How do you like our economy? You think your ilk telling the world Bush is evil, we lied to go into Iraq, and attacked ourselves on 9/11 doesn't convince the world this and they feel no remorse about stealing our patents and copyrighted material and trying to screw us every chance they get? The bullshit story is the one you continue to promote and most Americans have had enough of your stupid childish games. You want to live in a toilet somewhere, go do that but stop pissing on the rest of us.
This is probably the stupidest, most pointless presentation on this issue I've seen yet! The internal temperatures of the towers would not be measurable by such a device. Idiotic. How many steel skyscraper fires were accompanied by impacts of huge aircraft which indisputedly knocked off most of their fireproofing? As for WTC 7, it was hit with a huge chunk of the towers! Stop shooting America in the foot you ignoramus clown. Haven't you done enough already?
KowBoySpace your an idiot keep believing in your American science and govt lies and ignore physics if that is what makes u feel better. I guess I would lie to myself also if there was proof my govt lies and murders for finical reasons thank god I don't live in america
"Im Mr. Newton, and I've something to say." "Im confused bcs u've tried to debunk the laws I have created." "First. When u watch the collapsing u can see it accelerates". "I've discovered that the acceleration is possible only when there's empty space below the falling object". "The other tip even tilted. That means the kinetic energy more or less moved away from the tower. Still the tower pulverized all the way down". "Now I go back to my grave and write new laws which work only in America".
I pointed a thermal camera at my oven. It was turned up to 250 degrees. The thermal camera says 41 degrees?????? I think it cooks my food by miracles. Either way. I eat.
@KowBoySpace No one is eating what ever crap you are eating! Hey... put For C after your lost degree of understanding! How is that under educated (wanna be) pretentious puckering asshole working for ya!?
Wait a minute. So in the same video, you give evidence which contradicts itself? First the "Evidence" that the fire was 200 degrees. Then the evidence the metal suffered 480 degrees. Which is it? Talk about debunking yourself. Oh and by the way. The guy you talk about that debunked the steel failure? And was fired? Of course he was he was not even involved and it was not even his speciality! He for want of a better phrase - made it up! Poor video. Sorry.
Here are the videos that have all the proof Heres the proof of explosives watch?v=xvw0_i1rGns More explosives watch?v=V0tzmGgWggg&feature=related Firefighters and demolition crew cleaning up fires and molten metal 6 weeks AFTER the incident watch?v=t-XA0Rv1Ng8 The best and Damning compilation of evidence that will bring justice to all in the future watch?v=tIx2CVRxRXg ^enough evidence to put ANYONE in prison.
I watched about half the video without hearing any mention of the weight of the one hundred plus ton aircraft the building were supporting. Doesn't that factor in there somewhere? There would have been no need to figure in that much additional weight in the design specs of the buildings; snow doesn't weight that much.
@FolkExplorer No this does not factor anything, the twin towers were designed to withstand 2000% of it's normal load, and wind of magnitudes 30x greater than the plane
Did you talk about the impact of the actual plane hitting the building? I would imagine this would compromise the structural integrity of the building more than heat.
I suppose these buildings were designed to "Pancake" into pyroclastic dust. Just what happened to building7 by the way? Why doesn't FAUX news ever mention anything about lucky Larry (PULL IT) Silverstien's miraculous insurance claims or the 12 billion in missing gold or the infamous dancing isaeli's arrested documenting the event?
These people who think Bush-Cheney pulled off 9-11, are bigger idiots than George W Bush could ever be. These are the same morons who think Bush was so stupid, he couldn't tie his own shoes, yet managed to pull off a grand scale terrorist attack, giving the "illusion" that it was Bin Laden-Al Qaida. They totally dismiss the fact that Osama was bragging about this attack. These people are IDIOTS! Pancake THEORY? The floors were 100 tons. of course they would pancake you idiot! This kid is a dick.
@TwoChihuahuas If I sincerely believed "as some of you idiots do" that the government were the masters of 9-11, I'd be scared to death to remain in such a dangerous place. If I truly believed that Bush-Cheney pulled off 9-11 (Which would have taken the complete secrecy of thousands of accomplices, who would never leak a word to anyone). And, they did all this in just 8 months after taking office. I'd be running like hell toward Canada, Australia or anywhere but here in the USA,
What began as the filming of an ordinary day in September of 2001 turns out to be the most complete chronicle of 9/11 attacks. New 9/11 movie on dvd: 'Tuesday Morning in September' 2011 For more information about how to get the dvd, please go to the channel that posted this.
You obviously weren't held enough as a child... harboring resentment towards mommy and daddy. And hereby transferring it to the big bad government right?? You really need to get laid and realize that the government has been fucked up since way before bush.... not even your beloved democrats care about you or your puissant ideas.... they only care about getting re-elected. All of them.
It wasn't JUST the fire, it was the impact as well, and did u ever stop and think that the infared sensor needed some sort of recalibration or something. 9/11 WAS WHAT WE ALL SAW THAT DAY, duh.
@cabsk8er7 Yeah right, Frodo and Sam were rescued by giant eagles. I swear, i saw it on TV. Everything in this magic mass hypnotizing device is for real! I bet 1 Drachme on it. Keep skating little skater.
@cabsk8er7 ----> Moreover, in the case of building 7, according to NIST we are supposed to believe it was JUST fires (they final reports says debris from 1 WTC, the diesel tanks, the Con Edison sub station - neither of it contributed to the collapse). How would only fire cause a building to behave like that when collapsing? And does NISTs computer animation even resemble what we saw with our own eyes?
I cannot see how asking further questions is not justified, or even mandatory.
@cabsk8er7 ----> out like that on the opposite side of the building from where the strucutural failure obviously took place..? What had the columns fail there at all when the tilting of the top section naturally should have decreased there since it increased on the other side..? How do we explain such phenomenon such as the wave of demolition locally outrunning freely falling column sections..? When you really look into the video (and other) documentation, the questions are literally piling up.
@cabsk8er7 ----> tried to explain how the total and perfectly symmetric disintegration of all three buidlings really happened. Few columns from the floors of the allegedly 1-1½ hour raging infernos of the towers had been heated to more than 250 degrees C - and that was where the failure were supposed to have happened. So, in the case of the south tower (clip above), what would have been the mechanism to generate high velocity ejections of pulverized building contents shooting ---->
@cabsk8er7 And what did we see..? What happened at 0 : 59 into this clip:
/watch?v=DifdrPTerhE ..?
In the case of the towers, NIST hasn't even attempted to explain the mechanism of the collapses (not just what supposedly happened BEFORE collapse onset)..? They haven't even documented evidence to support their own theory, and they have not ---->
Could accomplices of the terrorists have put thermite or cordite in the building before the planes crashed? Does it have to be a diabolical plot by Americans, even George Bush, to murder Americans? I don't like Bush, I think he ruined the economy, but I will need pretty damn good proof before I believe he wantonly put cordite in those buildings. This would make him the worst mass murderer in American history. Is the evidence good enough to put him on trial? Why not?
@54markl ----> failure theory - which was rejceted by NIST), then what was generating the pulverized concrete in mid-air (the enormous dust clouds were billowing up right from the onset of collapse)..? And if the jets of pulverized building material shooting out as much as 40 flrs down are supposed to have been caused by compressed air, then why were the collapses not significantly slower (remember: even the resistance of just air slows down the fall of objects falling freely through the air)..?
