up
Most of the steel in the video was found THROWN from the towers and stuck into surrounding buildings. The beams that were not thrown from the WTC were mangled and melted to an unrecognizable state OR completely disintegrated. With the amount of impossibilities related to this event its impossible to be skeptical that it was not and orchestrated event by a people with technology and influence far beyond anything we've ever seen
...In case you missed it, I already pointed out that Jowenko rejects 2/3 of the conspiarcy theory. He clearly states the twin towers fell in a natural collapse, as it was to be expected.
Doesn't surprise me the least that you guys keep parroting the same debunked stuff over and over again.
Okay, He only said WTC 7 was demolished. Big deal. The implication is the same. And how do you know there won't be a DE 9/11 Truth? FYI they already have a blogspot with a list of personell. Google it.
Because the first thing real demolition engineers will ask themselves is why they don't see any charges/explosives going off in any of the collapse videos.
But hey, after all it was a super nano-thermite/laser space beam/secial demolitionzz high tech military stuff lol! TEH CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONZZ!!1! :D
You are right, I'm not a demolition engineer. But numerous people in the industry say 9/11 controlled demolition is a myth. In fact, Brent Blanchard (Protec) published a paper on why.
But of course some "engineers" @ae911twoof know better. You were so nice to "rely info" on the existance of 9/11 "truth demo experts", care point me to their publications in scientific journals, too? I'm sure they have some, yes, no? lol!
@NotableNUTJOB I wouldn't know. I don't spend all my waking hours researching the subject just so I can waste time arguing with trolls like you that have no life. I DO have a little bit of a life BESIDES that. Also, your irreverant "twoof" spelling exposes you as immature and childish. And just because something isn't in a scientific journal doesn't mean it isn't true. Also, Steven Jones and other scholars of Scholars for 9/11 Truth HAVE published essays in science and engineering journals.
I knew you'd get all pissy and self-defensive after confronted with the absence of demolition engineers publishing papers on those alleged "controlled demolitions".
keep grasping at straws, it's sure entertaining. 10 years after, still no "DemolitionEngineersFor911Truth".
@NotableJInx2 Now that you mention it, it is something a pilot as dumb as him would do, although accidentally. The only reason to discount it is that he's unfortunately still alive.
@73849309378 steven jones also believes jesus christ visited north america and had a pow wow with the injunes, they called him "he who flails with forked arms".
@911TRUTHINATOR I don't believe the book of Mormon any more than the Pope does. But Jones' religious beliefs have nothing to do with this discussion anyway.
"Bullshit, fairytales, theories based on speculation at its best. WTC was blown up and it takes an idiot to not see it."Yet you look at it through speculation and assumptions to cover this that it is indeed explosives. you cower behind Alex Jones who have articles that say the fire fighters are in a coverup.
"REAL scientists and engineers study the steel from the WTC." I guess the engineers of AE9/11Truth aren't REAL engineers huh. "There certainly was the possibility of them collapsing immediately as each aircraft hit. The fact that one of them lasted 55 min. and the other 1hr. 40 min. to me says they did very well." Even though other buildings have lasted far longer from fires before collapsing, and even then didn't fall straight down. So much for the credibility of this PNAC propaganda film.
Those dorks @ae911truth are scientists?? In a way, you are right LOL!
Computer scientists,economy scientists, psychologists and molecular biology scientists. How are those fields relevant to the question of controlled demolition...?
Still waiting for that "DemolitionEngineersFor911Truth" group, you know, the REAL experts on the subject. Too bad it will never be founded.
@NotableJInx2 They already interviewed a demolition expert and he concurred with them. There is AE9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, etc. etc. And demolition experts have also concurred with the CD theory such as Tom Sullivan and Danny Jowenko. But of course none of these groups of people know anything about the subject according to the deniers of obvious reality.
What a godawful BBC crock! I want a lisence fee refund! Is that what passes for a CSI in America? a doddery old geriatric stumbling round a scrapyard?
They never say anything about what actually happened because they cant, they dont know what the fuck happened because they cant fathom low energy nuclear reactions. Just look how dumbfounded the firefighter is.
This video is a bit old but it still shows how highrise structural engineers think. It's significant that none of them support any of the controlled demolition theories. Nearly 10 years later and the conspiracy theorists have yet to mount a plausible alternative explanation or attract experienced structural engineers to their theories. 911 conspiracy theory is doomed to its rightful place as a sociological oddity alongside moon landing denial.
This video is a bit old but it still shows how highrise structural engineers think. It's significant that none of them support any of the controlled demolition theories. Nearly 10 years later and the conspiracy theorists have yet to mount a plausible alternative explanation or attract experienced structural engineers to their theories. 911 conspiracy theory is doomed to its rightful place as a sociological oddity alongside moon landing denial.
@bagintree No, it is NOT like moon landing denial. YOU are HERE fighting about 9/11 but you don't bother with moon landing denial. Why not? Why do you waste time here? Answer: because there ARE unanswered questions about 9/11 that no one with a responsible job can discuss in public and keep his career on track. You obviously CARE if people question 9/11 anomalies but you do NOT care if people question or deny moon landings. Moon landings? So what! People question 9/11? You are afraid.
not all scrap is in manhatten because my cousin works as a crane operator and at the yard there is scrap of the world trade center and the 1 of the first firetrucks to be there on 9-11. i still dont know how they got it but they didnt want it and lucklily the company said yes and if your wondering what company it is its HILL CRANE but I dont have any pics of the steel and firetruck and by the way its in california......
bullshit video. 9/11 was an inside job. these men call themselves engineers. they dont even mention the temperature that structural steel melts or even buckles at. about 2000 degrees centigrade. also aircraft fuel burns off immediately and was seen to do so. pathetic. zap dick cheney in the chair.
Actually steel loses 50% of its strength at 600°C and melts at 1500°C. That's 1100°F and 27xx°F. The worst fires burned at 1000°C, 1800°F. The jet fuel burned up in 10 minutes, but it was the unusually wide- and fast spread office fire, the damaged passive and active fire-protection system that destroyed the WTC.
Silent, seismic-less, random explosion controlled demolitions and (to quote your nuttier friend) "low energy nuclear reactions", which we sheeple cannot fathom, happen every day.
@Weirdo10o4 I understand evidence "hijacked aircraft" started these fires has been made classified but there are many ways to start fires in high rise buildings and many have burned much longer and hotter without universal collapse to micron particles,the fuming rubble needing several years decontamination. Didn't a WW2 bomber lost in the fog crash into the Empire state building? and did its impact silhouette form SIX SECONDS+ late and 30 ft short? so many questions!☺
Actually the evidence and the background to 9/11 is being released by the 9/11 Commission, its records.
The B-25 pierced the exterior with ease. It was flying a lot slower with much less fuel, even relatively. The fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. Several buildings have experienced extreme plastic deformations because of fire.
For the xth time, there were ten intact columns on the right in all the footage so it was smoke plain and simple.
@Weirdo10o4 and people were seen standing very much unburned and very much alive near all this melting/softening steel!?! If you look at the alleged f11 impact silhouette aluminium facia has been knocked off the steel in several colums , this would have been visible much less that SIX SECONDS+ post impact in the Naudet film, "ten intact columns and smoke BLAHBLAH..." is just a strawman red herring (to mix metaphors) and you know it! the silhouette formed SIX SECONDS+ post impact QED!
Any comment on why they were hanging at the edge of a 350+ meter drop? Any comment on why they (Edna Cintron) later jumped?
The fire was originally concentrated on the opposite side of the building. The intensity of the heat radiation has been estimated to be unbearable within 18 meters and that's direct line of sight.
Any comment on the NIST fire tests?
Ten intact columns are exactly where your own source says the impact hole formed 6 seconds late, so suck it.
@Weirdo10o4 so you FINALLY admit the alleged f11 impact hole formed SIX SECONDS + late and is an anomaly that needs explaining??? (if I decipher your wriggling riddlesome answer correctly) additional to the displaced aluminium facia in the final 30ft short alleged f11 silhouette that would have been visible in the Naudet film directly post alleged impact ,much of the remaining aluminium facia is bending outward giving irregular light reflection.
Well you might wanna sharpen up on your reading comprehension then.
For the thousandth time. It's PROVEN to be nothing but SMOKE. 7 or 8 intact columns. And NAUDET went straight up to the building and others filmed the immediate aftermath guess what, SMOKE. And the aluminum claddings distortions aren't visible from nearly any photos of the north face, just because they're damaged don't mean they have to hit the Naudet camera. That's all it is. End of story.
@Weirdo10o4 What I don't get is... the WTC1 windows were clearly visible in the Naudet film but weirdo bsc hnrs'☺ says the missing/bent aluminium facia ,which was greater in size than the windows would NOT have been visible !?! this is what you'd expect from someone who claims (sic) that fire has NEVER been used as a precision tool.if there are any better informed people online what sort of fire was that SIX SECONDS+ late 30ft short silhouette formed by? It wasn't carbon like jet fuel fire.
I said the reflections don't have to hit the camera, but they do.
I said there's no way to apply fire in a way useful to a controlled demolition, in millisecond interval events.
If there are any bigger morons around here who can explain why this moron is going over plain trivial matters such as the flow patterns of smoke following an airliner impact and an explosion I'd appreciate it.
Are you the curiosity core of GLaDOS or its real life equivalent?
@Weirdo10o4 sorry , the significance of that link is lost on me. Direct quote... " I said the reflections don't have to hit the camera, but they do" another riddle!?! why do I waste my time on people who cannot get their heads round SIX SECONDS+ late impact silhouette formation being an anomaly/ clear proof of fakery? where ARE you coming from and what is your interest in these criminals getting away with it?
@Weirdo10o4 when I see a 30ft short plane impact silhouette form SIX SECONDS+LATE from the right wing tip inward(one of many 911 anomalies), I do NOT buy it as it defies common sense, you do , explain yourself I'm all ears!(deep breath) the displaced bent cladding was larger than the window width and would have been more visible directly post impact, the windows were visible the displaced/bent cladding was not.
The silhouette was 30ft short because the plane had a 156 foot wingspan and the building was 203 feet wide. (203 - 156) / 2 = 23.5 - effect of tilting. The area your video highlighted did not have anything hit it.
The cladding is very visible once the shadow of the mushroom cloud moves off it.
@Weirdo10o4 try this...stick your dick in a tin of swarfega and withdraw and count how long it takes for the impact hole to form, would it surprise you if the impact hole formed SIX SECONDS+ after withdrawl ?
the windows WERE visible in frames of the Naudet film but the much broader attendant impact displaced and bent facia was not. Additionally you can see intact steel girders between cutter charge 1 at the wing tip and the second cutter charge to its lower left .
Uh, the windows were visible, but the columns were not? The other way around. At the end of the footage you can see the aluminum cladding's distortions.
@Weirdo10o4 imagine you're in the witness box under oath, what do you see post alleged Flight 11 melding totally into WTC1 in the Naudet brothers alleged 9/11 f11 impact film? Do you see flames forming in WTC1 facia SIX SECONDS after F11's impact at the right wing tip point of the impact sihouette? yes or no?
@Weirdo10o4 "flaming hole"? CORRECTION the 30ft short SIX SECONDS+ late fake F11 impact silhouette starts with a micro puff of white smoke in unmarked WTC1 facia.
@Weirdo10o4 magnification is used in most crime detection son, please keep up. Which frame does your "flaming hole" appear? How can the silhouete be initiated by a flaming hole at the right wing tip SIX SECONDS+ late?
Because view of the hole was blocked by the opacity of the exploding cloud for six seconds until it subsided from between the camera and the flaming hole to the southeast and upwards, with the wind and heat?
@Weirdo10o4 More lies, the SIX SECOND+ late right wing tip of the impact silhouette and its appx 20 steel upright width formation is NOT obscured by the explosion and you know it. There is however a very large hole visible that you are digging yourself into with all these falsehoods printed on a public forum.
Yes it does, are you blind? About 10% of the right side of the building was not impacted. And you might want to capitalize the whole clause, I almost thought you agreed with me.
The WTC is likely several times larger than any other steel structure that has experienced large deformations. The fire zones were as large as the entire Windsor building's floor area. The Windsor building's top floors collapsed. As a larger structure it was inherently more unstable.
Surely the OCT realizes the core had horizontal columns, right? Suggesting the floors held the core columns together is laughable and the "official" account with "REAL scientists" is useless if they don't account for the facts to begin with. Yes, the buildings could have collapsed from fire IF the core was actually "free standing" like FEMA claims.
Thank god these accredited specialists were given full access to the steel remains so as to study their performance in response to the actual fires, internal collapses or alleged explosions.
No matter how it went down.This last mans face looked honest to me, must be hard with that weight.But anyways if the oficials wnated peopletobeleive them,mayb they shouldnt have LIED so much.Specially considering all the coincidences already present,the fact 3 building fell at the same day. And the drills taking place etc etc.After that it was WMD's in Irak, wich was direct lies.Then hightech caves in Afghanistan No matter what Bush Chenney Rumsfeld Rice and several more where FULL OFF SHIT!
The statement of "the buildings were not built as successfully as they could have been" is arrogant or ignorant or both!! The fire didn't melt it, so it was brought down by demolitions which no building is built against...he dismisses the collapse as structural design failure, NOT manipulation.
if this was a real terrorist attack then all they would have to do is put out a few small fires then repair the hole where the plane went in and repair a few offices and they would still be standing today
@wombweasel222 To argue further towards the point this was a "self-inflicted wound", the owner of WTC didn't want to repair the buildings; buildings were out of date and expensive to bring up to code, it'd be better to bring it down and start new... with less expensive designs. The rent was sky-high (no pun intended), heating, A.C., repairs, renovations, lights, water...even if they left just the lower 80, it would still be a money pit.
this is such a filthy lie -- completely pathetic and with no knowledge of the facts -- the owner of the WTC was the New York Port Authorigy -- why do truthers lie?
@Denierbud11 It was stated on video; the eye-sore that was WTC, the money pit that was costing more then bringing in...plenty of disturbing statements about it. But, what to do with real estate that's losing revenue and out of date? File a new insurance deal days before the attack and wait...
I don't care what a youtube video says, the towers were not owned by anyone other than the New York Port Authority -- Silverstein was the lease holder, and had only signed the lease a few months before the event -- it was NOT losing money, that is a truther lie again, research it yourself
@Denierbud11 ok sheep, then fix the lie; make a video to dispute the cost of WTC and how it was "attacked" because it was a great symbolic monument of American verility. Tell us where the "supposed" gold in the basement went, what paperwork was conveniently destroyed-or not- in the fires and collapse...there must be a whole list of things u, a common blogger, must know that u can shed light on.
@Denierbud11 a video educates others quicker then a book, but u obviously have NO proof, just dis-info and slander...ur a liberal tool. the rest of ur comment is jibberish; wtf r u talking about, ufo-boy?
@Denierbud11 I am not talking about several other countries, I am talking about American citizens, like you and I, that doubted the existance of atomic energy. It was hard for the common man to believe that such a device could cause so much destruction by splitting atoms, and the biggest difference between the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima, and the technology that we used to destroy the Twin Towers, is that we were able to focus that power on a specific target.
no the biggest diffrence is reality and fantasy == if the US had such technology, would not every nation with a satelite have been able to detect that massive energy beam that blasted the towers? This is about as stupid as the mini nuke theory
@Denierbud11 The difference between reality and fantasy more strongly suggests that jet fuel didn't soften hundreds of steel columns to the point where they would all suddenly lose their structural integrity. I am positive that other nations did know what our government was doing, and what difference does it make, our people would riot in the streets if they found out what happened. Why would anyone want to cause that by releasing such information?
so, if steel can not be weakened by fire, why do they fireproof steel columns? at the time of the WTC construction, asbestos was used on the lower floors -- why use the product if there is no danger to the building?