@54markl ----> and then ask ourselves: Can fire and the force of gravity really account for what can be seen happening at the onset of collapse (0 : 59)...? There are numerous plumes of smoke shooting out with great velocity tens of floors above the level of airplane impact on the side of the building which wasn't even struck. And if the cause of the collapses was column failure due to heating and not a pancaking scenario (i.e. the floor truss ---->
@54markl ---->up theories of controlled demolition being the cause of destruction rather than damage caused by airplane impacts and ensuing fires..? One (out of numerous possible) starting point is just watching a clip of the south tower:
@54markl Now, this video is about something completely different. The question is about technical issues, and what we need to ask ourselves is: Do we have reason to raise questions about the official explanations for the destruction of the WTC buildings..? If so, what are the questions, and what evidence is there to back ---->
@54markl ----> clear evidence (is there any evidence at all?) of him being part of a conspiracy (consider him a marionett, an instrument), and there are many blanks in the alternative conspiracy narratives to point at perpetrators, but CIA involvement seems likely (tip: pumpitout . com/disconnectingthedots . html), as well as parts of the infamous military/industrial complex (making for example Cheney and his connections to Haliburton much more suspicious than Bush). ---->
@54markl How would terrorists have put 100s of charges in the buildings (access/sequrity)?
My suggestion is that Bush himself was not part of it more than helping cover up the evidence of domestic and ally involvement (having Zelikov direct the commission was just one obstacle to prevent putting together an honest and full report (distortions and omissions) and pushing the war-on-terror agenda (incl the suggestions about Iraqi al-Qaeda ties and the lies about WMDs). I haven't found any ---->
The gentleman goes into great detail explaining what didn't happen, what what does he think really happened? Does he think george Bush blew up the WTC? Can he explain why an elected president would wantonly murder American citizens and totally get away with it? I'm a Democrat, but I would like to know who really did do this if Al Qaeda didn't? Who could get away with such a massive deception unchallenged, if deception it is? And why would such an act of malice be done?
@Stu3100 Correct - it wasn't. Neither was building 7. Still it "collapsed" perfectly symmetrically in about 7 seconds (of which 2,5 seconds was AT freefall acceleration). And also remember: "Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7" NCSTAR 1A, p xxxii
so have you ever wondered how many people would have been needed to pull this off, with rigging up WTC 1,2 & 7, not to mention the amount of explosives? And keep quiet for 10yrs, Why not just bring down WTC 1 & 2? Why Bdg 7? Why not carry it out at 3am? When the place would be deserted and little witness af seeing PLANES fly into the towers. Note 'Planes' and not fuckin 'Missiles', now get a fuckin life!
@Stu3100 ----> (twin towers); wave of destruction locally OUTRUNNING free-falling column elements; the micro-spheres (and the reactive red-gray chips) in the dust (requires extreme temperatures); witness testimonies of explosions; the total vanishing of +1000 (some 40% of the) victims' bodies... The list is long.
"Why not 3 a.m..?"..? Why 3 a.m....?
"Why building 7"..? The conveniently lost SEC case files might have been one reason.
"Missiles"..? Would you mind developing on that a bit..?
'Missiles'? yeah, you Al Qaeda supporting Conspiracy Theorists reckon it was a missile that slammed into the Pentagon, even tho 136 witnesses that seen it said it was a plane. And you lot reckon it was missiles attached to the planes that hit the WTCs? Fuckin sick to death of you cunts standing up for them evil paki Muslim pricks by saying they never done it! Once your minds made up you're not changing it, so its a waste of time communicating, so fuck off ya cunt!
@Stu3100 ----> I support evil muslim pricks who did not do it..? Not at all. I'm sure there were (are) terrorists who wanted to attack american (and other western) targets. However - that is FAR from all of the story. Just one thing you probably ignore is the amount of co-operation (read: USAGE of) with jihadi forces that the US has been involved in. That is just one of many self-inflicted wounds we all lose our much needed blood through.
I totally lack reply on facts. No fuck offs returned.
@Stu3100 ----> "Our" minds are made up..? Well, there are certain things I am pretty sure of, but many of them conclusions took med quite some time to reach. It's like you are angry that you cannot change peoples minds, although you use the worst possible method trying to do that. Think. ---->
@Stu3100 Your language - your rection on an honest opinion - speaks volumes about what you don't know, and fear learning. I do not at all support missile theories, neither do I support any violent action towards ANY human beings (including al-Qaeda and/or US war-on-terror agendas) - at all. Total peace. Anyone reading your lines can tell who is the violence supporting one of us. ---->
@Stu3100 The thing is as well the damage that was caused can't be done by a missile. It would create a huge blast whole at the start and not penetrate deep like the damage did. Also how can the pilots and passengers be found there if no plane hit. Some of these people are idiots.
@Stu3100 ----> acceleration (WTC7); the symmetry and the intense pulverization (high-order damage) in mid-air and the totality of the collapses (all three bldgs); violent white flashes and high-speed jets shooting out (some as fast as 100 mph, some occuring AT onset of collapse) some 40 flrs below the level of destruction ---->
@Stu3100 It took me quite some time to accept the idea of demolition, make no mistake about that. And yes, lots of explosives and work must've been required. However, even though the thought of rigging it secretively still is a somewhat weird thing to contemplate, the evidence for demolition is overwhelming; actual free-fall ---->
I have to say that the whole "no other steel structure..." argument is pretty silly to me. How many steel buildings have had a fully fueled jet liner crash into it at over 500MPH, especially buildings that were 110 stories tall?
You have the impact from the plane (which survivors say actually turned the building) plus approximately 10 floors of weakened structure (from that plane that hit) and you're surprised they collapsed?
And now CNN finally produces a show today that proves the air was unsafe even when the Government lied and told the rescue workers that the air was safe. Another TRUTH comes out.
The only I can agree with this scientist guy is the fact the building did drop to fast. I'm saying this was a conspiracy just the fact the building like the twin tower should be able to with stand that
I'm not sure if the war in the middle east was started after this, but you know how people say we are fighting for oil in the middle east? What if Bush knew about this and it was a move to cause the US to want to fight the middle east. Like what other way to have a country fight unless it's attacked.
@chango10669 Yes, because the US went war in Vietnam, Korea and Iraq (the first time) because we were attacked...wait... hold on a minute... there are other ways to have a country fight.
Also, this seems like a lot of overkill just for that. You don't think the American public would have been equally pissed had the US government crashed a plane into the Pentagon and then crashed another one in a remote part of the country?
I noticed all these conspiracy theorists mention the jet fuel and how the towers collapse but they never have an answer about the planes. Who the fuck do you think flew the planes into the buildings?
@remixedtrax Yeah and there's only 1500 Architects and Engineers in the world right? That's not even close to the amount that disagree with the conspiracies.
@bbasketballstr11 Prove it. There may be thousands upon thousands of engineers who don't care to have an opinion on 911's official story by NIST. That doesn't mean that they agree. More than 1500 Engineers and Architects are putting their reputations on the line by challenging the official story. Science is on their side. NIST is flawed. Time for a proper investigation.
@TheZodiacNoodle Uhmm maybe because if they prove that the american government did this, then that shows that it was a mass murder, as was AID's that the american's had made for wars
I wonder if the Windsor Tower in Madrid would have survived for 29 hours after being hit with a jetliner traveling 500mph fully loaded with 10,000lbs of jet fuel. I seriously doubt it. You are no scientist. You are a moron trying to get 15 minutes of fame. Well you have had 10 years. Time to move on to another delusion.
evr thought the fires wernt the problem. its all about how the plane hit an how the upper flloors collaped onto the lower ones due to sructural failure. the structure failed du 2 giant planes with lots of fuel creating a big hole n tha center of the wtcs. its that simple the fire was just icing on the cake that surley didnt help the situation. o any of you rednecks againt are goverment im with ya on some things but y tha hell wud we blow up are own buildings. how tha hell wuld we pull it off.
Lmao...this is one of the worst attempts at trying to prove the inside job that I've ever seen.
The average house fire burns at 1200 degrees and you're going to try and tell people that because some random fool with an infrared camera took a picture that the fires were burning at around 220 degrees? You're going to try and tell us that an office building burning with jet fuel after structural damage would burn at a lower temperature than a house fire?
this is bollocks thousands of people died if a fucking plane goes into a building it gonna collapse and blow up now grow your pricks and stop wanting a conspiracy theory
Thanks for showing your complete ignorance on the subject. NO PLANE hit WTC7 at all, which is the building we have been discussing, and also which was discussed in this video. only WTC 1 and 2 were hit by planes.