@Denierbud11 While it's true that steel can warp due to fire, those effects are very gradual. Figurately, in ten years time fire could cause some cosmetic damage to the buildings face, and the building would still be structurally safe.
The test that has been conducted by the NIST with higher temperature than observed and a charge much higher than the probable did not validate the conclusion of NIST.
In such case you should find other explanations so reopen is a must!
This video is total bullshit. The floors and exterior walls were not designed to hold up the center core. Photos of the towers during construction show clearly that the core proceeds first then the floors and exterior walls are added. This means the the core is independent of the floors and exterior walls. Thus, if the exterior walls and floors were to fail the center core would remain standing. The towers were designed to take a hit by a jet and were over built.
Fire in the top floors made the floor sytem give out? And if the fire was so strong then how is it possible that after the planes hit a woman was seen waving for help through the impact whole?.... How do they explain wtc 7? Building 7 fell 5 hours after the south tower, but was'nt hit by a plane... I gues due to "structual architechtual sympathy". Yes thats it. I know this becuase one day I noticed that when I had cut 2 tree's down the one next to them also fell because it was sympathetic....
They saved some if the debris, but why send ANY of it to Asia for recycling? It was at Fresh Kills, the closed landfill. It could have stayed there indefinitely. Question: what forensic equipment such as SEM-XEDS capability did they have at Fresh Kills? Their eyes? Were their eyes enough? If so, then why let Jonathan Barnett analyze two pieces of WTC7 debris? Could Barnett have found what he did with only his eyes? No? Then why not let him work on more than two pieces of WTC7?
@MrJedDoggett No 911TRUTHINATOR is a Shill! Think about it, the South Tower fell in nearly 11 seconds. So we have just three choices on how this could happen. 1) The speed of collapse is exactly the same from start to finish. Never changing through the greater mass of the lower floors. This speed is nearly 82 mph. 2) The speed was faster than 82 mph at the beginning and then slowed down as it proceeded to the ground. 3) Slower at the beginning then faster than 82 mph at the end. Pick a # !
There is not a single picture of a core column that is bent, the connecting columns are bent, but not the core columns. There also is only a few pictures of the ends of core columns, and each one of them have been CUT, either by the "cleanup crews" or by the "terrorists" who blew up the buildings, you can't have it both ways!
The mis-direction goes on and on. Lets not acknowledge or address the 45?48? core columns. One person compared them to "tin-foil". Yeah, thats how I would catagorize them, how retarded can you be? Also, in no ones diagram of the core columns do you see the cross-beams that connected ALL of them. Core columns do NOT stand alone in ANY steel skyscraper that has ever been built. These columns were BOX columns, 5" thick steel 54" x 22" with a 5" thick steel slab up the middle for the first 10 floors
The bottom line in all this is that the Truth movement is just one big scam. They will tell you anything, make up shit, post it online and hook gullible people into buying their videos, t-shirts + books and then have the audacity to ask for donations to their cause. Go to any of those websites...Ahole. Jones prisonplanet, AEtwoof, 911twoof, TvSNewsLies, Loosediaperchange, get the sales pitch and spend,spend,spend.
@lizardfirefighter110 Well don't take my word for it, see for yourself. Go to A.jonesPrisonplanet and JUST LOOK at the first page of that website. Then go to Scam[dot]com and search for 911 scams. It's under "conspiracy theory zone." Check out Loosechange forum and ask some simple questions that conflict with their theories and see how well you're treated. Loose Change was a fictional movie anyway, listen carefully to what Dylan says in the 1st minute of this video ...watch?v=3ZjJQWNQZog
May Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld Butt fuck you for all eternity. That is your payment for doing this, isn't it? I'd really like to know what the Government pays you to do this, while the rest of us are suffering through a horrible depression. If they'll kill 3000 of their own people and start a fake war and bankrupt the Earth, they should be paying you really good. And quit calling everybody a Traitor when you claim to live in Australia. 'Down Under' your ass is a big DILDO! You stupid shit.
No, no, no...not a dildo, but a fucking didgeridoo up his ass! The hot air escaping from his ass through the didgeridoo...makes a soothing sound to help him sleep--snuggling with his gay koala--so he can dream of how the world and EVERYTHING is just as "they" say it is!
PS: I'd like to apologize to all aboriginals, didgeridoo players and gay koalas--for making any associations between you and the mendacious/mentally impaired author of this video!
@TheTruthIsWayOutHERE Charlie Thorton and Lesile Robertson are both compromised. This is very sad. And I think you can see it in their eyes. nano Thermite is all dust samples. The truth is obvious. But those 2 will stay on the side of the lie.
Steven Jones has a scientifc, peer reviewed paper proving the existence of a nano-engineered version of Thermate in multiple samples of WTC dust. But hey, why would facts matter.
well, let me correct you...first it is not peer reviewed in an ENGINEERING JOURNAL....Secondly he had to pay to get it published in a crapy paper....Most importantly...His evidence is NO GOOD. He got it from some womens apartment 1 month later..=contaminated evidence is not evidence ...IT is NOT PEER REVIEWED...NOT ONE RESPECTED ENGINEER BELIEVES THEM....didnt you just see the investigators looking at the steel you dummy,,,they said no building in the world could have withstood those hits......
@JPPolachek If Steven Jones is such a crackpot, and has to pay to have his papers published, then why is he allowed to teach at BYU? Since a lot of universities base their tenure decisions on not only the individuals accomplishments, moral character, and at times political and religious affiliation, but also on the number and quality of works they have published. Peer opinions also count in their decision. BYU does in fact look at published works and quite deeply I might add.
I saw a video where they say the planes were military planes. How about the passenger lists. Now what you say about that !!! Where did all the people go that are missing from their families if these were military planes
@bluestrapsify The passenger list originally released by the FBI didn't have the names of the hijackers listed as passengers on any of the planes. Not saying one way or the other, but the FBI either dropped the biggest fucking ball ever, or the hijackers didn't exist, on those planes anyway.
Look at Jessy Ventura 9/11 on u tube .... with a black marker draw a pic of a grays head and have him saying this. Jesse ventura 9/11 u tube it and U tube Roswell 1947 on U tube now put this on all your money. Low bills work the best they move. The goverment has a room of people and all they do is make comments on U tube and post stupid commments.
christo930, The heat from fire did not weaken the steel components, of the WTC buildings that collapsed, to their failure temperature. Because the mass of the steel columns, girders, and beams was sufficient to conduct the heat away from the source. Random fires burning at random temperatures do not destroy steel frame buildings in a symmetrical fashion.
No, I do not have peer review on common sense. No building built with huge steel support columns, that are interconnected with a matrix of girders and beams, has ever been destroyed by fire. Furthermore if you want to claim that it was a combination of collateral damage and fire then you need to explain how random damage plus random fires burning at random intensities produces a symmetrical collapse at near free fall speed. Dr Niels Harrit's report is peer reviewed.
Yes, you do. You can't just say "I don't see how this could have happened", or "it never happened before".While the building falling was a first, there was another first that day... Buildings were smashed into with airplanes loaded with jet fuel. And just because you find it incredulous, doesn't mean it didn't happen that way. I know the lay people aren't lying, but there is a great deal of misinformation and downright lies in the 9/11 truth movement.
The Case of the South Tower: Burned for just 56 minutes. The top 25 floors twist and fall as a unit, but never land as a unit. The collateral damage from A/A 175 impacted the Southeast corner causing less damage than the impact of United 11 at the North Tower. The fire ball that we saw was nearly 400 feet in diameter. This fire ball represents the majority of jet fuel burning up outside the building. Yet, the South Tower collapses symmetrically at nearly 80 mph just like the North Tower.
And scientists and experts with no connection to the government verified why the building fell. University scientists are mostly liberal and hated the bush government, don't you think any of them would have come out and exposed the conspiracy with research papers and the peer review process? Every book I have ever heard of has errors in it, draws conclusions... Not one publication contains any peer reviewed science that can show that the plane crashes and fires couldn't have caused the collapses
What scientists and experts with no connection to the government that support the governments conspiracy theory? Dr Niels Harrit could have cared less about Bush policy until one day he saw a video of WTC #7 collapsing. Only then did he begin to question the official story / conspiracy. He eventually hooked up with other scientists that had similar questions. Before we debate any further you need to read Harrit's report. It has color photos. It has been peer reviewed.
I've read portions of it and it's a joke. I don't know if it is peer reviewed or not, but nobody takes it seriously. He references things that don't exist, is working with highly contaminated samples that can't be tied to the event since he got them from lay people 6 years after the event.
I used to be a truther, but I got tired of the leaders making a fool of me and I realized that the truther leaders just make shit up, do bad work and ALWAYS want money for dvds and so on.
Christo930, So, you used to be a truther, but now you are content otherwise? All the physical evidence that can not be explained by the official story are some how all of a sudden not important. Did you have a brain fart and start to believe the BS that comes from the NIST? Please tell the truth. What are the odds of someone putting red chips into the dust samples and those same chips chips just happen to match the molecular make up of thermite? The official story is a joke,
I got tired of looking up the things truther leaders put out as "problems" in the official story and inevitably they aren't so problematic when you actually look it up. When ever you have questions in your mind, read the other side with an open mind. The truther "work" is so shoddy that even if it were true, their jumping to conclusions, making shit up and generally biasing their whole view towards a nefarious explanation just destroys their credibility. You'll get tired of it too.
As a firefighter you can shit-can all of the mainstream truther arguments. I don't care. It comes down to this: The case for the South Tower. It fell just like the North Tower. Yet, we are to believe that the conner impact, the top 25 floors falling off, the giant fuel vapor fireball on the outside, and a burning time of only 56 minutes doesn't make a difference on how the building falls.
You dislike this video. Thanks for the feedback!
Ratings for this video (118 total)
Number of likes 41
Number of dislikes 77
alphakraker 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
With more than perfect conditions, if each floor pulverized on impact with the falling floor above it would take 96 seconds to collapse. The towers fell in less than 10 seconds. EACH FLOOR TURNED TO DUST =!!! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!!! Think! Douche whoever put this vid up
gregtool9 1 month ago
Most of the steel in the video was found THROWN from the towers and stuck into surrounding buildings. The beams that were not thrown from the WTC were mangled and melted to an unrecognizable state OR completely disintegrated. With the amount of impossibilities related to this event its impossible to be skeptical that it was not and orchestrated event by a people with technology and influence far beyond anything we've ever seen
gregtool9 1 month ago
THEY DIDNT EVEN SAY ANYTHING ABOUT RESULTS OR STUDIES YOU FUCKIN RETARDS. WAKE UP FAGS.
gurper707 4 months ago
Heres the real experts you worthless scumbags: youtube:YW6mJOqRDI4
gurper707 4 months ago
@738493003787
"10 minutes after, obvious it was an inside job to everybody with common sense."
Was that your attempt at sounding witty today?
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
@Tyrone
...In case you missed it, I already pointed out that Jowenko rejects 2/3 of the conspiarcy theory. He clearly states the twin towers fell in a natural collapse, as it was to be expected.
Doesn't surprise me the least that you guys keep parroting the same debunked stuff over and over again.
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
Okay, He only said WTC 7 was demolished. Big deal. The implication is the same. And how do you know there won't be a DE 9/11 Truth? FYI they already have a blogspot with a list of personell. Google it.
73849309378 4 months ago
@73849309378
Because the first thing real demolition engineers will ask themselves is why they don't see any charges/explosives going off in any of the collapse videos.
But hey, after all it was a super nano-thermite/laser space beam/secial demolitionzz high tech military stuff lol! TEH CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONZZ!!1! :D
You guys are funny, keep it comin'.
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
@NotableJInx2 Why ask me? Ask the experts, who know more about it than you or me, who say it was a controlled demolition. I'm just relaying the info.
73849309378 4 months ago
@73849309378
You are right, I'm not a demolition engineer. But numerous people in the industry say 9/11 controlled demolition is a myth. In fact, Brent Blanchard (Protec) published a paper on why.
But of course some "engineers" @ae911twoof know better. You were so nice to "rely info" on the existance of 9/11 "truth demo experts", care point me to their publications in scientific journals, too? I'm sure they have some, yes, no? lol!
(It's a rhetorical question).
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
@NotableNUTJOB I wouldn't know. I don't spend all my waking hours researching the subject just so I can waste time arguing with trolls like you that have no life. I DO have a little bit of a life BESIDES that. Also, your irreverant "twoof" spelling exposes you as immature and childish. And just because something isn't in a scientific journal doesn't mean it isn't true. Also, Steven Jones and other scholars of Scholars for 9/11 Truth HAVE published essays in science and engineering journals.
73849309378 4 months ago
@73849309378
*Sigh*
I knew you'd get all pissy and self-defensive after confronted with the absence of demolition engineers publishing papers on those alleged "controlled demolitions".
keep grasping at straws, it's sure entertaining. 10 years after, still no "DemolitionEngineersFor911Truth".
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
@NotableJInx2 Danny Jowenko a Dutch demolition expert brought explosive attention to 9/11 Truth
TyroneSandalphon 4 months ago
@NotableJInx2 10 minutes after, obvious it was an inside job to everybody with common sense.
73849309378 4 months ago
@73849309378
Inside job...?
You mean Bush crashed the planes into the towers?
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
@NotableJInx2 Now that you mention it, it is something a pilot as dumb as him would do, although accidentally. The only reason to discount it is that he's unfortunately still alive.
73849309378 4 months ago
@73849309378 steven jones also believes jesus christ visited north america and had a pow wow with the injunes, they called him "he who flails with forked arms".
911TRUTHINATOR 4 months ago
@911TRUTHINATOR I don't believe the book of Mormon any more than the Pope does. But Jones' religious beliefs have nothing to do with this discussion anyway.
73849309378 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Bullshit, fairytales, theories based on speculation at its best. WTC was blown up and it takes an idiot to not see it."Yet you look at it through speculation and assumptions to cover this that it is indeed explosives. you cower behind Alex Jones who have articles that say the fire fighters are in a coverup.
warlord2080 4 months ago
@TheAngryarchangel "its hard to study the steel when the vast majority was shipped off to the otherside of the planet and probably melted down."
This comment cracks me up more than any other truther comment I've ever seen!!!
Dude, what the hell do you think is going on in this video??? They're STUDYING the STEEL!!
Sheesh!
TimReed22222 4 months ago
"REAL scientists and engineers study the steel from the WTC." I guess the engineers of AE9/11Truth aren't REAL engineers huh. "There certainly was the possibility of them collapsing immediately as each aircraft hit. The fact that one of them lasted 55 min. and the other 1hr. 40 min. to me says they did very well." Even though other buildings have lasted far longer from fires before collapsing, and even then didn't fall straight down. So much for the credibility of this PNAC propaganda film.
73849309378 5 months ago
@73849309378
Those dorks @ae911truth are scientists?? In a way, you are right LOL!
Computer scientists,economy scientists, psychologists and molecular biology scientists. How are those fields relevant to the question of controlled demolition...?
Still waiting for that "DemolitionEngineersFor911Truth" group, you know, the REAL experts on the subject. Too bad it will never be founded.