Furthermore, why do you support the impossibility of a collapse that requires compression happening at the same time as freefall. You must really hate the 911 victims families if you want them to have a final report that defies physics?
@Bi0hazardOpeth you think that when you say big words it makes you smarter? wow i remeber when i was 8. and anyways how could you possibly think that our president er what ever was behind all this?! for what purpose again?(sorry if it said it in the vid i was too busy doing anything else) anyways it was obviously not bush. and to say i must really hate the 911 victims is pretty funny cuz that came out of nowhere. you people out there who believe this conspiracy shit are crazy?!
Pursuant to Section 7(d) of the National Construction Safety Team Act, I hereby find that the disclosure of the information described below, received by the National Institute of Standards and Technology ("NIST"), in connection with its investigation of the technical causes of the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11,2001, MIGHT JEOPARDIZE PUBLIC SAFETY. Therefore, NIST shall not release [this] information.
Nist only used 2! data points to monitor the whole collapse. Which is ridiculous. No physicist would use such a small pool of transition points, without trying to water down the results. This 2 point method could not account for the different in acceleration between the last part of the collapse. You can verify yourself, and watch top engineers show with physics tools an 30+ data points the actual acceleration rate floor to floor. NIST was disingenuous, this is why they avoided peer review.
In order to back up the official story of the WTC7 collapse:
Debunkers would have to explain how a collapse that required compression between floors and thus resistance could take place in free-fall acceleration.
If debunkers want to have any grounds to stand on, in critiquing those who challenge the official story.
They need to show that the official story itself is SOUND, in order to debunk those who question it.
Debunkers skip this step on the questions they cannot answer.
It is impossible to support a conclusion of a collapse with compression, at the same time as WTC7 fell at free-fall. By definition free-fall is "falling free from resistance" which means the falling building couldn't have compressed against the lower structure of the building as it fell. since the falling building didn't destroy the lower structure of the towers - what other force was responsible for pulverizing the lower floors in a fraction of a second, so it fell at free-fall?
"The FBI's counterterrorism division concluded that the evidence presented by the [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth] deserves FBI scrutiny. In a letter, Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach assessed that the group's analysis is "backed by thorough research and analysis."
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
and AE911Truth's Blueprint for Truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
Wow, you really have a way with words and unprecedented logic. Obviously we all know that since Jurassic* Park was created, any scientific studies on VERIFIABLE known laws of physics - shouldn't even be looked at or considered. Funny you brought up a movie, I assume you enjoy reading fiction more than researching public record of whistle blowers within the government FBI, CIA on many of these same issues I'm Bringing up. Way to be intellectual and add something to the convo
So defend the official story and explain the mechanism in which the lower floors of WTC 7 were removed in fractions of a second prior to the upper floors hitting resistance? Especially when all of the potential energy of the building was already turned into kinetic energy to achieve the free fall acceleration admitted by NIST. Thus, leaving no energy from the falling building to cause any damage to the building below, which again did not provide any resistance as the building fell at free-fall
@Bi0hazardOpeth why fabricate evidence thats why people like you have no credability, so that means i carnt answer your question as it is taken out of context... the building fell at near free fall speed, nice how you fail to miss one word to completly change an analysis
WTC 1 and 2 fell at near free fall, WTC7 fell at 9.8m/s2 which is 'absolute' free-fall. You don't remember from high school that 9.8m/s2 was free-fall? which is why I didn't say near for WTC7.
How do you have a 9.8m/s2 collapse in a compression based collapse? It is impossible to have compression (resistance) at the same time as free-fall. What other force pulverized the lower structure so that the falling top hit no resistance falling into its own footprint?
No you are just showing your ignorance on the topic, this is openly confirmed by NIST themselves the 9.8m/s2 acceleration rate of WTC7. And you have no debating or research skills obviously, you didn't even discuss what was wrong about it or any specifics. You just said "nah uh" like an 8 year old would do. Is this really the level of debate the debunkers bring to the table?
@Bi0hazardOpeth where does it say in the nist report building 7 fell free fall speed all the way into its footprint, please reference this because i cannot find it
Below is video footage of a nist conference where the question was asked and answered by NIST. wtc7 was in free-fall for 4.6 seconds out of 5.6 seconds total. (5.6 seconds verified @ ) In the last 12 seconds the buildings acceleration slowed down significantly. nist "Assumed the accelerate was consistent the whole fall" and took an average of the whole collapse. They took the slower final time and added it to the free-fall "assuming" they were the same rate.
You have the personality of a middle school kid. What an indepth reply there - you completely missed the context of the building falling at freefall for 75% of the collapse. Especially the first 80% which would have met the most resistance. You don't care about being accurate, because all you want to do is reinforce pre-held belief prior to doing research.
Fire damage is an organic process and DOES not create symmetrical collapses that start at freefall. Period.
@Bi0hazardOpeth you keep saying different things things all the time so thats ironic to yourself that you mention an 8 year old, as I first stated you fabricate evidence to suit your theory
golly gee. let's see. andy. uh, how does concrete get pulverized in mid air? i dunno wilbur. okay, okay, uh, let's see...andy, can fire melt steel...ya know, like, whatcha call it? molten, that's right...molten steel. like flowin' lava in Hawaii. i dunno Wilbur. go google it, or sumthin. ya know Andy, i heard they found some kinda fancy high tech explosive that wuz still live...i think thay call it nanothermite. they could still explode it years later...and thay did. whattya think a that?
The evidence of US Government Complicity in 9/11 is publicly available and verifiable. Here are the 4 Best videos on the subject. They together will prove without a doubt US government complicity.
1) Zero - Nobel Prize Winner's Doc (Start here) @ watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
2) 911 Connect the Dots: Great 18 min video @ watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE
3) 911 Press for Truth (By 911 Victim families) @ watch?v=PSVgnsIJH4Y
4) Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth - All Science and Physics @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
DID YOU KNOW? Out of the 6 supposed hijackers, who weren’t found alive in other countries. 4 of them were given their Visas by top US Gov Officials. There is an interview with Michael Springman - 'Chief of Visa Selection at US General Consulate in Jeddah 87-89' who gave the "terrorists" their visas. He admits how they did not meet standard protocol, but the US gov pushed them through anyways to get the terrorists in to the US for air training. His Interview @ watch?v=F9-IISF4ckg (at 4:30)
Notice, how you resorted to some lame attempt at character assassination rather than addressing the question RIGHT BELOW... You can still see it, but obviously you preferred to avoid it and bring up some person who I don't even know. Do all debunkers have the delusion that everyone showing them high school level physics is the same person? Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean there is only 1 person who does. All you do is avoided addressing Q's with juvenile debate.
@Bi0hazardOpeth High School level physics and Elementary school math tells us with minimal work that the building cannot even come remotely close to arresting collapse yet you still "believe" it can but cannot tell us why.
You Brits are overtly fucktarded conspiracy-believing tards.
You're not really good for anything Rizla "wtc collapse simulator" 2012. LOL
@flanksteak2 Thats not what he was trying to say at all. Quit trying to over exaggerate his claims and discredit him as being some conspiracy nut and answer his questions.
That has always been Flanksteak's approach. He ignores the specific context of the questions you ask him and brings up other things instead. It doesn't matter if you point out over 5 times that what he is answering - 'isn't the question' and restate the question. He will still find diversions, I don't know if he does it consciousness, or he is just so used to lying to himself and always having to be right - that he is unable to directly address specifics. Instead he uses ad hominem attacks.
The 911 Commission NOW reveals that the official version of 911 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The sources and details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.
Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.