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
@NotableJInx2 They already interviewed a demolition expert and he concurred with them. There is AE9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, etc. etc. And demolition experts have also concurred with the CD theory such as Tom Sullivan and Danny Jowenko. But of course none of these groups of people know anything about the subject according to the deniers of obvious reality.
73849309378 4 months ago
@73849309378
Danny Jowenko said that that WTC 1 and 2 were definately NO controlled demolitions lol! On what planet do you live, excuse me?
There will never be a "DemolitionEngineersFor911Truth" group, deal with it.
NotableJInx2 4 months ago
This is the largest structure in the world
madude04 5 months ago
Wow, they say lot's of skyscrapers have this shitty design!
1971SuperLead 5 months ago
Bullshit, fairytales, theories based on speculation at its best. WTC was blown up and it takes an idiot to not see it.
Xendrius 5 months ago
it is also interesting to me that the steel was in 30 ft sections after the collapse
TheAngryarchangel 6 months ago
@TheAngryarchangel It was fabricated in 30-foot chunks and bolted together ... the sections are because the bolts failed.
lazygardens 5 months ago
@lazygardens the steel beams were in fifty foot sections and the bolts were welded to them. sorry but nice try.
TheAngryarchangel 5 months ago
its hard to study the steel when the vast majority was shipped off to the otherside of the planet and probably melted down.
TheAngryarchangel 6 months ago
pile of crap
MrPhattdirty 7 months ago
so what was all the boom sounds that were heard throughout the event on that morning ..???? another bull shit video.
flaco1231 8 months ago
@flaco1231 LOL all myths about 911 were debunked in 2007 your still on that shit? grow up and read book
kushsmokkeralt 8 months ago
PROPAGANDA
lastpatriot4America 10 months ago
lies
Coolworldleaderguy 10 months ago
What a godawful BBC crock! I want a lisence fee refund! Is that what passes for a CSI in America? a doddery old geriatric stumbling round a scrapyard?
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
Inside Job!
Born2Flesh 11 months ago
They never say anything about what actually happened because they cant, they dont know what the fuck happened because they cant fathom low energy nuclear reactions. Just look how dumbfounded the firefighter is.
f0rumrr 1 year ago
@f0rumrr
Low energy nuclear reactions. Maybe you want to attend a physics class on radioactive decay before parroting everything you hear from Judy.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This video is a bit old but it still shows how highrise structural engineers think. It's significant that none of them support any of the controlled demolition theories. Nearly 10 years later and the conspiracy theorists have yet to mount a plausible alternative explanation or attract experienced structural engineers to their theories. 911 conspiracy theory is doomed to its rightful place as a sociological oddity alongside moon landing denial.
bagintree 1 year ago
This video is a bit old but it still shows how highrise structural engineers think. It's significant that none of them support any of the controlled demolition theories. Nearly 10 years later and the conspiracy theorists have yet to mount a plausible alternative explanation or attract experienced structural engineers to their theories. 911 conspiracy theory is doomed to its rightful place as a sociological oddity alongside moon landing denial.
bagintree 1 year ago
@bagintree No, it is NOT like moon landing denial. YOU are HERE fighting about 9/11 but you don't bother with moon landing denial. Why not? Why do you waste time here? Answer: because there ARE unanswered questions about 9/11 that no one with a responsible job can discuss in public and keep his career on track. You obviously CARE if people question 9/11 anomalies but you do NOT care if people question or deny moon landings. Moon landings? So what! People question 9/11? You are afraid.
Skeptic121 1 year ago
Profiteers off 911 such as the twoofers will rot in hell !
HeadLessMunkees 1 year ago
not all scrap is in manhatten because my cousin works as a crane operator and at the yard there is scrap of the world trade center and the 1 of the first firetrucks to be there on 9-11. i still dont know how they got it but they didnt want it and lucklily the company said yes and if your wondering what company it is its HILL CRANE but I dont have any pics of the steel and firetruck and by the way its in california......
gobber50 1 year ago
bullshit video. 9/11 was an inside job. these men call themselves engineers. they dont even mention the temperature that structural steel melts or even buckles at. about 2000 degrees centigrade. also aircraft fuel burns off immediately and was seen to do so. pathetic. zap dick cheney in the chair.
larrydelamb 1 year ago
@larrydelamb
jet fuels does not burn of immediately, steel weakens much lower than 2000 degrees and you are just a liar
otherwise, good job
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@larrydelamb
Actually steel loses 50% of its strength at 600°C and melts at 1500°C. That's 1100°F and 27xx°F. The worst fires burned at 1000°C, 1800°F. The jet fuel burned up in 10 minutes, but it was the unusually wide- and fast spread office fire, the damaged passive and active fire-protection system that destroyed the WTC.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 happens EVERY day☺
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Silent, seismic-less, random explosion controlled demolitions and (to quote your nuttier friend) "low energy nuclear reactions", which we sheeple cannot fathom, happen every day.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 YES there certainly many questions remaining unanswered re. 9/11
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Like.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 like why you can't provide us with any pre or post 911 precedent for what we saw , please keep up!
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
It's every day skyscrapers are hit by hijacked aircraft. Albeit AirFrance 8969 was hijacked with the intent of crashing it in to the Eiffel Tower.
/watch?v=QEhNLzN_q5k
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 I understand evidence "hijacked aircraft" started these fires has been made classified but there are many ways to start fires in high rise buildings and many have burned much longer and hotter without universal collapse to micron particles,the fuming rubble needing several years decontamination. Didn't a WW2 bomber lost in the fog crash into the Empire state building? and did its impact silhouette form SIX SECONDS+ late and 30 ft short? so many questions!☺
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Actually the evidence and the background to 9/11 is being released by the 9/11 Commission, its records.
The B-25 pierced the exterior with ease. It was flying a lot slower with much less fuel, even relatively. The fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. Several buildings have experienced extreme plastic deformations because of fire.
For the xth time, there were ten intact columns on the right in all the footage so it was smoke plain and simple.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 and people were seen standing very much unburned and very much alive near all this melting/softening steel!?! If you look at the alleged f11 impact silhouette aluminium facia has been knocked off the steel in several colums , this would have been visible much less that SIX SECONDS+ post impact in the Naudet film, "ten intact columns and smoke BLAHBLAH..." is just a strawman red herring (to mix metaphors) and you know it! the silhouette formed SIX SECONDS+ post impact QED!
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Any comment on why they were hanging at the edge of a 350+ meter drop? Any comment on why they (Edna Cintron) later jumped?
The fire was originally concentrated on the opposite side of the building. The intensity of the heat radiation has been estimated to be unbearable within 18 meters and that's direct line of sight.
Any comment on the NIST fire tests?
Ten intact columns are exactly where your own source says the impact hole formed 6 seconds late, so suck it.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 so you FINALLY admit the alleged f11 impact hole formed SIX SECONDS + late and is an anomaly that needs explaining??? (if I decipher your wriggling riddlesome answer correctly) additional to the displaced aluminium facia in the final 30ft short alleged f11 silhouette that would have been visible in the Naudet film directly post alleged impact ,much of the remaining aluminium facia is bending outward giving irregular light reflection.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Well you might wanna sharpen up on your reading comprehension then.
For the thousandth time. It's PROVEN to be nothing but SMOKE. 7 or 8 intact columns. And NAUDET went straight up to the building and others filmed the immediate aftermath guess what, SMOKE. And the aluminum claddings distortions aren't visible from nearly any photos of the north face, just because they're damaged don't mean they have to hit the Naudet camera. That's all it is. End of story.
/watch?v=FBzts-8pXdA
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 What I don't get is... the WTC1 windows were clearly visible in the Naudet film but weirdo bsc hnrs'☺ says the missing/bent aluminium facia ,which was greater in size than the windows would NOT have been visible !?! this is what you'd expect from someone who claims (sic) that fire has NEVER been used as a precision tool.if there are any better informed people online what sort of fire was that SIX SECONDS+ late 30ft short silhouette formed by? It wasn't carbon like jet fuel fire.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@D1m
I said the reflections don't have to hit the camera, but they do.