220+ US Intelligence Agents and Counter-Terrorism Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "a Joke" "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions,"
Gov SOURCES: PatriotsQuestion911.(com)
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
*****
84% of New Yorker's Say there is a Cover Up and Reject the Official 9/11 Story -
In 2006 the NY Times and CBS ran an extensive poll with these results @ tiny(DOT)cc/ny911poll
WTC 7 was never hit by a plane. Explain the mechanism in which the lower floors of WTC 7 were removed in fractions of a second prior to the upper floors hitting resistance? Especially when all of the potential energy of the building was already turned into kinetic energy to achieve the free fall acceleration admitted by NIST.Thus, leaving no energy from the falling building to cause any damage to the building below,which again did not provide any resistance as the building fell at free-fall
i agree bush lied and people died!!! i may not be a scientist!! but i always wondered why the towers collapsed!!!!i always knew something didn't add up!!! thank you for the info!! oh by the way miracles do happen!!!!.:)
Department of Chemistry, Jeffrey Farrer of Brigham Young University's Department of Physics and Astronomy, Steven E. Jones, and others state that thermite and nanothermite composites in the dust and debris were found following the collapse of the three buildings, which they conclude to be proof that explosives brought down the buildings.
Demolition theory proponents, such as Brigham Young University physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures.
Lots of good information, unfortunately the delivery is not very good, especially towards the end of this video. The guy is almost slurring his words, mumbling quickly, like he just wants to get this over with.
Wrong! 02:06 The 9/11 Commission Report did not try to hide anything. It focused on the terrorist events of 9/11, not the buildings that collapsed. This NIST report focused on why the buildings of the WTC collapsed.
When you heat any kind of metal u weakin it...and with 100s of tons on top do the math.you dont need to melt the steel beams to have to fail just need to heat them up
i was buisy and just caught a glimpse of this video and i saw the temp. color scale and saw an striaght up lie. then again why am i suprised all conspiracy theorist now a days are making up lies because there stupid "truth" movement has lost thanks to basic science and commen sense.
Well i guess if we're so harmless then you wouldn't take the tme to make up a childish name and comment on videos that "bullshit." Everyones entitled to their opinion butno one is enttled to insult or ridicule.
@Twooftard Mrbobthejerk, "Everyones entitled to their opinion butno one is enttled to insult or ridicule."
Incorrect, prickhead. No one is entitled to slander innocent people which you fucktards do without evidence or sensitivity. You loons spew complete bullshit. Why? So you can accuse NIST, FDNY, Silverstein, jetliner passengers and crew, NYPD, FBI, and others of mass-murder complicity? You can go to fucking hell. So can shithead WarCreep911. His claim as a "scientist" is a laughingstock.
How do you like our economy? You think your ilk telling the world Bush is evil, we lied to go into Iraq, and attacked ourselves on 9/11 doesn't convince the world this and they feel no remorse about stealing our patents and copyrighted material and trying to screw us every chance they get? The bullshit story is the one you continue to promote and most Americans have had enough of your stupid childish games. You want to live in a toilet somewhere, go do that but stop pissing on the rest of us.
batvette 5 days ago
This is probably the stupidest, most pointless presentation on this issue I've seen yet! The internal temperatures of the towers would not be measurable by such a device. Idiotic. How many steel skyscraper fires were accompanied by impacts of huge aircraft which indisputedly knocked off most of their fireproofing? As for WTC 7, it was hit with a huge chunk of the towers! Stop shooting America in the foot you ignoramus clown. Haven't you done enough already?
batvette 5 days ago
KowBoySpace your an idiot keep believing in your American science and govt lies and ignore physics if that is what makes u feel better. I guess I would lie to myself also if there was proof my govt lies and murders for finical reasons thank god I don't live in america
1danvivaldi 1 week ago
Anyone find this cunts voice annoying. Have a drink dude!
martinwilliamrandall 2 weeks ago in playlist Conspiracy Theories
conspiracy theorists sleep on Physic lessons
mastouris69 4 weeks ago
Wow. Dem some big words!!!! You must be a smart feller!!!!!!!!! Now back to your mom's basement for more research......
ericprovost101 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Im Mr. Newton, and I've something to say." "Im confused bcs u've tried to debunk the laws I have created." "First. When u watch the collapsing u can see it accelerates". "I've discovered that the acceleration is possible only when there's empty space below the falling object". "The other tip even tilted. That means the kinetic energy more or less moved away from the tower. Still the tower pulverized all the way down". "Now I go back to my grave and write new laws which work only in America".
Scumbot404 1 month ago
the guy sounds like alienscientist..? is this his other channel?
Rel7eGaDe 1 month ago
Jimmy y Jp con los gustos de debunker inútil se define únicamente por su falta de juicio!
TheScottybobear 1 month ago
I pointed a thermal camera at my oven. It was turned up to 250 degrees. The thermal camera says 41 degrees?????? I think it cooks my food by miracles. Either way. I eat.
KowBoySpace 1 month ago
@KowBoySpace No one is eating what ever crap you are eating! Hey... put For C after your lost degree of understanding! How is that under educated (wanna be) pretentious puckering asshole working for ya!?
TheScottybobear 1 month ago
Wait a minute. So in the same video, you give evidence which contradicts itself? First the "Evidence" that the fire was 200 degrees. Then the evidence the metal suffered 480 degrees. Which is it? Talk about debunking yourself. Oh and by the way. The guy you talk about that debunked the steel failure? And was fired? Of course he was he was not even involved and it was not even his speciality! He for want of a better phrase - made it up! Poor video. Sorry.
KowBoySpace 1 month ago
bin laden was a troll...
shankoathreiya 1 month ago
how does the thermagraph work? Is it a provable thermal image?
keflar5 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DarkDragon187II 2 months ago
I watched about half the video without hearing any mention of the weight of the one hundred plus ton aircraft the building were supporting. Doesn't that factor in there somewhere? There would have been no need to figure in that much additional weight in the design specs of the buildings; snow doesn't weight that much.
FolkExplorer 2 months ago
@FolkExplorer No this does not factor anything, the twin towers were designed to withstand 2000% of it's normal load, and wind of magnitudes 30x greater than the plane
Ur0pinionDoesntCount 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'Tuesday Morning in September'. Available on DVD. Runtime 130 minutes.
Pure, unfiltered, authentic. Something new from 9/11/2001; that day.
tuesmornininsept 3 months ago
Holy crap too much Science and Math :o
shanyahROX 3 months ago
This man is so knowledgeable, he explains everything with pure logic and physical and chemical standpoints
Ur0pinionDoesntCount 3 months ago
indisputable evidence, thank you
Ur0pinionDoesntCount 3 months ago
Wow this explains a lot. thank you
jtaghero 3 months ago
Did you talk about the impact of the actual plane hitting the building? I would imagine this would compromise the structural integrity of the building more than heat.
thinkboutit 3 months ago
@thinkboutit skyscrapers are designed to withstand this kind of impact, the WTC towers definitely were, look it up.
MrDzver 3 months ago
@MrDzver Oh really? Buildings are designed to take a hit from a commercial airliner?
thinkboutit 3 months ago
@thinkboutit
I suppose these buildings were designed to "Pancake" into pyroclastic dust. Just what happened to building7 by the way? Why doesn't FAUX news ever mention anything about lucky Larry (PULL IT) Silverstien's miraculous insurance claims or the 12 billion in missing gold or the infamous dancing isaeli's arrested documenting the event?
ChilesGreen 3 months ago
@ChilesGreen You suppose? ehh not quite what I was looking for.
thinkboutit 3 months ago
Thank you for this video
cabbagesftw 3 months ago
what am I supposed to discern from the nanothermite patent owner? I missed something evidently
NUTSINUSA 3 months ago
Excellent Vid. This blows the lid off the official conspiracy.
ChilesGreen 3 months ago
These people who think Bush-Cheney pulled off 9-11, are bigger idiots than George W Bush could ever be. These are the same morons who think Bush was so stupid, he couldn't tie his own shoes, yet managed to pull off a grand scale terrorist attack, giving the "illusion" that it was Bin Laden-Al Qaida. They totally dismiss the fact that Osama was bragging about this attack. These people are IDIOTS! Pancake THEORY? The floors were 100 tons. of course they would pancake you idiot! This kid is a dick.
TwoChihuahuas 3 months ago
@TwoChihuahuas If I sincerely believed "as some of you idiots do" that the government were the masters of 9-11, I'd be scared to death to remain in such a dangerous place. If I truly believed that Bush-Cheney pulled off 9-11 (Which would have taken the complete secrecy of thousands of accomplices, who would never leak a word to anyone). And, they did all this in just 8 months after taking office. I'd be running like hell toward Canada, Australia or anywhere but here in the USA,
TwoChihuahuas 3 months ago
@TwoChihuahuas Come to Australia we have Kangaroos and a sane govt. :D
Mhinx2268 3 months ago
@TwoChihuahuas
And who is to say the videos of osama were not faked?
They done it so they could go to war in iraq and afghanistan for oil....
NbdVideos 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What began as the filming of an ordinary day in September of 2001 turns out to be the most complete chronicle of 9/11 attacks. New 9/11 movie on dvd: 'Tuesday Morning in September' 2011 For more information about how to get the dvd, please go to the channel that posted this.
tusdaymorninginsept 3 months ago
You obviously weren't held enough as a child... harboring resentment towards mommy and daddy. And hereby transferring it to the big bad government right?? You really need to get laid and realize that the government has been fucked up since way before bush.... not even your beloved democrats care about you or your puissant ideas.... they only care about getting re-elected. All of them.
TheRoadfarmer 4 months ago
By the way... What happend to the 2.3 trillion dollars, which were unable to track? Rumsfeld told you on 9/10: /watch?v=jjcRywb6Zf4
Still missing i heard...
Captain Obvious, over and out
t4d0k 4 months ago
Comment removed
ChilesGreen 3 months ago
It wasn't JUST the fire, it was the impact as well, and did u ever stop and think that the infared sensor needed some sort of recalibration or something. 9/11 WAS WHAT WE ALL SAW THAT DAY, duh.
cabsk8er7 4 months ago
@cabsk8er7 Yeah right, Frodo and Sam were rescued by giant eagles. I swear, i saw it on TV. Everything in this magic mass hypnotizing device is for real! I bet 1 Drachme on it. Keep skating little skater.
t4d0k 4 months ago
@t4d0k im 37 btw, and thanks, i saw that too :D
cabsk8er7 4 months ago
@cabsk8er7 ----> Moreover, in the case of building 7, according to NIST we are supposed to believe it was JUST fires (they final reports says debris from 1 WTC, the diesel tanks, the Con Edison sub station - neither of it contributed to the collapse). How would only fire cause a building to behave like that when collapsing? And does NISTs computer animation even resemble what we saw with our own eyes?
I cannot see how asking further questions is not justified, or even mandatory.
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@cabsk8er7 ----> out like that on the opposite side of the building from where the strucutural failure obviously took place..? What had the columns fail there at all when the tilting of the top section naturally should have decreased there since it increased on the other side..? How do we explain such phenomenon such as the wave of demolition locally outrunning freely falling column sections..? When you really look into the video (and other) documentation, the questions are literally piling up.
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@cabsk8er7 ----> tried to explain how the total and perfectly symmetric disintegration of all three buidlings really happened. Few columns from the floors of the allegedly 1-1½ hour raging infernos of the towers had been heated to more than 250 degrees C - and that was where the failure were supposed to have happened. So, in the case of the south tower (clip above), what would have been the mechanism to generate high velocity ejections of pulverized building contents shooting ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@cabsk8er7 And what did we see..? What happened at 0 : 59 into this clip:
/watch?v=DifdrPTerhE ..?
In the case of the towers, NIST hasn't even attempted to explain the mechanism of the collapses (not just what supposedly happened BEFORE collapse onset)..? They haven't even documented evidence to support their own theory, and they have not ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
PAUL ISAAC (911 NYC/ ENRON / Y2K CONNECTION??) SHADOWS & DUST
NYsentinel 4 months ago
Could accomplices of the terrorists have put thermite or cordite in the building before the planes crashed? Does it have to be a diabolical plot by Americans, even George Bush, to murder Americans? I don't like Bush, I think he ruined the economy, but I will need pretty damn good proof before I believe he wantonly put cordite in those buildings. This would make him the worst mass murderer in American history. Is the evidence good enough to put him on trial? Why not?
54markl 4 months ago
@54markl ----> failure theory - which was rejceted by NIST), then what was generating the pulverized concrete in mid-air (the enormous dust clouds were billowing up right from the onset of collapse)..? And if the jets of pulverized building material shooting out as much as 40 flrs down are supposed to have been caused by compressed air, then why were the collapses not significantly slower (remember: even the resistance of just air slows down the fall of objects falling freely through the air)..?
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@54markl ----> and then ask ourselves: Can fire and the force of gravity really account for what can be seen happening at the onset of collapse (0 : 59)...? There are numerous plumes of smoke shooting out with great velocity tens of floors above the level of airplane impact on the side of the building which wasn't even struck. And if the cause of the collapses was column failure due to heating and not a pancaking scenario (i.e. the floor truss ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@54markl ---->up theories of controlled demolition being the cause of destruction rather than damage caused by airplane impacts and ensuing fires..? One (out of numerous possible) starting point is just watching a clip of the south tower:
/watch?v=DifdrPTerhE
---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Funkadelic2 Then please tell me what really did happen. PLEASE!
54markl 4 months ago
@54markl Now, this video is about something completely different. The question is about technical issues, and what we need to ask ourselves is: Do we have reason to raise questions about the official explanations for the destruction of the WTC buildings..? If so, what are the questions, and what evidence is there to back ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@54markl ----> clear evidence (is there any evidence at all?) of him being part of a conspiracy (consider him a marionett, an instrument), and there are many blanks in the alternative conspiracy narratives to point at perpetrators, but CIA involvement seems likely (tip: pumpitout . com/disconnectingthedots . html), as well as parts of the infamous military/industrial complex (making for example Cheney and his connections to Haliburton much more suspicious than Bush). ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@54markl How would terrorists have put 100s of charges in the buildings (access/sequrity)?
My suggestion is that Bush himself was not part of it more than helping cover up the evidence of domestic and ally involvement (having Zelikov direct the commission was just one obstacle to prevent putting together an honest and full report (distortions and omissions) and pushing the war-on-terror agenda (incl the suggestions about Iraqi al-Qaeda ties and the lies about WMDs). I haven't found any ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
The gentleman goes into great detail explaining what didn't happen, what what does he think really happened? Does he think george Bush blew up the WTC? Can he explain why an elected president would wantonly murder American citizens and totally get away with it? I'm a Democrat, but I would like to know who really did do this if Al Qaeda didn't? Who could get away with such a massive deception unchallenged, if deception it is? And why would such an act of malice be done?
54markl 4 months ago
Did any American notice that their country is being colonized by the Jews? now I finally understand why hitler send them a memorable holocaust
audreysaudreys 4 months ago
@audreysaudreys ignorant prick......
servusdei2013 4 months ago
megamogx 4 months ago
was that building in Madrid hit by a passenger airliner travelling at 550mph? Dont think it was.
Stu3100 4 months ago 2
@Stu3100 and was attacked 8 years before and weakened
urworstnightmare22 4 months ago
@Stu3100 Correct - it wasn't. Neither was building 7. Still it "collapsed" perfectly symmetrically in about 7 seconds (of which 2,5 seconds was AT freefall acceleration). And also remember: "Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7" NCSTAR 1A, p xxxii
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@Funkadelic2
so have you ever wondered how many people would have been needed to pull this off, with rigging up WTC 1,2 & 7, not to mention the amount of explosives? And keep quiet for 10yrs, Why not just bring down WTC 1 & 2? Why Bdg 7? Why not carry it out at 3am? When the place would be deserted and little witness af seeing PLANES fly into the towers. Note 'Planes' and not fuckin 'Missiles', now get a fuckin life!