I said there's no way to apply fire in a way useful to a controlled demolition, in millisecond interval events.
If there are any bigger morons around here who can explain why this moron is going over plain trivial matters such as the flow patterns of smoke following an airliner impact and an explosion I'd appreciate it.
Are you the curiosity core of GLaDOS or its real life equivalent?
/watch?v=3fo-_bEp-Xg
What is THAT!!?
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 sorry , the significance of that link is lost on me. Direct quote... " I said the reflections don't have to hit the camera, but they do" another riddle!?! why do I waste my time on people who cannot get their heads round SIX SECONDS+ late impact silhouette formation being an anomaly/ clear proof of fakery? where ARE you coming from and what is your interest in these criminals getting away with it?
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@D1m
I don't get your point about the cladding.
The "anomaly" is smoke.
This is immediately after the impact:
/watch?v=FBzts-8pXdA
Black smoke starts flowing stronger and stronger, out from where your "anomaly" occurs.
The "anomaly" just became strong evidence against fakery.
The significance of that link? It's you:
"Ooh, what's that!?? What IS THAT!?"
Curious of the most trivial things, I bet you wake up every morning, look at the sun and shout:"What the hell is that!?"
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 when I see a 30ft short plane impact silhouette form SIX SECONDS+LATE from the right wing tip inward(one of many 911 anomalies), I do NOT buy it as it defies common sense, you do , explain yourself I'm all ears!(deep breath) the displaced bent cladding was larger than the window width and would have been more visible directly post impact, the windows were visible the displaced/bent cladding was not.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
The silhouette was 30ft short because the plane had a 156 foot wingspan and the building was 203 feet wide. (203 - 156) / 2 = 23.5 - effect of tilting. The area your video highlighted did not have anything hit it.
The cladding is very visible once the shadow of the mushroom cloud moves off it.
/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 try this...stick your dick in a tin of swarfega and withdraw and count how long it takes for the impact hole to form, would it surprise you if the impact hole formed SIX SECONDS+ after withdrawl ?
the windows WERE visible in frames of the Naudet film but the much broader attendant impact displaced and bent facia was not. Additionally you can see intact steel girders between cutter charge 1 at the wing tip and the second cutter charge to its lower left .
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
@MarkB1ngham
Why yes it would.
Uh, the windows were visible, but the columns were not? The other way around. At the end of the footage you can see the aluminum cladding's distortions.
/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk&t=0m35s
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 imagine you're in the witness box under oath, what do you see post alleged Flight 11 melding totally into WTC1 in the Naudet brothers alleged 9/11 f11 impact film? Do you see flames forming in WTC1 facia SIX SECONDS after F11's impact at the right wing tip point of the impact sihouette? yes or no?
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
No, I've never seen the impact hole form 6 seconds late, and neither has anyone who's not well acquainted with psychotropic drugs.
I guess you mean from impact until you see the flaming hole?
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 "flaming hole"? CORRECTION the 30ft short SIX SECONDS+ late fake F11 impact silhouette starts with a micro puff of white smoke in unmarked WTC1 facia.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
At which point:
/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk
?
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 Is that the best you got??? I've worn my DVD out studying this event magnified X4 and 1/16th speed son.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Well congratulations on that. But your "achievement" seem to be only visible to you. (And magnifying will not improve resolution.)
And I have the DVD as well.
"Is that the best you got" that's not an answer. Again, at which point?
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 magnification is used in most crime detection son, please keep up. Which frame does your "flaming hole" appear? How can the silhouete be initiated by a flaming hole at the right wing tip SIX SECONDS+ late?
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
That is when resolution supports it.
/watch?v=JMIHNiR3CP8
Probably around 624 in that footage.
Because view of the hole was blocked by the opacity of the exploding cloud for six seconds until it subsided from between the camera and the flaming hole to the southeast and upwards, with the wind and heat?
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 More lies, the SIX SECOND+ late right wing tip of the impact silhouette and its appx 20 steel upright width formation is NOT obscured by the explosion and you know it. There is however a very large hole visible that you are digging yourself into with all these falsehoods printed on a public forum.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Well you're still making no sense. This is why I've asked and will continue to ask for pictures.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@Weirdo10o4 the explosion cloud DOES not obscure the formation of the impact silhouette from the right wing tip for six seconds, you are lying.
MarkB1ngham 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Yes it does, are you blind? About 10% of the right side of the building was not impacted. And you might want to capitalize the whole clause, I almost thought you agreed with me.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Continued.
Even if the heat radiation was so massive, 86 percent of the floor area could still be on fire without it effecting people directly.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
@MarkB1ngham
Continued.
The WTC is likely several times larger than any other steel structure that has experienced large deformations. The fire zones were as large as the entire Windsor building's floor area. The Windsor building's top floors collapsed. As a larger structure it was inherently more unstable.
Weirdo10o4 10 months ago
What a fucking bogus video! They are trying to portray Bloomberg and Corley as being on opposite sides, when they are both shills!
How could that Corley asshole claim that 2 buildings...collapsing to piles of dust, as some form of success?
The towers were designed to withstand MULTIPLE hits from airliners, as was indicated by one of the architects, Frank A. de Martini!
Did everyone forget how the 911 Omission tried to convince the world that the twins were just "tubes", with no core columns?!
Bongofury361 1 year ago
These guys are idiots. Just watch the collapse to know what happend.
ChristianHolloway7 1 year ago
More babble...
Surely the OCT realizes the core had horizontal columns, right? Suggesting the floors held the core columns together is laughable and the "official" account with "REAL scientists" is useless if they don't account for the facts to begin with. Yes, the buildings could have collapsed from fire IF the core was actually "free standing" like FEMA claims.
cancanbiker 1 year ago
Thank god these accredited specialists were given full access to the steel remains so as to study their performance in response to the actual fires, internal collapses or alleged explosions.
Oh wait.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
No matter how it went down.This last mans face looked honest to me, must be hard with that weight.But anyways if the oficials wnated peopletobeleive them,mayb they shouldnt have LIED so much.Specially considering all the coincidences already present,the fact 3 building fell at the same day. And the drills taking place etc etc.After that it was WMD's in Irak, wich was direct lies.Then hightech caves in Afghanistan No matter what Bush Chenney Rumsfeld Rice and several more where FULL OFF SHIT!
TheoriginalGrumphy 1 year ago
The statement of "the buildings were not built as successfully as they could have been" is arrogant or ignorant or both!! The fire didn't melt it, so it was brought down by demolitions which no building is built against...he dismisses the collapse as structural design failure, NOT manipulation.
threepercenter03 1 year ago
I suggest listening to Judy Wood to find an accurate explanation on how the towers collapsed.
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
Judy Woods? Space beams ?? what next, lost city of atlantis
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 If you want to ignore the evidence, that's up to you.
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
There is no evidence of space beams -- perhaps you need more medication
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 There is evidence of muon-catalyzed fusion. Look it up.
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
there is no evidence of space beams or energy weapons -- look it up
Denierbud11 1 year ago
if this was a real terrorist attack then all they would have to do is put out a few small fires then repair the hole where the plane went in and repair a few offices and they would still be standing today
wombweasel222 1 year ago
@wombweasel222
You think a 200,000 lb plane loaded with fuel is just going to start small fires>
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@wombweasel222 To argue further towards the point this was a "self-inflicted wound", the owner of WTC didn't want to repair the buildings; buildings were out of date and expensive to bring up to code, it'd be better to bring it down and start new... with less expensive designs. The rent was sky-high (no pun intended), heating, A.C., repairs, renovations, lights, water...even if they left just the lower 80, it would still be a money pit.
threepercenter03 1 year ago
@threepercenter03
this is such a filthy lie -- completely pathetic and with no knowledge of the facts -- the owner of the WTC was the New York Port Authorigy -- why do truthers lie?