Stu3100 4 months ago
@Stu3100 ----> (twin towers); wave of destruction locally OUTRUNNING free-falling column elements; the micro-spheres (and the reactive red-gray chips) in the dust (requires extreme temperatures); witness testimonies of explosions; the total vanishing of +1000 (some 40% of the) victims' bodies... The list is long.
"Why not 3 a.m..?"..? Why 3 a.m....?
"Why building 7"..? The conveniently lost SEC case files might have been one reason.
"Missiles"..? Would you mind developing on that a bit..?
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@Funkadelic2
'Missiles'? yeah, you Al Qaeda supporting Conspiracy Theorists reckon it was a missile that slammed into the Pentagon, even tho 136 witnesses that seen it said it was a plane. And you lot reckon it was missiles attached to the planes that hit the WTCs? Fuckin sick to death of you cunts standing up for them evil paki Muslim pricks by saying they never done it! Once your minds made up you're not changing it, so its a waste of time communicating, so fuck off ya cunt!
Stu3100 4 months ago
@Stu3100 ----> I support evil muslim pricks who did not do it..? Not at all. I'm sure there were (are) terrorists who wanted to attack american (and other western) targets. However - that is FAR from all of the story. Just one thing you probably ignore is the amount of co-operation (read: USAGE of) with jihadi forces that the US has been involved in. That is just one of many self-inflicted wounds we all lose our much needed blood through.
I totally lack reply on facts. No fuck offs returned.
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@Stu3100 ----> "Our" minds are made up..? Well, there are certain things I am pretty sure of, but many of them conclusions took med quite some time to reach. It's like you are angry that you cannot change peoples minds, although you use the worst possible method trying to do that. Think. ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@Stu3100 Your language - your rection on an honest opinion - speaks volumes about what you don't know, and fear learning. I do not at all support missile theories, neither do I support any violent action towards ANY human beings (including al-Qaeda and/or US war-on-terror agendas) - at all. Total peace. Anyone reading your lines can tell who is the violence supporting one of us. ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@Stu3100 The thing is as well the damage that was caused can't be done by a missile. It would create a huge blast whole at the start and not penetrate deep like the damage did. Also how can the pilots and passengers be found there if no plane hit. Some of these people are idiots.
cup1966wow 2 months ago
@Stu3100 ----> acceleration (WTC7); the symmetry and the intense pulverization (high-order damage) in mid-air and the totality of the collapses (all three bldgs); violent white flashes and high-speed jets shooting out (some as fast as 100 mph, some occuring AT onset of collapse) some 40 flrs below the level of destruction ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
@Stu3100 It took me quite some time to accept the idea of demolition, make no mistake about that. And yes, lots of explosives and work must've been required. However, even though the thought of rigging it secretively still is a somewhat weird thing to contemplate, the evidence for demolition is overwhelming; actual free-fall ---->
Funkadelic2 4 months ago
I have to say that the whole "no other steel structure..." argument is pretty silly to me. How many steel buildings have had a fully fueled jet liner crash into it at over 500MPH, especially buildings that were 110 stories tall?
You have the impact from the plane (which survivors say actually turned the building) plus approximately 10 floors of weakened structure (from that plane that hit) and you're surprised they collapsed?
penndrex 4 months ago
So u start this investigation off of 2 pictures...one u say doesn't show much. What a great scientist u are.
jstripe7 4 months ago
how do we know thoes pictures of the fire are acurate or from a reliable source, we dont
MrMasterNorris 4 months ago
derp derp
Opul3nce 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And now CNN finally produces a show today that proves the air was unsafe even when the Government lied and told the rescue workers that the air was safe. Another TRUTH comes out.
remixedtrax 4 months ago
Not a conspiracy theory
littleman938 4 months ago
@littleman938 just a conspiracy.
InfamousDainton 4 months ago
The only I can agree with this scientist guy is the fact the building did drop to fast. I'm saying this was a conspiracy just the fact the building like the twin tower should be able to with stand that
littleman938 4 months ago
You sir are a scientific idiot.
jediknight2079 4 months ago
I'm not sure if the war in the middle east was started after this, but you know how people say we are fighting for oil in the middle east? What if Bush knew about this and it was a move to cause the US to want to fight the middle east. Like what other way to have a country fight unless it's attacked.
chango10669 4 months ago
@chango10669 Yes, because the US went war in Vietnam, Korea and Iraq (the first time) because we were attacked...wait... hold on a minute... there are other ways to have a country fight.
Also, this seems like a lot of overkill just for that. You don't think the American public would have been equally pissed had the US government crashed a plane into the Pentagon and then crashed another one in a remote part of the country?
penndrex 4 months ago
this is just stupid...
bones9965 4 months ago
I feel like I should point out that just because one explanation of an event is incorrect, it doesn't automatically make another explanation true..
CharlieGMusic 4 months ago
I noticed all these conspiracy theorists mention the jet fuel and how the towers collapse but they never have an answer about the planes. Who the fuck do you think flew the planes into the buildings?
bbasketballstr11 4 months ago
If there is anyone considering questioning the official story, then this might be a good place to start:
rememberbuilding7 (DOT) org
1500 Architects and Engineers said Building 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition.
911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!
remixedtrax 4 months ago
@remixedtrax Yeah and there's only 1500 Architects and Engineers in the world right? That's not even close to the amount that disagree with the conspiracies.
bbasketballstr11 4 months ago
@bbasketballstr11 Prove it. There may be thousands upon thousands of engineers who don't care to have an opinion on 911's official story by NIST. That doesn't mean that they agree. More than 1500 Engineers and Architects are putting their reputations on the line by challenging the official story. Science is on their side. NIST is flawed. Time for a proper investigation.
remixedtrax 4 months ago
@remixedtrax yes!
17GDS 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
megamogx 4 months ago
Instead of trying to prove these conspiracies wrong, why don't we remember the hundreds of people that died on that die.
TheZodiacNoodle 4 months ago
@TheZodiacNoodle Uhmm maybe because if they prove that the american government did this, then that shows that it was a mass murder, as was AID's that the american's had made for wars
jadsf5 4 months ago
I wonder if the Windsor Tower in Madrid would have survived for 29 hours after being hit with a jetliner traveling 500mph fully loaded with 10,000lbs of jet fuel. I seriously doubt it. You are no scientist. You are a moron trying to get 15 minutes of fame. Well you have had 10 years. Time to move on to another delusion.
MrREH1962 4 months ago
GEORGE BUSH IS A MASS MURDERER PRESIDENT :)
mayaforpeaceful 4 months ago
911 IS A NEW PEARL HARBOR
mayaforpeaceful 4 months ago
Can you hear the narrator's voice go back and forth? He's not even confidant of what he is saying. What an idiot!!!!
pmurphy5657 4 months ago
Nevada ,your a dumbfuck
DRIFTERSPARK 4 months ago
some funny when the 2nd plane flew into the other tower lololololol
marksinnottparke 4 months ago
evr thought the fires wernt the problem. its all about how the plane hit an how the upper flloors collaped onto the lower ones due to sructural failure. the structure failed du 2 giant planes with lots of fuel creating a big hole n tha center of the wtcs. its that simple the fire was just icing on the cake that surley didnt help the situation. o any of you rednecks againt are goverment im with ya on some things but y tha hell wud we blow up are own buildings. how tha hell wuld we pull it off.
nevadawalrus5 4 months ago
@nevadawalrus5 Exactly!
11binf9 4 months ago
I'm a skeptic regarding 9/11 conspiracy theories but I have to say something sure stinks about the whole incident.
abraxsmith01 4 months ago
i think the real target was trade centre 7
napalmcoffee 4 months ago
inside job!
Sirkinney 4 months ago
Write a script, I can only assume that you are either amature or unable to read so why should I take you seriously?
natedogbfd 4 months ago
Lmao...this is one of the worst attempts at trying to prove the inside job that I've ever seen.
The average house fire burns at 1200 degrees and you're going to try and tell people that because some random fool with an infrared camera took a picture that the fires were burning at around 220 degrees? You're going to try and tell us that an office building burning with jet fuel after structural damage would burn at a lower temperature than a house fire?
lmao...try again
067Blackhawk 4 months ago
this is bollocks thousands of people died if a fucking plane goes into a building it gonna collapse and blow up now grow your pricks and stop wanting a conspiracy theory
devilalbz 5 months ago
@devilalbz Erm it was built to stand more than a plane crash? innocent people died yes, but the towers didnt come down due to fire n the impact
jamak05 4 months ago 2
Also the images are flashing too quickly...I'd like to see them a bit longer. Thanx
jazzbones1 5 months ago
great work....please do some editing and add a few pauses in your speech. It is a lot of information...slow down a bit.
jazzbones1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11/2011 - Ten Years, No Justice
/watch?v=FxPaebHe3fw
911debunkerschannel 5 months ago
hey dumbass< maybe it collapsed because a multi ton plane crashed into it pretty fast, ehh, never thought of that, o ok. understandable.
DFeucht321 5 months ago
@DFeucht321 building was built to withstand such an occurance dumbass
brandon420z1 5 months ago
@brandon420z1 yes and no. alot of the support beams were destroyed making it weak and it was dominos after that
DFeucht321 5 months ago
@DFeucht321
Thanks for showing your complete ignorance on the subject. NO PLANE hit WTC7 at all, which is the building we have been discussing, and also which was discussed in this video. only WTC 1 and 2 were hit by planes.
Furthermore, why do you support the impossibility of a collapse that requires compression happening at the same time as freefall. You must really hate the 911 victims families if you want them to have a final report that defies physics?
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth you think that when you say big words it makes you smarter? wow i remeber when i was 8. and anyways how could you possibly think that our president er what ever was behind all this?! for what purpose again?(sorry if it said it in the vid i was too busy doing anything else) anyways it was obviously not bush. and to say i must really hate the 911 victims is pretty funny cuz that came out of nowhere. you people out there who believe this conspiracy shit are crazy?!
DFeucht321 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
6.6* seconds WTC collapse time verified with 4 angles at once @ watch?v=DcEm9wLR3N0
**Correction** 12 Seconds = 2.2 Seconds. mistyped it without a period.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
Comment removed
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
Comment removed
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
NIST Refused Peer Review for 9/11
Pursuant to Section 7(d) of the National Construction Safety Team Act, I hereby find that the disclosure of the information described below, received by the National Institute of Standards and Technology ("NIST"), in connection with its investigation of the technical causes of the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11,2001, MIGHT JEOPARDIZE PUBLIC SAFETY. Therefore, NIST shall not release [this] information.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
Nist only used 2! data points to monitor the whole collapse. Which is ridiculous. No physicist would use such a small pool of transition points, without trying to water down the results. This 2 point method could not account for the different in acceleration between the last part of the collapse. You can verify yourself, and watch top engineers show with physics tools an 30+ data points the actual acceleration rate floor to floor. NIST was disingenuous, this is why they avoided peer review.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
In order to back up the official story of the WTC7 collapse:
Debunkers would have to explain how a collapse that required compression between floors and thus resistance could take place in free-fall acceleration.
If debunkers want to have any grounds to stand on, in critiquing those who challenge the official story.
They need to show that the official story itself is SOUND, in order to debunk those who question it.
Debunkers skip this step on the questions they cannot answer.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
It is impossible to support a conclusion of a collapse with compression, at the same time as WTC7 fell at free-fall. By definition free-fall is "falling free from resistance" which means the falling building couldn't have compressed against the lower structure of the building as it fell. since the falling building didn't destroy the lower structure of the towers - what other force was responsible for pulverizing the lower floors in a fraction of a second, so it fell at free-fall?
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
very good point
allycat114 5 months ago
Nice one. Makes us think! To all you idiots who are name calling, why are you even watching this if you dont believe him?
Mirandalo1982 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Mirandalo1982 because unlike you we review all probabilities before forming an opinion.
mazzepa1 6 months ago
should rename this video 'TROLL' lol your an idiot you must be a special needs scientist
daveygravey123456 6 months ago
@daveygravey123456
"The FBI's counterterrorism division concluded that the evidence presented by the [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth] deserves FBI scrutiny. In a letter, Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach assessed that the group's analysis is "backed by thorough research and analysis."
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
and AE911Truth's Blueprint for Truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth jurrasic park was backed by thorough research and analysis
daveygravey123456 5 months ago
@daveygravey123456
Wow, you really have a way with words and unprecedented logic. Obviously we all know that since Jurassic* Park was created, any scientific studies on VERIFIABLE known laws of physics - shouldn't even be looked at or considered. Funny you brought up a movie, I assume you enjoy reading fiction more than researching public record of whistle blowers within the government FBI, CIA on many of these same issues I'm Bringing up. Way to be intellectual and add something to the convo
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
So defend the official story and explain the mechanism in which the lower floors of WTC 7 were removed in fractions of a second prior to the upper floors hitting resistance? Especially when all of the potential energy of the building was already turned into kinetic energy to achieve the free fall acceleration admitted by NIST. Thus, leaving no energy from the falling building to cause any damage to the building below, which again did not provide any resistance as the building fell at free-fall
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth why fabricate evidence thats why people like you have no credability, so that means i carnt answer your question as it is taken out of context... the building fell at near free fall speed, nice how you fail to miss one word to completly change an analysis
daveygravey123456 5 months ago
@daveygravey123456
WTC 1 and 2 fell at near free fall, WTC7 fell at 9.8m/s2 which is 'absolute' free-fall. You don't remember from high school that 9.8m/s2 was free-fall? which is why I didn't say near for WTC7.
How do you have a 9.8m/s2 collapse in a compression based collapse? It is impossible to have compression (resistance) at the same time as free-fall. What other force pulverized the lower structure so that the falling top hit no resistance falling into its own footprint?
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth lol that is complete missinformation
daveygravey123456 5 months ago
@daveygravey123456
No you are just showing your ignorance on the topic, this is openly confirmed by NIST themselves the 9.8m/s2 acceleration rate of WTC7. And you have no debating or research skills obviously, you didn't even discuss what was wrong about it or any specifics. You just said "nah uh" like an 8 year old would do. Is this really the level of debate the debunkers bring to the table?
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth where does it say in the nist report building 7 fell free fall speed all the way into its footprint, please reference this because i cannot find it
daveygravey123456 5 months ago
@daveygravey123456
Below is video footage of a nist conference where the question was asked and answered by NIST. wtc7 was in free-fall for 4.6 seconds out of 5.6 seconds total. (5.6 seconds verified @ ) In the last 12 seconds the buildings acceleration slowed down significantly. nist "Assumed the accelerate was consistent the whole fall" and took an average of the whole collapse. They took the slower final time and added it to the free-fall "assuming" they were the same rate.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth you see it didnt fall all the way into its own footprint at absolute free fall you sir have just answered your own question lol
daveygravey123456 5 months ago
@daveygravey123456
You have the personality of a middle school kid. What an indepth reply there - you completely missed the context of the building falling at freefall for 75% of the collapse. Especially the first 80% which would have met the most resistance. You don't care about being accurate, because all you want to do is reinforce pre-held belief prior to doing research.
Fire damage is an organic process and DOES not create symmetrical collapses that start at freefall. Period.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth LOL
flanksteak2 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth you keep saying different things things all the time so thats ironic to yourself that you mention an 8 year old, as I first stated you fabricate evidence to suit your theory
daveygravey123456 5 months ago
WTC7 in Freefall--No Longer Controversial. Scientifically verifiable and proven. watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ
WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall - The manipulations of how they covered up and then had to admit free-fall and say it supports their model.