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 It was stated on video; the eye-sore that was WTC, the money pit that was costing more then bringing in...plenty of disturbing statements about it. But, what to do with real estate that's losing revenue and out of date? File a new insurance deal days before the attack and wait...
threepercenter03 1 year ago
@threepercenter03
I don't care what a youtube video says, the towers were not owned by anyone other than the New York Port Authority -- Silverstein was the lease holder, and had only signed the lease a few months before the event -- it was NOT losing money, that is a truther lie again, research it yourself
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 ok sheep, then fix the lie; make a video to dispute the cost of WTC and how it was "attacked" because it was a great symbolic monument of American verility. Tell us where the "supposed" gold in the basement went, what paperwork was conveniently destroyed-or not- in the fires and collapse...there must be a whole list of things u, a common blogger, must know that u can shed light on.
threepercenter03 1 year ago
@threepercenter03
Make a video? why, does a video make it true? lol
yeah, you got it, they used directed energy weapons to destroy the towers and steal the gold in the basement -- good lord do you need meds
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 a video educates others quicker then a book, but u obviously have NO proof, just dis-info and slander...ur a liberal tool. the rest of ur comment is jibberish; wtf r u talking about, ufo-boy?
threepercenter03 1 year ago
@threepercenter03
do you think I need to prove the moon is not made of cheese or does the allegation lose all credibility? seriously, direct energy weapons
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 Before we dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, no one thought that it was possible. Seriously, splitting atoms...
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
that is not true, several nations had atomic bomb programs
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 I am not talking about several other countries, I am talking about American citizens, like you and I, that doubted the existance of atomic energy. It was hard for the common man to believe that such a device could cause so much destruction by splitting atoms, and the biggest difference between the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima, and the technology that we used to destroy the Twin Towers, is that we were able to focus that power on a specific target.
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
no the biggest diffrence is reality and fantasy == if the US had such technology, would not every nation with a satelite have been able to detect that massive energy beam that blasted the towers? This is about as stupid as the mini nuke theory
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 The difference between reality and fantasy more strongly suggests that jet fuel didn't soften hundreds of steel columns to the point where they would all suddenly lose their structural integrity. I am positive that other nations did know what our government was doing, and what difference does it make, our people would riot in the streets if they found out what happened. Why would anyone want to cause that by releasing such information?
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
so, if steel can not be weakened by fire, why do they fireproof steel columns? at the time of the WTC construction, asbestos was used on the lower floors -- why use the product if there is no danger to the building?
Denierbud11 1 year ago
@Denierbud11 While it's true that steel can warp due to fire, those effects are very gradual. Figurately, in ten years time fire could cause some cosmetic damage to the buildings face, and the building would still be structurally safe.
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
10 years time? no doubt you can cite some authority on this - so please do so
Denierbud11 1 year ago
The test that has been conducted by the NIST with higher temperature than observed and a charge much higher than the probable did not validate the conclusion of NIST.
In such case you should find other explanations so reopen is a must!
rokag3 1 year ago
This video is total bullshit. The floors and exterior walls were not designed to hold up the center core. Photos of the towers during construction show clearly that the core proceeds first then the floors and exterior walls are added. This means the the core is independent of the floors and exterior walls. Thus, if the exterior walls and floors were to fail the center core would remain standing. The towers were designed to take a hit by a jet and were over built.
lizardfirefighter110 1 year ago
wow this is one polished production full of lies. its like vomit spewing from my monitor.
DINGLEtheBERRY 1 year ago
Fire in the top floors made the floor sytem give out? And if the fire was so strong then how is it possible that after the planes hit a woman was seen waving for help through the impact whole?.... How do they explain wtc 7? Building 7 fell 5 hours after the south tower, but was'nt hit by a plane... I gues due to "structual architechtual sympathy". Yes thats it. I know this becuase one day I noticed that when I had cut 2 tree's down the one next to them also fell because it was sympathetic....
screwehow 1 year ago
EAT THE RICH. start with the richest person you know. Things will change then.
beastshawnee 1 year ago
THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN YT "PULL IT" i said PULL IT goddamned
flotillaGo 1 year ago
They saved some if the debris, but why send ANY of it to Asia for recycling? It was at Fresh Kills, the closed landfill. It could have stayed there indefinitely. Question: what forensic equipment such as SEM-XEDS capability did they have at Fresh Kills? Their eyes? Were their eyes enough? If so, then why let Jonathan Barnett analyze two pieces of WTC7 debris? Could Barnett have found what he did with only his eyes? No? Then why not let him work on more than two pieces of WTC7?
Skeptic121 1 year ago
911TRUTHINATOR is a FAGGOT.
MrJedDoggett 1 year ago 4
@MrJedDoggett wellput!! one small comment greater than all 911truthraper's videos..
flotillaGo 1 year ago
@MrJedDoggett No 911TRUTHINATOR is a Shill! Think about it, the South Tower fell in nearly 11 seconds. So we have just three choices on how this could happen. 1) The speed of collapse is exactly the same from start to finish. Never changing through the greater mass of the lower floors. This speed is nearly 82 mph. 2) The speed was faster than 82 mph at the beginning and then slowed down as it proceeded to the ground. 3) Slower at the beginning then faster than 82 mph at the end. Pick a # !
lizardfirefighter110 5 months ago 2
This is disgusting, evil government propaganda lies.
Watch SEPTEMBER CLUES.
SteveFusionX 1 year ago 6
@SteveFusionX lol sep clues is a joke.
ChristianHolloway7 1 year ago
Lies
ProductAnalyst 1 year ago 3
There is not a single picture of a core column that is bent, the connecting columns are bent, but not the core columns. There also is only a few pictures of the ends of core columns, and each one of them have been CUT, either by the "cleanup crews" or by the "terrorists" who blew up the buildings, you can't have it both ways!
thcount 1 year ago 2
The mis-direction goes on and on. Lets not acknowledge or address the 45?48? core columns. One person compared them to "tin-foil". Yeah, thats how I would catagorize them, how retarded can you be? Also, in no ones diagram of the core columns do you see the cross-beams that connected ALL of them. Core columns do NOT stand alone in ANY steel skyscraper that has ever been built. These columns were BOX columns, 5" thick steel 54" x 22" with a 5" thick steel slab up the middle for the first 10 floors
thcount 1 year ago
911 is the greatest HOAX in all history - an inside job - certainly supported by the Bush admin, FBI, CIA and of course the media.
goldstead 1 year ago
The bottom line in all this is that the Truth movement is just one big scam. They will tell you anything, make up shit, post it online and hook gullible people into buying their videos, t-shirts + books and then have the audacity to ask for donations to their cause. Go to any of those websites...Ahole. Jones prisonplanet, AEtwoof, 911twoof, TvSNewsLies, Loosediaperchange, get the sales pitch and spend,spend,spend.
gimme2utah1 1 year ago
@gimme2utah1 Yea, that's it! They just want to make money selling T-shirts and DVDs. Your wisdom is your hallmark.
You should work for the CIA. I think you would fit in well. This is an organization that truly has the mind set that will do anything for a dollar.
lizardfirefighter110 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 Well don't take my word for it, see for yourself. Go to A.jonesPrisonplanet and JUST LOOK at the first page of that website. Then go to Scam[dot]com and search for 911 scams. It's under "conspiracy theory zone." Check out Loosechange forum and ask some simple questions that conflict with their theories and see how well you're treated. Loose Change was a fictional movie anyway, listen carefully to what Dylan says in the 1st minute of this video ...watch?v=3ZjJQWNQZog
gimme2utah1 1 year ago
May Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld Butt fuck you for all eternity. That is your payment for doing this, isn't it? I'd really like to know what the Government pays you to do this, while the rest of us are suffering through a horrible depression. If they'll kill 3000 of their own people and start a fake war and bankrupt the Earth, they should be paying you really good. And quit calling everybody a Traitor when you claim to live in Australia. 'Down Under' your ass is a big DILDO! You stupid shit.