(Part 1) watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng
(2) watch?v=XtKLtUiww80
(3) watch?v=Vz43hcKYBm4
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
thumps up if ur a highskool geek n after watching these video u went to study couse u wanna feel all smart like this guy
dragonraiderzombie 6 months ago
golly gee. let's see. andy. uh, how does concrete get pulverized in mid air? i dunno wilbur. okay, okay, uh, let's see...andy, can fire melt steel...ya know, like, whatcha call it? molten, that's right...molten steel. like flowin' lava in Hawaii. i dunno Wilbur. go google it, or sumthin. ya know Andy, i heard they found some kinda fancy high tech explosive that wuz still live...i think thay call it nanothermite. they could still explode it years later...and thay did. whattya think a that?
jerjr49 6 months ago
The evidence of US Government Complicity in 9/11 is publicly available and verifiable. Here are the 4 Best videos on the subject. They together will prove without a doubt US government complicity.
1) Zero - Nobel Prize Winner's Doc (Start here) @ watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
2) 911 Connect the Dots: Great 18 min video @ watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE
3) 911 Press for Truth (By 911 Victim families) @ watch?v=PSVgnsIJH4Y
4) Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth - All Science and Physics @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
Bi0hazardOpeth 6 months ago
DID YOU KNOW? Out of the 6 supposed hijackers, who weren’t found alive in other countries. 4 of them were given their Visas by top US Gov Officials. There is an interview with Michael Springman - 'Chief of Visa Selection at US General Consulate in Jeddah 87-89' who gave the "terrorists" their visas. He admits how they did not meet standard protocol, but the US gov pushed them through anyways to get the terrorists in to the US for air training. His Interview @ watch?v=F9-IISF4ckg (at 4:30)
Bi0hazardOpeth 6 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth
LOL
Rizla got banned again. Are they doing IP bans now? LOL
flanksteak2 6 months ago
@flanksteak2
Notice, how you resorted to some lame attempt at character assassination rather than addressing the question RIGHT BELOW... You can still see it, but obviously you preferred to avoid it and bring up some person who I don't even know. Do all debunkers have the delusion that everyone showing them high school level physics is the same person? Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean there is only 1 person who does. All you do is avoided addressing Q's with juvenile debate.
Bi0hazardOpeth 6 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth High School level physics and Elementary school math tells us with minimal work that the building cannot even come remotely close to arresting collapse yet you still "believe" it can but cannot tell us why.
You Brits are overtly fucktarded conspiracy-believing tards.
You're not really good for anything Rizla "wtc collapse simulator" 2012. LOL
flanksteak2 6 months ago
@flanksteak2 Thats not what he was trying to say at all. Quit trying to over exaggerate his claims and discredit him as being some conspiracy nut and answer his questions.
Ignitey24 5 months ago
@Ignitey24 What makes you think that she's a he?
flanksteak2 5 months ago
Comment removed
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
That has always been Flanksteak's approach. He ignores the specific context of the questions you ask him and brings up other things instead. It doesn't matter if you point out over 5 times that what he is answering - 'isn't the question' and restate the question. He will still find diversions, I don't know if he does it consciousness, or he is just so used to lying to himself and always having to be right - that he is unable to directly address specifics. Instead he uses ad hominem attacks.
Bi0hazardOpeth 5 months ago
@Bi0hazardOpeth well said. cherio. finally some one who talks sense.
Ignitey24 5 months ago
The 911 Commission NOW reveals that the official version of 911 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The sources and details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.
Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.
Bi0hazardOpeth 6 months ago
220+ US Intelligence Agents and Counter-Terrorism Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11: "a Cover-up," "a Joke" "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions,"
Gov SOURCES: PatriotsQuestion911.(com)
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
*****
84% of New Yorker's Say there is a Cover Up and Reject the Official 9/11 Story -
In 2006 the NY Times and CBS ran an extensive poll with these results @ tiny(DOT)cc/ny911poll
Bi0hazardOpeth 6 months ago
the windsor tower was not hit by a full speed boeing 767 so that is an unreliable source.
Ded0099 6 months ago
ded
WTC 7 was never hit by a plane. Explain the mechanism in which the lower floors of WTC 7 were removed in fractions of a second prior to the upper floors hitting resistance? Especially when all of the potential energy of the building was already turned into kinetic energy to achieve the free fall acceleration admitted by NIST.Thus, leaving no energy from the falling building to cause any damage to the building below,which again did not provide any resistance as the building fell at free-fall
Bi0hazardOpeth 6 months ago
You are an amazing video creator, subbed and fav'd.
EvilIntentions01 6 months ago
i agree bush lied and people died!!! i may not be a scientist!! but i always wondered why the towers collapsed!!!!i always knew something didn't add up!!! thank you for the info!! oh by the way miracles do happen!!!!.:)
yankeechick9 6 months ago
Department of Chemistry, Jeffrey Farrer of Brigham Young University's Department of Physics and Astronomy, Steven E. Jones, and others state that thermite and nanothermite composites in the dust and debris were found following the collapse of the three buildings, which they conclude to be proof that explosives brought down the buildings.
adilumer 6 months ago
Demolition theory proponents, such as Brigham Young University physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argue that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures.
adilumer 6 months ago
You just can't fix stupid. Keep sleeping people. American Idol is on what ...Sunday's now?
Follow the money, do your research and it is very clear 911 was an inside job.
joecanukk 6 months ago
Lots of good information, unfortunately the delivery is not very good, especially towards the end of this video. The guy is almost slurring his words, mumbling quickly, like he just wants to get this over with.
rfwelsh 6 months ago
Wrong! 02:06 The 9/11 Commission Report did not try to hide anything. It focused on the terrorist events of 9/11, not the buildings that collapsed. This NIST report focused on why the buildings of the WTC collapsed.
jrvenice1999 6 months ago
When you heat any kind of metal u weakin it...and with 100s of tons on top do the math.you dont need to melt the steel beams to have to fail just need to heat them up
damanbrad2004 7 months ago
who ever believes 911 is a conspiracy is retarded
arc175 7 months ago
WHAT A USA FREEDOM.... investigar11s. org
ThePoltergueist 7 months ago
i was playing black ops earlier today and killed someone with a random tomahawk. it was so awesome.
thatblakedude92 7 months ago
i was buisy and just caught a glimpse of this video and i saw the temp. color scale and saw an striaght up lie. then again why am i suprised all conspiracy theorist now a days are making up lies because there stupid "truth" movement has lost thanks to basic science and commen sense.
M11ty 7 months ago
Another idiot Twooftard vid. Good God, don't you Twoofers have better things to do with your time besides smoke crack and come up with bullshit vids.
kangtimelord 7 months ago
@kangtimelord
Well i guess if we're so harmless then you wouldn't take the tme to make up a childish name and comment on videos that "bullshit." Everyones entitled to their opinion butno one is enttled to insult or ridicule.
Mrbobthejoe1 7 months ago
@Twooftard Mrbobthejerk, "Everyones entitled to their opinion butno one is enttled to insult or ridicule."
Incorrect, prickhead. No one is entitled to slander innocent people which you fucktards do without evidence or sensitivity. You loons spew complete bullshit. Why? So you can accuse NIST, FDNY, Silverstein, jetliner passengers and crew, NYPD, FBI, and others of mass-murder complicity? You can go to fucking hell. So can shithead WarCreep911. His claim as a "scientist" is a laughingstock.
kangtimelord 7 months ago
@kangtimelord
"Without evidence or sensitivity."
This is you ignoring tons of independant research proving the official story to be ridiculous.
"No one is entitled to slander innocent people"
No one is innocent. this video clearly shows things wrong with the NIST report and the 911 commision.
I have never insulted, slandered, or ridiculed any supporter of the official story, yet when i enter a conversation all they do is just that.
Mrbobthejoe1 7 months ago