TheTruthIsWayOutHERE 1 year ago 10
@TheTruthIsWayOutHERE
No, no, no...not a dildo, but a fucking didgeridoo up his ass! The hot air escaping from his ass through the didgeridoo...makes a soothing sound to help him sleep--snuggling with his gay koala--so he can dream of how the world and EVERYTHING is just as "they" say it is!
PS: I'd like to apologize to all aboriginals, didgeridoo players and gay koalas--for making any associations between you and the mendacious/mentally impaired author of this video!
Bongofury361 1 year ago
@TheTruthIsWayOutHERE Charlie Thorton and Lesile Robertson are both compromised. This is very sad. And I think you can see it in their eyes. nano Thermite is all dust samples. The truth is obvious. But those 2 will stay on the side of the lie.
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
Rubbish..
MrDoverben22 1 year ago
oh wow, look how fast they shipped the steal. oh wait, its still in the scrap yard. Another truther lie.
taledarkside 1 year ago
Steven Jones has a scientifc, peer reviewed paper proving the existence of a nano-engineered version of Thermate in multiple samples of WTC dust. But hey, why would facts matter.
beagletoe 1 year ago
well, let me correct you...first it is not peer reviewed in an ENGINEERING JOURNAL....Secondly he had to pay to get it published in a crapy paper....Most importantly...His evidence is NO GOOD. He got it from some womens apartment 1 month later..=contaminated evidence is not evidence ...IT is NOT PEER REVIEWED...NOT ONE RESPECTED ENGINEER BELIEVES THEM....didnt you just see the investigators looking at the steel you dummy,,,they said no building in the world could have withstood those hits......
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@JPPolachek If Steven Jones is such a crackpot, and has to pay to have his papers published, then why is he allowed to teach at BYU? Since a lot of universities base their tenure decisions on not only the individuals accomplishments, moral character, and at times political and religious affiliation, but also on the number and quality of works they have published. Peer opinions also count in their decision. BYU does in fact look at published works and quite deeply I might add.
navoria 1 year ago
I saw a video where they say the planes were military planes. How about the passenger lists. Now what you say about that !!! Where did all the people go that are missing from their families if these were military planes
bluestrapsify 2 years ago
@bluestrapsify The passenger list originally released by the FBI didn't have the names of the hijackers listed as passengers on any of the planes. Not saying one way or the other, but the FBI either dropped the biggest fucking ball ever, or the hijackers didn't exist, on those planes anyway.
navoria 1 year ago
People really still believe the "official story"?! That is stunning! I wonder how long you can keep your head in the sand before you suffocate.
beagletoe 2 years ago
i wonder how long you can stand the stress of your misplaced ideas before you suffer myocardial infarction.
admiralct 2 years ago
@beagletoe I never stop being surprised at how efficiently people can lie to themselves if it makes them feel good.
DarkwingScooter 1 year ago
9/11 official story is such a conspiracy theory LMAO
ODAL123 2 years ago
Yeah that jackazz is a joke J Ventholeo
HeadLessMunkees 2 years ago
Look at Jessy Ventura 9/11 on u tube .... with a black marker draw a pic of a grays head and have him saying this. Jesse ventura 9/11 u tube it and U tube Roswell 1947 on U tube now put this on all your money. Low bills work the best they move. The goverment has a room of people and all they do is make comments on U tube and post stupid commments.
2009wildmonkey1 2 years ago
Was this video supposed to convince me that fires took those buildings down? Because it didn't.
BloodTar 2 years ago
@BloodTar
no its to convince idiots like you that the government didn't ship steel from the WTC in 1 day.
taledarkside 2 years ago
If the Military hadn't taken starlite and stole it from the market, buildings all over the world may have been protected.
christo930 2 years ago
how would starlite protect buildings
magnusalexa 2 years ago
It would protect the steel beams from the heat. It was the heat that weakened the beam enough to allow the WTC to collapse.
christo930 2 years ago
christo930, The heat from fire did not weaken the steel components, of the WTC buildings that collapsed, to their failure temperature. Because the mass of the steel columns, girders, and beams was sufficient to conduct the heat away from the source. Random fires burning at random temperatures do not destroy steel frame buildings in a symmetrical fashion.
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago
Can you point to any peer reviewed science that supports this hypothesis?
christo930 2 years ago
No, I do not have peer review on common sense. No building built with huge steel support columns, that are interconnected with a matrix of girders and beams, has ever been destroyed by fire. Furthermore if you want to claim that it was a combination of collateral damage and fire then you need to explain how random damage plus random fires burning at random intensities produces a symmetrical collapse at near free fall speed. Dr Niels Harrit's report is peer reviewed.
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago
Yes, you do. You can't just say "I don't see how this could have happened", or "it never happened before".While the building falling was a first, there was another first that day... Buildings were smashed into with airplanes loaded with jet fuel. And just because you find it incredulous, doesn't mean it didn't happen that way. I know the lay people aren't lying, but there is a great deal of misinformation and downright lies in the 9/11 truth movement.
christo930 2 years ago
The Case of the South Tower: Burned for just 56 minutes. The top 25 floors twist and fall as a unit, but never land as a unit. The collateral damage from A/A 175 impacted the Southeast corner causing less damage than the impact of United 11 at the North Tower. The fire ball that we saw was nearly 400 feet in diameter. This fire ball represents the majority of jet fuel burning up outside the building. Yet, the South Tower collapses symmetrically at nearly 80 mph just like the North Tower.
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago
And scientists and experts with no connection to the government verified why the building fell. University scientists are mostly liberal and hated the bush government, don't you think any of them would have come out and exposed the conspiracy with research papers and the peer review process? Every book I have ever heard of has errors in it, draws conclusions... Not one publication contains any peer reviewed science that can show that the plane crashes and fires couldn't have caused the collapses
christo930 2 years ago
What scientists and experts with no connection to the government that support the governments conspiracy theory? Dr Niels Harrit could have cared less about Bush policy until one day he saw a video of WTC #7 collapsing. Only then did he begin to question the official story / conspiracy. He eventually hooked up with other scientists that had similar questions. Before we debate any further you need to read Harrit's report. It has color photos. It has been peer reviewed.
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago
I've read portions of it and it's a joke. I don't know if it is peer reviewed or not, but nobody takes it seriously. He references things that don't exist, is working with highly contaminated samples that can't be tied to the event since he got them from lay people 6 years after the event.
I used to be a truther, but I got tired of the leaders making a fool of me and I realized that the truther leaders just make shit up, do bad work and ALWAYS want money for dvds and so on.
christo930 2 years ago
Christo930, So, you used to be a truther, but now you are content otherwise? All the physical evidence that can not be explained by the official story are some how all of a sudden not important. Did you have a brain fart and start to believe the BS that comes from the NIST? Please tell the truth. What are the odds of someone putting red chips into the dust samples and those same chips chips just happen to match the molecular make up of thermite? The official story is a joke,
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago
I got tired of looking up the things truther leaders put out as "problems" in the official story and inevitably they aren't so problematic when you actually look it up. When ever you have questions in your mind, read the other side with an open mind. The truther "work" is so shoddy that even if it were true, their jumping to conclusions, making shit up and generally biasing their whole view towards a nefarious explanation just destroys their credibility. You'll get tired of it too.
christo930 2 years ago
As a firefighter you can shit-can all of the mainstream truther arguments. I don't care. It comes down to this: The case for the South Tower. It fell just like the North Tower. Yet, we are to believe that the conner impact, the top 25 floors falling off, the giant fuel vapor fireball on the outside, and a burning time of only 56 minutes doesn't make a difference on how the building falls.
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago