RT is the new mainstream. The American ones don't even stand a chance. At least they give these people a chance instead of brushing them off with cliche, misnomers.
The Harrit paper that allegedly shows active thermite to be in the red part of the chips fails to take into consideration the lack of aluminum in the red chips as shown in the figure 15 c XEDS map of the red/grey chip shown in figures 12 and 13. No Aluminum, no aluminothermitic reaction. Sorry Niels, you been owned by your own paper.
The allies of the A&E.No university,technical journals,research centers,associations engineering, architects and pilots supports the conspiracy.The same in Asia,Oceania,Europe and the Americas.The list below is today.I have the link of all.Always find more on the internet.There evidence against the towers and WTC7.Only 0.001% of U.S. engineers are in A&E.Without the support of those listed below,the A&E will never convince the U.S. Congress to reopen anything.The conspiracy was born defeated.
Show your resistance to the New Anti Social Design by keeping your original channel design and not the "New UnWanted Design" . . . just an idea . . . Pass it on ten times . . . just an Idea.
The analysis of the explosives expert Jowenko was used by conspiracy theorists to show that WTC 7 was deliberately demolished. In the same interview, he explains that the controlled demolition of the twin towers is impossible. Dynamite would have exploded right away, and it would have taken a year to put everything in place. in English.
w w w . dailymotion . com/video/x2l5k9_effondrement-des-tours-jumelles_news
Now the TV lied to putin it. Russian dictator is also the villain. Help spread the lie that biochemistry, pretends to be a forensic expert. In my country it is the explosive "dirty sand" in steel. It is used and industrial paints. He found the rest of the painting of the towers. I am not alone, all the universities and engineering schools in the U.S., Brazil, Western Europe, Australia and Asia. See what was found in France against A & E TV and lie Putin.
They're in charge of the Whole Western Civilization!, All Religions, All Food Fabrications, All theGoverments, The Media(Associations), And all Other Financial, Mass Murdering Institutions
They have caused Disorder, Death and have Financed every War From Both sides since the 1600's and are the ones behind the horrible day of 9/11!
We must not let ourselves be treated like Taxpaying Deathslaves of the Liberal Bankingsystem!
You should see the facts noob:3 days before 911 there has been a huge power failure ,the dogs and security guards and cameras were completely off.So somebody maybe the society Controlled Demolition could easily do what they wanted during these 3 days in the elevators cages..And i had that the chief of security of WTC was mr marvin Bush , george w young brother.Any other question about that noob?
Thousands of tons of TNT? That would have killed everybody nearby instantly. The fuck is this guy on? LOL @ conspiracy theorists thinking this guy is credible. Thousands of tons of TNT took the building down...this is your typical "Truth Scholar" (TM)
@eatwoodman He is credible. You don't know much. Those buildings were pre wired by design in case of emergency. A lot of people were told to stay home that day. And the area was evacuated. Those buildings were also a cancer liability for Silverstein.
Excuse me, but hundreds of tons of TNT would have blown any of the surrounding buildings and the very camera that's recording this video. Do you have any idea how power hundreds of tons of TNT is?
@eatwoodman I never said hundreds of tons of TNT. And besides, you aren't making any valid point. There are things called shape shifted charges to point in certain directions. And I bet you didn't even know some skyscrapers are pre wired for demolition in case of emergency.
Your hero in the video claimed hundreds of tons of explosives would NEEDED to be used. It is a valid point, whether you agree or not. Sky scrapper are pre-wired with explosives. I applaud you, sir. You have a sense of humor.
@eatwoodman I don't know how many tons would be required. But if you saying hundreds of tons would be required, doesn't that make your pancake theory just plain silly? I have to go watch an MIT professor dispute the pancake theory now. Bye.
The conspiracy "scientist" in THIS VERY VIDEO says hundreds of tons of conventional explosives would have been used. Are you handicapped? The pancake theory isn't even the official NIST theory, LOL. Jesus, conspiracy theorists are the most confused, ignorant people I've seen.
@eatwoodman No, NIST changed it's theory 2 times before they got it wrong again. Those complicit idiots didn't even consider the use of explosives, while NFPA regulations require them to do so.
& while some "conspiracy theorists" (I would especially count people who believe the official story among those) may be confused and ignorant, the most ignorant of all are the people who buy into the official bullshit story, which almost has no hard proof to back it up. Nothing but appeals to authority
NIST didn't change it's theory. They've only released one final report on WTC 1 and 2 and one for WTC 7. And no, "admitting free fall" is not changing their theory. This is beyond your grasp of science and understanding of what a theory is, so go back to school kid.
@eatwoodman U obviously don't know shit about how things went down, with Zelikow controlling the whole sham of an investigation, leaving out the most probable hypothesis of CD. Admitting freefall for WTC7 renders their whole theory worthless, so they just left out any explanation for it. But hey, maybe I missed it, so if u could point out the pages in which this is explained that would be nice.
& never mind they used zero physical evidence for the 1st instance of a total collapse due to fire.
@eatwoodman There u go calling the collapse of WTC7 silent. It wasn't silent, whoever said it was silent?
U assume CD in general requires loud sounding explosives, and usually they do. And it appears that loud explosions were heard by some who have come out and testified to that.
Other than that, ur soundargument won't even begin to explain the first 2.25 secs of freefall as well as the sudden complete loss of every remaining loadbearing steel column. U seem to forget about this, so many do.
CD usually require loud explosives? LOL. Show me a single CD that is silent. Also, the entire building does not collapse at freefall. The penthouse portion sinks several seconds before, meaning that only part of the building falls at that speed. Not only this, but only during part of the collapse does it fall at that acceleration. It begins to slow down near the end.
@eatwoodman OK then, show me how NIST has proved that a 47-story steelframed building can collapse the way it did on 9/11?
What's that? U don't have the data or info on that? Why? Is it because NIST hasn't released that info to the public?
That's odd. One would kinda expect that if u claim something to be the first time in history, u would make all of the data available to the public so that qualified members of it can verify ur findings, right? I mean, it's a pretty big deal, so......
There is no such thing as "proof" in science. There is evidence, and there are theories. Your understanding of science is juvenile and as a result, you can't grasp what a true scientific theory is. I'll give you a hint: It's not CD.
Show me the "evidence" that is consistent with the hypothesis of fire-induced collapses, in all three cases here.
While u're at it, could u explain again what the scientific method is, how it works, the methodology etc. u know, I'm sure u know what I mean. Thanx in advance.
I always have time to listen to people who are well prepared & who are serious about an issue like this. So.....let's see how well prepared & serious you are. ;)
@eatwoodman And genius, one more thing: Could u explain how the existence of a 2.25 sec. period of freefall would be consistent with a fire-induced collapse? Let's see, I'm betting my life's savings that u'll dodge this question. LOL.
And kinda strange don't u think, that NIST will not release its data on the collapsesequence & scientific findings of WTC7, of which Shyam Sunder (know who that is, I wonder?) is so comfortable with?
Can you explain it using explosives? Has there ever even been a model using CD? Of course not. The "scholars" twoofers can't even come up with a physics model. LOL.
U're obviously too fucking dumb or ignorant to realize the implications of freefall.
"Twoofers" don't even have to come up with a model, u don't realize that, do u? If u're gonna claim a first time in history, don't u think one should at least share the data one has used in all the calculationss? Don't u think one should've used physical evidence to support ur hypothesis?
@eatwoodman Degree in economics, like that would matter.
Look buddy, it's obvious u don't have any answers to the issues I brling up. U've had plenty of chances to make ur case, instead u've resorted to the same avoiding tactics every time.
But it is highschool physics that's at stake here. Seems the official story has some problems when it comes to Newtonian physics. Wouldn't u think so? But hey, u're not even aware of these problems, are u?
For the WTC7 to fall at free fall, a negligible amount of structure would have to be present. This does not contradict any physics. If it fell faster than free fall, it would have. Contradicting physics is saying CD knocked the building down when it collapsed to silently. Yeah, silent bombs don't exist.
@eatwoodman OK, so all you & NIST have got to do now is prove that "a negligible amount of structure would have to be present", across the entire floorarea of the first 8 floors. Notice the word "negligible" here.
What is there to prove? Watch the WTC7 video. Obviously a negligible amount of structural strength was present. That's evidence right there. Unless you're a looney conspiracy theorists. People who don't wear tin foil hats tend to not believe everything Alex Jones says.
"Obviously" a negligible amount of structural strength was present.
Yes this was very obvious indeed! Hurrah for ur powers of observation.
Now all u need to do is PROVE how a barely damaged steel skyscraper that had some fires on a few floors managed to lose virtually all of it's structural strength, not to mention losing it from one moment to the next.
There is no such thing as "proof" in science. That term does not exist. You fail at grammar, science and terminology. Go back to school, kid. Come back to me when you take a high school level science class at least.
It's okay, you obviously haven't even taken a college level science class. You probably haven't even graduated high school yet, it's okay bro. I love how so many conspiracy theorists are in high school and think they know more than professionals who have studied for many years.
@eatwoodman I'm just saying you should be awarded a medal for your "remarkable" opinions, especially that one from your second to last post. Lemme show this again folks:
"The fact that a building fell due to fire is "proof" it is possible for a building to fall due to fire"
Bravo! Well done kid. U get an A+ for outright stupidity.
Just like those engineers at NIST, who tried to cover it all up in 1000's of pages of boring data & statistics, endless graphs & illustrations. TNRAT u know.
@eatwoodman "professionals who have studied for many years." - ya, like the guy in this video! Shanksville PA - no fucking plane - NIST confirms WTC7 freefall collapse (no resistance) for 8 stories,but fail or refused to explain how - it's even stated in this video (along with being true) that it is normal procedure to check for explosives. NIST did not. Being in highschool doesn't make someone an idiot, believing something blindly does. peace.
The fact that a building fell due to fire is "proof" (the proper term here is evidence, but whatever) that it is possible for a building to fall due to fire. Like I said, only a nutjob would argue this.
"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00, that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy."
"WTC Building 7 appears to have suffered significant damage at some point after the WTC Towers had collapsed, according to firefighters at the scene. Firefighter Butch Brandies tells other firefighters that nobody is to go into Building 7 because of creaking and noises coming out of there. [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a bulge in the southwest corner of the building between floors 10 and 13. [Firehouse Magazine, 4/02]
Deputy Chief Nick Visconti also later recalls recounts, “A big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side.” Captain Chris Boyle recalls, “On the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors.” [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
Your precious "thermite dust samples" were finally tested by a non-911 twoofer scientist.
"There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite."
Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants, February 28, 2012
@ctcole77 You do know that the other buildings were damaged more than building 7 was right? You do know that even NIST agreed and confirmed that bldg 7 fell at free fall (no resistance) for at least 8 stories, right? Of course you do. And the one thing that I always notice about people who call truthers twoofers, it they completely dismiss the info in the video they're commenting on! It hurts and is difficult to admit to one's self they've been decieved. But necessary. peace.
@ctcole77 3 more dumb irrelevant questions, great job.
About the second question, let's get into that a bit more.
How the hell could firefighters predict something that has never ever happened before in the history of burning steel skyscrapers? Why would firefighters expect a total and complete collapse, let alone one this symmetrical and at near freefall acc., kinda like some kind of CD?
About ur 3rd question: any piece of paper could've survived, but of all things, a hijacker's passport?
WTC 1 & 2 didn't "explode" gullible moron. When it collapsed debris was ejected outwards. No explosions. Ejections. The sheer height of the building made it possible for the material to descend downwards and outwards slightly so that concrete and steel impacted adjacent buildings. Why don't you read some of the engineering reports?
WTC7? You seem to forget about the penthouse collapsing first?
@ctcole77 Come on dude, u're not responding to the arguments here. I'll ask u again: What did u not understand about "total & complete collapse"?
NIST didn't explain 1 damn thing about the collapses itself, they were "unable to provide a full explanation for the collapses". Not so strange of course, since it had never happened before.
What about the penthouse collapse? Care to explain how that could've happened? Oh wait, u can't, because the data is off-limits to every member of the audience
"911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!" Yes, just keep typing that in all caps. Just to let people know how desperate you are to protect your fragile lie you call a life.
"And I bet you didn't even know some skyscrapers are pre wired for demolition in case of emergency."
This is probably the dumbest 911 twoofer comment I have EVER heard.
LMAO! I've been an engineer working in construction for 15 years and I have NEVER seen or heard of pre-wiring buildings with explosives. Would you pre-wire your house with explosives? What's next sherlock moron, "still alive hijackers"?
@ctcole77 If u were really an engineer who actually gave a shit about 9/11 u would already be on the list of petition signers of AE911Truth.
U can stop the twoofer insults, and take a long hard look at those NIST reports. If u're really an engineer, u shouldn't have any problems spotting all the omissions, distortions and ridiculous assumptions that are being made in those reports.
But since I know u a bit longer than today, I kinda know what to expect from u.
I am a REAL engineer and I belong to a REAL professional engineering organization who laughs at your magical theories.
The American Society of Civil Engineers is composed of 200,000 professional engineers compared to your 1600 at A&EFor911Lies.
There are 1.7 million engnineers in America. There are 1600 crackpots pots with no relevant experience to examine high rise steel building collapses at A&EFor911Lies.
@ctcole77 U're not a real engineer, because if u are & if u had really bothered to actually LOOK at all the available evidence, u would've been on that petitionlist for a while.
1600 crackpots ey? Rrrright, now THAT is a real conspiracy don't u think? Why don't u back that up if u will?
Tell me, what arguments has the ASCE produced to debunk AE911Truth? Maybe I missed that as well, who knows.
For one, u have not produced jackshit in this comment of urs to debunk one single goddamn thing.
What I'm wondering about though, are the two closeups od Niels' eyes (at 08:48 and at 09:06). Is he being mocked here? I must say Laura asks exactly the right questions, these are the kind of questions that should be asked when talking about the demise of the 3 towers.
The part where he says "Why should this building come down, which I've never heard about before, in itself I think, this is, should raise some eyebrows, actually, WHY haven't I heard about building 7 before?" is legendary :)
Verily Verily - I say unto you - stand and fight for Truth to be known and be not afraid of death - for all die. God is with those who are on the side of Truth and not those who seek to conceal the truth.
''And it took me weeks - actually to digest this and i think this is common to most persons to Realize what you have seen but once you have realized this THERE IS NO WAY BACK. - So you can either SPEAK OUT or live in shame.'' Prof Niels Harrit
''All evildoers,will be throw into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!'' Jesus - peace be upon him
Also when she asks "how much of this material would have been there". He answers "hundreds of tons". Then she needed to ask 1 question - how much clay would have been needed to set the thermite powder? He would have had to answer many many thousands of tons. Then she should ask how many decades it would take a crew of 1000 ninjas to prepare the towers using this method.
Her question at 2:20, could those elements been found there naturally? Just ask, are aluminum and ferric oxide found in normal everyday dust? Yes or No question, not a 10 minute bizarre rambling.
@nickrock23 Well this wasn't normal every day dust, like the dust you wipe off your bookcase every spring. This is dust that came from two 500,000,000 pound steel structures that was hit by two fully loaded 400,000+ pound Boeing 767's.. The amount of energy released in the initial impacts and resulting collapses is just... Un-fucking-imaginable! Given that the majority of the materials that make up a Boeing Commercial jet are aluminum, I don't think it was unusual to find aluminum in the dust.
My hat's off the Niels Harrit, a brave soul who sticks to his facts, someone who dares to ask the most obvious of questions when confromted
His bodyenglish is funny to watch, so are his facial expressions.
And he's dead on of course when he speaks the words "Well, it quacks like a duck, it waggles like a duck, it looks like a duck....maybe it's duck, this is all we can say"
NO ALL BUILDING BLOCKS OF THERMITE WERE FOUND HOWEVER THE ELEMENTS FOUND HAD ALTERNATIVE SOURCES EXISTING IN THE BUILDING SUCH AS PAINT AND CONCRETE. THE 2 MAJOR BI PRODUCTS OF THERMITE REACTIONS WERE NOT DETECTED. END OF STORY
this man is a scientific hero to me (the rest of the famous and especially American Nobel price winners are just .... i do not know what kind of word i should use......they are not a truthful scientists) the only one who asked the questions when something strange had happened and used his knowledge to find the reason...... peace price for him!!!!
@2Trueforyouu Placing Bin Laden on " their No.1 terrorist list to be caught!!! " and listing him as officially wanted for the crime itself are two completely different things, you absolute donut.
@jonnyboymellor No, this guy said exactly, "The F.B.I didn't evem put him on their wanted list". The F.B.I put his name on the National List for wanted terrorists and acts. Which is basically crime.
@2Trueforyouu lol ur dumb as hell, Osama was on the most wanted list since 1992 for other things, but never for "orchestration of WTC destruction". look it up smart ass. Also he is write there was no criminal investigation and there was no indictment to Iran or Pakistan from the U.N to make them give up Osama's location which they new all along if you watch the news. Do some research my friend.
"you can either speak out or you can live in shame" So true. The world needs more ethically motivated people like Niels Harrit. Fortunately, more and more experts are coming out - go to the ae911truth (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth) website to see a *very* touching preview of the new documentary "9/11 Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out".
Former professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University, Dr. Judy Wood discussed how the destruction of buildings in NYC on 9-11 was the result of directed energy technology
DiceyJJ Harrit, Jones, Chandler, and the other scholars at AE911 are brave men, we need to find WHO produced and sprayed this nano-thermite in WTC 1, 2, and 7, and how they "got past" security, or did "security" consent to it?
@PAGEN3 Those that see the resultant iron microspheres from the of heating iron gray chips with a 6000F torch and call them the results of a thermitic reaction. They be the fools.
Funkadelic2, There still is nothing in harrits paper that shows thermite. How you guys come up with the thermite theory based on the spheroid found after the 6000F ignition test of the gray steel chip, I'll never know. Why can't you show me why it isn't paint?
Could the most audacious terrorist attack in history be a sophisticated masterpiece of demolition? Yes, absolutely! The evidence is so huge and so clear that as Dr. Harrit says the knowledgeable people either must ask for a new and honest-to-Goodness investigation or live in shame.
after watching tons of videos on the "plane crash" in the Pentagon, the "wreckage of Flight 93" the nose of the plane going through the building intact, and thousands more, leaves me only one conclusion. There is no worse deaf as those who not want to hear so blind as those who will not see ...
then, the attack was against anyone but against the American people and their credibility.
@Funkadelic2 The sounds levels might be "anomalous", in a comparison to a standard controlled demolition where you have to blow things.
I will tell you what they are. They are absurd. This is physically impossible. One charge required to cut the core columns in this building would be hard enough to accept. Let alone 47 more and that does not begin to address some 60 columns per side on the tower.
If this is what you claim believe me everyone shooting this would have IRON clad proof
@roquefortfiles You DO hear what could easily be interpreted as explosive events on several recordings. At 1 : 57 in this clip
"/watch?v=qhyu-fZ2nRA"
you can hear it quite clearly. 3 seconds later the buidling has just started to come down (compare with other sequences the position of the tilting top section), so obviously that BOOM occured before, or just as the collapse began. At 8 : 32 NJ Burkett bursts out: "A huge explosion" - which you DO hear.
The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. (END)
Hardly a hidden mystery or "Smoking Gun!!". MULTIPLE companies were dealing with this place
@roquefortfiles Can't be more of a smoking gun, no matter the fires, which were (according to NIST on floors 7,8,9, 11, 12 and 13. They were unevenly distributed throughout the floors, and about the alleged scoop-out NIST finally said:
"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".
Forget about the scoop-out claim, the NIST report is about fire.
@Funkadelic2 Ok I'll forget about it. I wasn't there. But Chief Dan Nigro was. All day in fact. And had this to say about it
"Conspiracy theories abound and i believe they are all without merit"
Lets get a little Logical here. Some group of people are going to rig up a bunch of explosives. On beams hidden behind electrical conduit and drywall. To implode a building with some file cabinets and computers?
@roquefortfiles Dan Nigro says "conspriacy theories...are without merit"..? Does that mean the official account is without merit..?
William Rodriquez was there too, in WTC 1 when it was hit, and he felt explosions from below. Does his testimony mean less than Nigros, and in that case why?
Brian Clarke heard "all those boom-boom explosions", when he got out of the South Tower when it started to come down. Does that mean he did no hear "boom-boom explosions"..?
@Funkadelic2 I saw both the FDNY chief and the Metallurgist who examined the steel in B7 on a fairly recent documentary. He said there was NO sign of thermite on any of the steel and that it failed from a prolonged exposure to fire. Or as he put it.. " A rapid erosion event not explosive or thermitic in nature".. Basically the steel underwent rapid rusting for all intents and purposes. The connections became so brittle that it failed and precipitated across the structure.
@roquefortfiles And that metalurgist also examined and commented on the steel that was documented in the FEMA Appendix C, showing sulfidation and intergranular melting..?
@Funkadelic2 No.. no.. no no..!!! I have had exactly this experience. I have stood with a pro news camera shooting a CD a block away. I know what a shaped charge sounds like in person and in an editing suite.. (more like FEELS like!!). There is no way on God's green earth ANY of these are shaped charges going off. Not even close. Not remotely so. Yes these people blurt out "Huge Explosion" the top of the building is coming apart. VERY VERY different to what is happening AUDIO wise.
@roquefortfiles You are comparing a STANDARD controlled demolition to something that you don't even know what it was. Who has ever claimed those blasts occuring before and at onset was chaped charges..??
@Funkadelic2 You can "Standard Controlled Demolition" this all you like!!! It does not change the fact the a huge steel beam needs to be cut with a high explosive charge (RDX or similar). These are the largest steel beams and require considerable explosives to cut. ONE shaped charge this size will produce a VERY large report. (LET ALONE 47!!!!!) This is not a subtle event in the slightest. Its not something going to be masked or "Hidden" behind falling debris.. uh uh!!.
@roquefortfiles Incendiaries could have been used to pre-weaken the structure, then, something explosive obviously came into action (you could hear the booms yourself), and what then happend during the collapse could not have been that easy to distinguish above the roar of the collapse.
Certainly not more absurd than the idea of THREE self-destructing buildings, totally crushing themselves almost at the acceleration of gravity, due only to gravity.
@Funkadelic2 Why because a jet hitting it at full power can't accomplish that task on its own?
Sound travels at 1100 ft/sec. I mapped out about half a dozen camera positions just for the hell of it one day. ABC NEWS shoots from about 800 feet from the tower. Another one in front of Trinity Church is about 1200 feet away (give or take). these cameras record the ambient street sounds PERFECTLY... We know the mics are working. Not one sound comes from the tower (charges).
@roquefortfiles No one has ever claimed these were standard controlled demolitions, so why resorting to comparing with such ones? There are booms heard, and lots of testimonies of explosions. It happened.
@roquefortfiles And if you are not completely set on blindfolds, you should be capable of seeing very distinctive white flashes occurring both circled and lots of other ones in this clip:
/watch?v=MPSW_eHnsfM
and clearly visible through the dust clouds in this clip:
/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc
Not in itself PROOF of controlled demoliton, but on top of all the other things indicting something must have been present moving mass out of the way, it sure should be considered.
@Funkadelic2 The building fails at the impact floor. Not 10 stories below or above that.
And charges necessary to implode this building would blow the aluminum cladding off the tower!! WITH EASE!! It would also easily shatter windows in the vicinity.
And the "Squibs" everybody loves to push as being evidence of a CD. A charge capable of severing those columns would blow out with FAR more force than that
@roquefortfiles You keep on talking about charges. We do not see standard controlled demolitions, and therefore we do not know how they were performed. And you keep ignoring all of the evidence that actually do speak very clearly of the presence of additional energy to blow the concrete to dust and scattering huge steel columns hundreds of feet outside of the footprint of the buildings and also disinterating about half of the victims beyond identification even by DNA.
@Funkadelic2 It makes no difference to say this is not a "Standard CD". We are talking about explosives here. Up down, sideways, back to front.. It doesn't matter how it was (alleged) to be done That is irrelevant!!. And you don't seem to understand that insisting this building is "aided" by explosives is in NO WAY seen in the manner it falls. Explosives REMOVE resistance. There is no reason for material to be hurled 3 blocks if explosives are going off. That is NOT what we see!!
@roquefortfiles The only thing you base your dismissal on is comparison to standard controlled demolitions. Yes, I've seen and heard them too. The WTC "collapses" certainly were NOT standardad controlled demolitions.
You have not even begun to explain the absent deceleration of the roofline of the falling top section of WTC 1 on alleged impact with the lower part of the building. How can it both disintegrate, and still crush the lower part of the building at freefall acceleration?
@Funkadelic2 Again... "Standard" non Standard CD.. Is Irrelevant. The most salient aspect is explosives. That is a constant that does not change across any "Situation". or how ever you want to "Allege" it was done.
The WTC does not fall REMOTELY like a CD. It is utter total chaos. There is nothing controlled about it.
The analogy is like sitting on a stool and charges blow out the legs. You fall straight down. you don't fall across the room.
@roquefortfiles WTC 7, which did collapse from the lower floors, did come down EXACTLY like a controlled demolition, and we even have CD people saying "It is controlled demolition, without a doubt. A team of experts did this". WTC 1 and 2 came down top-down, otherwise with several features of controlled demolition. No escaping that fact just by saying it did not sound like standard controlled demolitions. And saying we hear nothing is not true at all.
@roquefortfiles You mean the thermetic residue wasn't found, just becuas it was verified by independent scientists? And iron micro-spheres found in abundance by boht RJ Lee and US GS..?
Nigro, yes I've heard. I've heard other witnesses saying the exact opposite, so don't be hung-up on him. Who exactly did you speak to? And what kind of trained people was there to look for explosives remains...? No one was sent specifically to look for explosives remains.
@Funkadelic2 Oh.. so the chief is going to hear nothing and some other "TM" guy is going to hear charges going off?. I don't know if you realize (You don't!!) how utterly stupid that remark is. I can tell you from experience that had ANY.. ANY!!! of the buildings in question had charges in them (to the level that is alleged).. Every single camera shooting this within........a mile!! would be absolutely OVERFLOWING!! with audio proof. It would not even REMOTELY be a question.
@roquefortfiles Kevin MCPadden, thank you. He was an emegency worker. And suddenly, becuase his testimony doens't match your ideas, he is "TM"..? Can you be more obvioulsly biased...?
@roquefortfiles Numbers and Math don't lie. (Unless of course the event is not taking place.. Which it wasn't) and the numbers simply don't add up or make sense.
This building is 2500 feet away. Turn up your sound and forward to 3 min mark.
watch?v=rUSyWs9z9N8&feature=related
This video was shot about 1200 feet from the tower. And we hear NOTHING!! No charges
watch?v=gJbGm7GE1tA&feature=fvwrel
I can show you a dozen more no different. 12 cameras audio suddenly not working that day?
@roquefortfiles You are basing most of your conclusions on the SOUND issue. And all of the other parameters, physical featurs which can not be explained by merely gravity-driven collapses..? What is pulverizing the concrete? What is causing all three buildings to come straight down? What is causing them to come down at close to freefall acceleration? What is causing all those white flashes? And the wall of the South Tower to blow out? And cancelling the angular momentum?
@roquefortfiles "Numbers and Math don't lie. (Unless of course the event is not taking place)"
Very true. And it did take place. There were over 2 seconds of actual freefall for Building 7, and there were no deceleration of the top section of WTC 1 on alleged impact with the lower part of the building. There is no escaping these facts, and the implications seem very obvious - something moved the mass out of the way, whether you heard distinct cracking bangs or not. Booms could be heard though.
@Funkadelic2 Moving mass out of the way? Hardly!! Softening and failing columns? Absolutely. If you notice the antennae starts down just prior to the out side of the building. Which suggest the core columns have failed and considering how that tower was hit makes entire sense. The plane hit it square on to the core.
Booms? Absolutely. You can hear the floors landing on each other and firemen in the 6th floor stairway spoke about that. They NEVER mentioned explosives.
@Funkadelic2 Ever stop to consider Kevin Cosgrove? Trapped on the 105th floor. EMT records a conversation with him for almost 10 mins. A recording that picks up Kevin and his office mates just feet away. Speaking normally. Not only do we hear no explosions taking place Kevin does not even react to any and you would figure in his alarmed state he certainly would had something exploded. We hear nothing right up to collapse. Cross ref this with ABC news and a DOZEN more vids NO DIFFERENT.
@roquefortfiles Kevin Cosgrove? Well, if you care to crank up the volume, and listen more carefully to that phone call than what you obviously did look when you called the white flashes circled in the Tinerotiman clip "windows", you might as well hear a noise that could very well be interpreted as sounds of the booms we can hear in the videos, which occured BEFORE the building started to come down.
@roquefortfiles Now, all these aspects you bring up are not useful very much more than to back up opinions (yes, the same goes for me using them), but you don't answer the crucial questions about the physics. What cancelled the angular momentum? What caused the missing jolt of the falling top of WTC 1..? What caused freefall acceleration for WTC 7..?
@Funkadelic2 I have no clue what you are talking about. What is "Angular Momentum"?? I have never heard that and i don't understand what you are saying.
B7 was entirely expected to collapse. Sorry but it was. And the building did not come straight down. It leaned over backwards a little bit. And the Penthouse started down first. EXACTLY as described by NIST and the researched video and eye witness testimony.
Dude. its a structure. Its not going to take endless amounts of torture.
@roquefortfiles Building 7 wasn't expected to come down, but after the two first, VERY unexpected collapses (why did 300 firefigthers die..?) it was feared that it might collapse too, yes. But please, read the NIST report on Building 7 before commenting further. Do you think, btw, that the collapse simulation looks anything like the actual collapse? And is heat conductivity set to ZERO good science..? And compared to how buildings "normally" falls, it came down extremely symmetrically. Period.
@Funkadelic2 Yeah it was expected. Very much so!! The main water main was in operative. It had a nearly 15 story gash taken out of it from falling debris. It was basically evacuated because they did not want any more men killed that day.. (Hence the "pull it term). It had very rich oxygen fed fire burning all day on many floors. Heavily involved. The FDNY had transits on it and determined it was sagging a moving. They said.. "Forget it its going to go"..
@roquefortfiles There is NO proof of that alleged scoop-out, sorry. We know it was heavily damaged by debris from WTC 1 (how did it get hurled away that far btw, considering how massive the debris was...?), but that doesn't in any way make it more plausible for the building NOT to fall over. Rathe the opposite.
Angular momenum, yes. Please read, it is still no more nutty than ordinary PHYSICS.
h t t p://911research.wtc7. net/wtc/analysis/collapses/shattering. html
@Funkadelic2 I thought you knew everything?? . I've seen the pictures dude. Carved out nearly top to bottom on the back side of it. And i don't quite understand how you simply disregard what professionals who were dealing with it have to say about it. Pretty ignorant actually. How did it get hurled that far?? Easy. The WTC is 1200 feet high. Distance over height!! All the more reason AGAINST explosives. A charge going off would permit material to fall DOWN.. not out.
@Funkadelic2 PLEASE!!!... don't send me Chandler videos!! I have had it up to here with all of these white collar "CT" people. He is another one who is what i like to call "Brilliantly" miss informed. Sorry David Explosives don't detonate in a sound vacuum. Yeah this guy is a physics prof. Whoop de do. I can guarantee you he hasn't stood with a news camera shooting a CD a block away and knowing what the experience is like. I have and i know from experience what a load of BS this is.
@roquefortfiles If you don't like Chandler then look up other clips of the same sequences. The point is NOT Chandler, but what can be seen in the videos. You do the wathing, and turn off the audio if you don't like his voice.
You are also tired of hearing about "squibs", but you don't even comment on what can be seen shooting out from the side of the South Tower BEFORE the building starts to come down. It's WELL above airplane impact level.
@roquefortfiles If you look carefully at the west side wall, several stories ABOVE the level of airplane impact (which is on the opposite side) of the South Tower at approximately 1 : 59 into this clip:
/watch?v=DifdrPTerhE
you can see the wall blowing out BEFORE the collapse initiation. What do you suggest caused all that
I too have built cutting boxes much more compact and much more effecient. I have tested on the exact same size beams and the welded and mechanical joints as well. I can cut 40 full size beams cross beams connections in 4 seconds and they fall at the same time. The slower thermite burns as it falls and steel turns to liquid. Watch my videos watch steel turn to water.
Here it is 2011 and the STUPID murderous USA still wants to preach the same BS. So... I see water boarding as the sport which should be entertained to bring out signed confessions. Of course it's hard to get a team together to play water boarding. Nobody wants to be IT!
Im no scientist but im not retarded either. Just open your eyes and think about it a little bit. Only 16 million dollars were invested in total on the events of 9/11 and 50 million was invested on the clinton affair. Thas reall odd? If the government really has nothing to hide then why are there so many questions unanswered and why do they drag their feet so much. it took bush 144 to put together a 9/11 comission to investage usually commision on events like this one are set up within 10 days.y?
@hickey023 16 million dollars is all the investigative agencies requested during their investigation of the 9/11 attacks. If they needed more money for the investigation they would've asked for it and the Government would have easily invested. It's a no brainer. Just because it cost less to investigate doesn't mean it's suspicious or any evidence of wrong doing on the Government's part. Also: The Clinton investigation was funded by the Republican party, NOT the U.S. Government. Check your facts.
Thermite huh? Lets do some quick calculations on that. 47 int columns. 240 Ext Columns. 287 total. We'll half that to 144 for arguments sake. How much thermite do you need to cut ONE column? 50? 80 pounds.. Lets say 100 pounds per column. That's 14,400 pounds of thermite in the building. 7 TONS of the shit.!! (#1 do you believe that? cause i sure as hell don't). #2 do you HONESTLY think this would result in "Scanning electron microscopic" residue left over?
He sounds illiterate, lol he said pure bullshit
CCentral 1 week ago
a hundred tons of thermite? LOL that is an awful lot of WHITE SMOKE.
TheSpiritof1969 1 month ago
RT is the new mainstream. The American ones don't even stand a chance. At least they give these people a chance instead of brushing them off with cliche, misnomers.
NothingAtAllXD 1 month ago
The Harrit paper that allegedly shows active thermite to be in the red part of the chips fails to take into consideration the lack of aluminum in the red chips as shown in the figure 15 c XEDS map of the red/grey chip shown in figures 12 and 13. No Aluminum, no aluminothermitic reaction. Sorry Niels, you been owned by your own paper.
lijebaley01 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The allies of the A&E.No university,technical journals,research centers,associations engineering, architects and pilots supports the conspiracy.The same in Asia,Oceania,Europe and the Americas.The list below is today.I have the link of all.Always find more on the internet.There evidence against the towers and WTC7.Only 0.001% of U.S. engineers are in A&E.Without the support of those listed below,the A&E will never convince the U.S. Congress to reopen anything.The conspiracy was born defeated.
aczjbr 1 month ago
Comment removed
aczjbr 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ImplosionworldCom
American Institute of Steel Construction Inc, Chicago (AISC),
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 123,000 members
American Institute of Architects (AIA), 80,000 members
Association of de Wall & Ceiling Industry, 2.000 members that are primarily wall and ceiling contractors
aczjbr 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
American Council Of Engineering Companies (ACEC), 6,000 independent engineering companies
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), 120,000 members
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), 35,000 members
American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), 40,000 members
American Standards Institute (ANSI), 125 mil empresas e 3.500 mil members.
Department of Design and Construction (DDC) in NY,1,200 members
aczjbr 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
International Metallographic Society,
Institute of Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY),
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 370,000 members
Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, 15,000 members
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations, (NCSEA), 12 mil members,
National Fire Protection Association, (NFPA), 70,000 individuals around the world,
Structural Engineering Institute, (SEI),
Society for Fire Protection Engineering, (SFPE),
aczjbr 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Columbia University, The Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Engineering Department,
Northwestern University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Engineering Department,
University of California, Engineering Department,
National Academy of Engineering,
University of Pennsylvania, Engineering Department,
University of Maryland, Department of Fire Protection Engineering,
aczjbr 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Stanford University, Engineering Department,
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Massachusetts, Engineering Department,
State University of New York at Buffalo, Engineering Department,
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Natural and Applied Sciences,
University of Perdue, School of Civil Engineering,
University of Arizona, Engineering Department,
University of Colorado, Engineering Department,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
aczjbr 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
University of Akron, Department of Mechanical Engineering
Michigan State University, Engineering Department
University of Texas at El Paso, Department of Computer Science & Department of Public Administration
University of Delaware, Department of Sociology & Criminal Justice
Cornell University, Department of Engineering
Washington State University; Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice
University of Louisville, Department of Urban and Public Affairs
aczjbr 1 month ago
She's the one who came up with "Nano Thermite"
Who still listens to this crap?
mrthebillman 2 months ago
who are the fools indeed.
SUNNYRAINWIND 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Show your resistance to the New Anti Social Design by keeping your original channel design and not the "New UnWanted Design" . . . just an idea . . . Pass it on ten times . . . just an Idea.
k9thru12 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
URGENT-FRAUD "A & E TRUTH." - FRANCE
Effondrement des tours jumelles
The analysis of the explosives expert Jowenko was used by conspiracy theorists to show that WTC 7 was deliberately demolished. In the same interview, he explains that the controlled demolition of the twin towers is impossible. Dynamite would have exploded right away, and it would have taken a year to put everything in place. in English.
w w w . dailymotion . com/video/x2l5k9_effondrement-des-tours-jumelles_news
aczjbr 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Now the TV lied to putin it. Russian dictator is also the villain. Help spread the lie that biochemistry, pretends to be a forensic expert. In my country it is the explosive "dirty sand" in steel. It is used and industrial paints. He found the rest of the painting of the towers. I am not alone, all the universities and engineering schools in the U.S., Brazil, Western Europe, Australia and Asia. See what was found in France against A & E TV and lie Putin.
aczjbr 3 months ago
thermite is present in paint also the jet fuel only softend the steel bars but it softened it enough to buckle and then fail
Effectedpenguin 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
★THE ROTHSCHILDS ARE THE PROBLEM!★
They're in charge of the Whole Western Civilization!, All Religions, All Food Fabrications, All theGoverments, The Media(Associations), And all Other Financial, Mass Murdering Institutions
They have caused Disorder, Death and have Financed every War From Both sides since the 1600's and are the ones behind the horrible day of 9/11!
We must not let ourselves be treated like Taxpaying Deathslaves of the Liberal Bankingsystem!
★ ITS TIME FOR REVOLUTION ★
LikaPyramid 3 months ago
@eatwoodman
You should see the facts noob:3 days before 911 there has been a huge power failure ,the dogs and security guards and cameras were completely off.So somebody maybe the society Controlled Demolition could easily do what they wanted during these 3 days in the elevators cages..And i had that the chief of security of WTC was mr marvin Bush , george w young brother.Any other question about that noob?
frankito78 3 months ago
@frankito78
Oh of course man. That's a good fairy tale story. Did your dad or mom tell you that one?
eatwoodman 2 months ago
Thousands of tons of TNT? That would have killed everybody nearby instantly. The fuck is this guy on? LOL @ conspiracy theorists thinking this guy is credible. Thousands of tons of TNT took the building down...this is your typical "Truth Scholar" (TM)
eatwoodman 4 months ago
@eatwoodman He is credible. You don't know much. Those buildings were pre wired by design in case of emergency. A lot of people were told to stay home that day. And the area was evacuated. Those buildings were also a cancer liability for Silverstein.
buzzybeemarketing 4 months ago
@buzzybeemarketing
Excuse me, but hundreds of tons of TNT would have blown any of the surrounding buildings and the very camera that's recording this video. Do you have any idea how power hundreds of tons of TNT is?
eatwoodman 4 months ago
@eatwoodman I never said hundreds of tons of TNT. And besides, you aren't making any valid point. There are things called shape shifted charges to point in certain directions. And I bet you didn't even know some skyscrapers are pre wired for demolition in case of emergency.
buzzybeemarketing 4 months ago
@buzzybeemarketing
Your hero in the video claimed hundreds of tons of explosives would NEEDED to be used. It is a valid point, whether you agree or not. Sky scrapper are pre-wired with explosives. I applaud you, sir. You have a sense of humor.
eatwoodman 4 months ago
@eatwoodman I don't know how many tons would be required. But if you saying hundreds of tons would be required, doesn't that make your pancake theory just plain silly? I have to go watch an MIT professor dispute the pancake theory now. Bye.
buzzybeemarketing 4 months ago
@buzzybeemarketing
The conspiracy "scientist" in THIS VERY VIDEO says hundreds of tons of conventional explosives would have been used. Are you handicapped? The pancake theory isn't even the official NIST theory, LOL. Jesus, conspiracy theorists are the most confused, ignorant people I've seen.
eatwoodman 4 months ago
@eatwoodman No, NIST changed it's theory 2 times before they got it wrong again. Those complicit idiots didn't even consider the use of explosives, while NFPA regulations require them to do so.
& while some "conspiracy theorists" (I would especially count people who believe the official story among those) may be confused and ignorant, the most ignorant of all are the people who buy into the official bullshit story, which almost has no hard proof to back it up. Nothing but appeals to authority
Sandberg1972 3 months ago in playlist Favorite videos
@Sandberg1972
NIST didn't change it's theory. They've only released one final report on WTC 1 and 2 and one for WTC 7. And no, "admitting free fall" is not changing their theory. This is beyond your grasp of science and understanding of what a theory is, so go back to school kid.
eatwoodman 3 months ago
@eatwoodman U obviously don't know shit about how things went down, with Zelikow controlling the whole sham of an investigation, leaving out the most probable hypothesis of CD. Admitting freefall for WTC7 renders their whole theory worthless, so they just left out any explanation for it. But hey, maybe I missed it, so if u could point out the pages in which this is explained that would be nice.
& never mind they used zero physical evidence for the 1st instance of a total collapse due to fire.
Sandberg1972 3 months ago
@Sandberg1972
Yeah CD is the most probable theory. That's why you hear so many explosions during the WTC 7 collapse. It's not completely silent at all!
eatwoodman 3 months ago
@eatwoodman There u go calling the collapse of WTC7 silent. It wasn't silent, whoever said it was silent?
U assume CD in general requires loud sounding explosives, and usually they do. And it appears that loud explosions were heard by some who have come out and testified to that.
Other than that, ur soundargument won't even begin to explain the first 2.25 secs of freefall as well as the sudden complete loss of every remaining loadbearing steel column. U seem to forget about this, so many do.
Sandberg1972 3 months ago
@Sandberg1972
CD usually require loud explosives? LOL. Show me a single CD that is silent. Also, the entire building does not collapse at freefall. The penthouse portion sinks several seconds before, meaning that only part of the building falls at that speed. Not only this, but only during part of the collapse does it fall at that acceleration. It begins to slow down near the end.
eatwoodman 3 months ago
@eatwoodman OK then, show me how NIST has proved that a 47-story steelframed building can collapse the way it did on 9/11?
What's that? U don't have the data or info on that? Why? Is it because NIST hasn't released that info to the public?
That's odd. One would kinda expect that if u claim something to be the first time in history, u would make all of the data available to the public so that qualified members of it can verify ur findings, right? I mean, it's a pretty big deal, so......
Sandberg1972 2 months ago
@Sandberg1972
There is no such thing as "proof" in science. There is evidence, and there are theories. Your understanding of science is juvenile and as a result, you can't grasp what a true scientific theory is. I'll give you a hint: It's not CD.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
@eatwoodman OK dude, right on then.
Show me the "evidence" that is consistent with the hypothesis of fire-induced collapses, in all three cases here.
While u're at it, could u explain again what the scientific method is, how it works, the methodology etc. u know, I'm sure u know what I mean. Thanx in advance.
I always have time to listen to people who are well prepared & who are serious about an issue like this. So.....let's see how well prepared & serious you are. ;)
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@eatwoodman And genius, one more thing: Could u explain how the existence of a 2.25 sec. period of freefall would be consistent with a fire-induced collapse? Let's see, I'm betting my life's savings that u'll dodge this question. LOL.
And kinda strange don't u think, that NIST will not release its data on the collapsesequence & scientific findings of WTC7, of which Shyam Sunder (know who that is, I wonder?) is so comfortable with?
What's that, no comment from u again?
Go away u loser...
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@Sandberg1972
Can you explain it using explosives? Has there ever even been a model using CD? Of course not. The "scholars" twoofers can't even come up with a physics model. LOL.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
@eatwoodman Dodging the freefall, as expected.
U're obviously too fucking dumb or ignorant to realize the implications of freefall.
"Twoofers" don't even have to come up with a model, u don't realize that, do u? If u're gonna claim a first time in history, don't u think one should at least share the data one has used in all the calculationss? Don't u think one should've used physical evidence to support ur hypothesis?
U're just completely in the dark, aren't u?
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@Sandberg1972
What's your highest level of education, high school? LOL. I love it when kids talk like they're more intelligent than scholars.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
@eatwoodman Degree in economics, like that would matter.
Look buddy, it's obvious u don't have any answers to the issues I brling up. U've had plenty of chances to make ur case, instead u've resorted to the same avoiding tactics every time.
But it is highschool physics that's at stake here. Seems the official story has some problems when it comes to Newtonian physics. Wouldn't u think so? But hey, u're not even aware of these problems, are u?
I pity folks like u, the avoiding kind. .
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@Sandberg1972
For the WTC7 to fall at free fall, a negligible amount of structure would have to be present. This does not contradict any physics. If it fell faster than free fall, it would have. Contradicting physics is saying CD knocked the building down when it collapsed to silently. Yeah, silent bombs don't exist.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
@eatwoodman OK, so all you & NIST have got to do now is prove that "a negligible amount of structure would have to be present", across the entire floorarea of the first 8 floors. Notice the word "negligible" here.
Good luck with that mate! LOL!
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@Sandberg1972
What is there to prove? Watch the WTC7 video. Obviously a negligible amount of structural strength was present. That's evidence right there. Unless you're a looney conspiracy theorists. People who don't wear tin foil hats tend to not believe everything Alex Jones says.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
@eatwoodman "What is there to prove?" he asks.
U're not too clever, are u?
"Obviously" a negligible amount of structural strength was present.
Yes this was very obvious indeed! Hurrah for ur powers of observation.
Now all u need to do is PROVE how a barely damaged steel skyscraper that had some fires on a few floors managed to lose virtually all of it's structural strength, not to mention losing it from one moment to the next.
U have no idea how science works, do u?
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@Sandberg1972
There is no such thing as "proof" in science. That term does not exist. You fail at grammar, science and terminology. Go back to school, kid. Come back to me when you take a high school level science class at least.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
@eatwoodman Wow, impressive language dude! Big round of applause for urself.
I like the "there's no such thing as "proof" in science", that one makes u look real good, real smart. ;)
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@Sandberg1972
It's okay, you obviously haven't even taken a college level science class. You probably haven't even graduated high school yet, it's okay bro. I love how so many conspiracy theorists are in high school and think they know more than professionals who have studied for many years.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eatwoodman I'm just saying you should be awarded a medal for your "remarkable" opinions, especially that one from your second to last post. Lemme show this again folks:
"The fact that a building fell due to fire is "proof" it is possible for a building to fall due to fire"
Bravo! Well done kid. U get an A+ for outright stupidity.
Just like those engineers at NIST, who tried to cover it all up in 1000's of pages of boring data & statistics, endless graphs & illustrations. TNRAT u know.
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@eatwoodman "professionals who have studied for many years." - ya, like the guy in this video! Shanksville PA - no fucking plane - NIST confirms WTC7 freefall collapse (no resistance) for 8 stories,but fail or refused to explain how - it's even stated in this video (along with being true) that it is normal procedure to check for explosives. NIST did not. Being in highschool doesn't make someone an idiot, believing something blindly does. peace.
VD420herpes 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let's cut through these 911 twoofer lies.
First off,
WTC 7 DID NOT COLLAPSE AT FREEFALL!
I suppose thousands of tons of concrete and steel falling hundreds of feet on WTC 7 had NOTHING to do with the collapse?
How about the 30 foot hole in WTC 7's facade?
How about the southwest corner of WTC 7 chopped off?
Please explain firefighters predicting WTC 7's collapse HOURS ahead?
911 TRUTH = STRAWMAN
ctcole77 3 weeks ago
@Sandberg1972
The fact that a building fell due to fire is "proof" (the proper term here is evidence, but whatever) that it is possible for a building to fall due to fire. Like I said, only a nutjob would argue this.
eatwoodman 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eatwoodman And u've really outdone urself with this next jewel:
"The fact that a building fell due to fire is "proof" it is possible for a building to fall due to fire"
Somebody nominate this guy 4 a medal please. This is brilliant!!!
I'm not going to say anything else, I just leave the audience to stare and wonder at your baffling ignorance of science.
U might as well have said: the fact that WTC7 fell because of a mousefart is proof that it's possible to fail due to a mousefart
Sandberg1972 1 month ago
@eatwoodman
Let's cut through these 911 twoofer lies.
First off,
WTC 7 DID NOT COLLAPSE AT FREEFALL!
I suppose thousands of tons of concrete and steel falling hundreds of feet on WTC 7 had NOTHING to do with the collapse?
How about the 30 foot hole in WTC 7's facade?
How about the southwest corner of WTC 7 chopped off?
Please explain firefighters predicting WTC 7's collapse HOURS ahead?
911 TRUTH = STRAWMAN
ctcole77 3 weeks ago
@ctcole77 Keep it going dude.
U sound really convincing, really, u do.
And by all means, why don't YOU explain how firefighters could've predicted WTC7's collapse hourse in advance. Give it ur best shot, OK?
Sandberg1972 3 weeks ago
@Sandberg1972
- Lt William Ryan FDNY
"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00, that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy."
911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!
ctcole77 3 weeks ago
@Sandberg1972
"WTC Building 7 appears to have suffered significant damage at some point after the WTC Towers had collapsed, according to firefighters at the scene. Firefighter Butch Brandies tells other firefighters that nobody is to go into Building 7 because of creaking and noises coming out of there. [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a bulge in the southwest corner of the building between floors 10 and 13. [Firehouse Magazine, 4/02]
ctcole77 3 weeks ago
@Sandberg1972
Deputy Chief Nick Visconti also later recalls recounts, “A big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side.” Captain Chris Boyle recalls, “On the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors.” [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
911 TRUTH DEBUNKED (3rd time)!
ctcole77 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sandberg1972
Did you hear yet gullible shill?
Your precious "thermite dust samples" were finally tested by a non-911 twoofer scientist.
"There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite."
Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants, February 28, 2012
911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!
ctcole77 6 days ago
@ctcole77 You do know that the other buildings were damaged more than building 7 was right? You do know that even NIST agreed and confirmed that bldg 7 fell at free fall (no resistance) for at least 8 stories, right? Of course you do. And the one thing that I always notice about people who call truthers twoofers, it they completely dismiss the info in the video they're commenting on! It hurts and is difficult to admit to one's self they've been decieved. But necessary. peace.
VD420herpes 3 weeks ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Since WTC 7 was constructed over a Con Ed station, how did the structural framing compensate for the station and how did that influence the collapse?
If WTC 7 was destroyed via controlled demolition, how do you explain firefighters predicting the building's collapse 7 hours in advance?
If a postcard could survive the Hindenburg inferno isn't it possible for a passport to survive the WTC collapse?
ctcole77 2 months ago
@ctcole77 3 more dumb irrelevant questions, great job.
About the second question, let's get into that a bit more.
How the hell could firefighters predict something that has never ever happened before in the history of burning steel skyscrapers? Why would firefighters expect a total and complete collapse, let alone one this symmetrical and at near freefall acc., kinda like some kind of CD?
About ur 3rd question: any piece of paper could've survived, but of all things, a hijacker's passport?
Sandberg1972 2 months ago
@Sandberg1972
"How the hell could firefighters predict something that has never ever happened before in the history of burning steel skyscrapers?"
Never happened? You really need to do some research shill.
Windsor Tower, Kadar Toy Factory, Delft Tower (in you own country moron!) are failed due to fire
Oh yeah! WTC 1, 2, & 7 fell soooooo symmetrical that they damaged/destroyed 20+ surrounding buildings.
And it's just as rare for a postcard to survive a raging inferno.
ctcole77 2 months ago
@ctcole77 What did u not understand about "total and complete collapse"?
The reason WTC1 & 2 damaged so many buildings is because they EXploded outwards, throwing large steel sections and beams laterally.
WTC7 hardly damaged one building, it's kinda pathetic to try and claim it's collapse wasn't symmetrical.
No go away.
Sandberg1972 2 months ago
@Sandberg1972
WTC 1 & 2 didn't "explode" gullible moron. When it collapsed debris was ejected outwards. No explosions. Ejections. The sheer height of the building made it possible for the material to descend downwards and outwards slightly so that concrete and steel impacted adjacent buildings. Why don't you read some of the engineering reports?
WTC7? You seem to forget about the penthouse collapsing first?
911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!
ctcole77 2 months ago
@ctcole77 Come on dude, u're not responding to the arguments here. I'll ask u again: What did u not understand about "total & complete collapse"?
NIST didn't explain 1 damn thing about the collapses itself, they were "unable to provide a full explanation for the collapses". Not so strange of course, since it had never happened before.
What about the penthouse collapse? Care to explain how that could've happened? Oh wait, u can't, because the data is off-limits to every member of the audience
Sandberg1972 2 months ago
@ctcole77 And I know u're just trying to waste as much of my time as possible, so u go & bother someone else now with ur pityful antics, OK?
Thanx.
Sandberg1972 2 months ago
@Sandberg1972
"ever wondered how many people, let alone 911 TWOOFERS, have actually read those voluminous NIST-reports in its entirity?"
YES!!!!!! HELL YES!!!!
Well, we know that you have NEVER READ NIST'S WTC 7 REPORT!
911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!
ctcole77 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ctcole77
"911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!" Yes, just keep typing that in all caps. Just to let people know how desperate you are to protect your fragile lie you call a life.
It's been a while, care to dance?
smitty121981 2 months ago
@buzzybeemarketing
"And I bet you didn't even know some skyscrapers are pre wired for demolition in case of emergency."
This is probably the dumbest 911 twoofer comment I have EVER heard.
LMAO! I've been an engineer working in construction for 15 years and I have NEVER seen or heard of pre-wiring buildings with explosives. Would you pre-wire your house with explosives? What's next sherlock moron, "still alive hijackers"?
911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!
ctcole77 3 months ago
@ctcole77 If u were really an engineer who actually gave a shit about 9/11 u would already be on the list of petition signers of AE911Truth.
U can stop the twoofer insults, and take a long hard look at those NIST reports. If u're really an engineer, u shouldn't have any problems spotting all the omissions, distortions and ridiculous assumptions that are being made in those reports.
But since I know u a bit longer than today, I kinda know what to expect from u.
Sandberg1972 3 months ago in playlist Favorite videos
@Sandberg1972
I am a REAL engineer and I belong to a REAL professional engineering organization who laughs at your magical theories.
The American Society of Civil Engineers is composed of 200,000 professional engineers compared to your 1600 at A&EFor911Lies.
There are 1.7 million engnineers in America. There are 1600 crackpots pots with no relevant experience to examine high rise steel building collapses at A&EFor911Lies.
Even a 911 Twoofer can do that math!
911 TRUTH = STRAWMAN
ctcole77 3 months ago
@ctcole77 U're not a real engineer, because if u are & if u had really bothered to actually LOOK at all the available evidence, u would've been on that petitionlist for a while.
1600 crackpots ey? Rrrright, now THAT is a real conspiracy don't u think? Why don't u back that up if u will?
Tell me, what arguments has the ASCE produced to debunk AE911Truth? Maybe I missed that as well, who knows.
For one, u have not produced jackshit in this comment of urs to debunk one single goddamn thing.
Sandberg1972 3 months ago
@buzzybeemarketing
They were pre-wired? LOL. That is the biggest load of shit I've heard. Pre-wired...you are a jokester sir. I suggest you treat that schizophrenia.
eatwoodman 2 months ago
What I'm wondering about though, are the two closeups od Niels' eyes (at 08:48 and at 09:06). Is he being mocked here? I must say Laura asks exactly the right questions, these are the kind of questions that should be asked when talking about the demise of the 3 towers.
The part where he says "Why should this building come down, which I've never heard about before, in itself I think, this is, should raise some eyebrows, actually, WHY haven't I heard about building 7 before?" is legendary :)
Sandberg1972 5 months ago
nano thermite ducks
blew up them 2 towers..
chena3 5 months ago
watch?v=WSQYOq71io8
redartatem9 5 months ago
Verily Verily - I say unto you - stand and fight for Truth to be known and be not afraid of death - for all die. God is with those who are on the side of Truth and not those who seek to conceal the truth.
malcolmx28 5 months ago
''And it took me weeks - actually to digest this and i think this is common to most persons to Realize what you have seen but once you have realized this THERE IS NO WAY BACK. - So you can either SPEAK OUT or live in shame.'' Prof Niels Harrit
''All evildoers,will be throw into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let anyone with ears listen!'' Jesus - peace be upon him
malcolmx28 5 months ago
Also when she asks "how much of this material would have been there". He answers "hundreds of tons". Then she needed to ask 1 question - how much clay would have been needed to set the thermite powder? He would have had to answer many many thousands of tons. Then she should ask how many decades it would take a crew of 1000 ninjas to prepare the towers using this method.
nickrock23 6 months ago
Her question at 2:20, could those elements been found there naturally? Just ask, are aluminum and ferric oxide found in normal everyday dust? Yes or No question, not a 10 minute bizarre rambling.
nickrock23 6 months ago
@nickrock23 Well this wasn't normal every day dust, like the dust you wipe off your bookcase every spring. This is dust that came from two 500,000,000 pound steel structures that was hit by two fully loaded 400,000+ pound Boeing 767's.. The amount of energy released in the initial impacts and resulting collapses is just... Un-fucking-imaginable! Given that the majority of the materials that make up a Boeing Commercial jet are aluminum, I don't think it was unusual to find aluminum in the dust.
NowKillYourself 5 months ago
Question asking is strictly prohibited!
megamogx 6 months ago in playlist 9/11 2
I like that 2trueforyouu name, it's cool.
My hat's off the Niels Harrit, a brave soul who sticks to his facts, someone who dares to ask the most obvious of questions when confromted
His bodyenglish is funny to watch, so are his facial expressions.
And he's dead on of course when he speaks the words "Well, it quacks like a duck, it waggles like a duck, it looks like a duck....maybe it's duck, this is all we can say"
Sandberg1972 6 months ago
Everyone... PLEASE visit 911research(dot)wtc7(dot)net(dot) to learn the truth behind America's transformation into a tyrannical dictatorship.
omglollmao123 6 months ago
NO ALL BUILDING BLOCKS OF THERMITE WERE FOUND HOWEVER THE ELEMENTS FOUND HAD ALTERNATIVE SOURCES EXISTING IN THE BUILDING SUCH AS PAINT AND CONCRETE. THE 2 MAJOR BI PRODUCTS OF THERMITE REACTIONS WERE NOT DETECTED. END OF STORY
TheMCBADGER 6 months ago
*Face Palm
Russia "Fox News"
JPSwissCheese 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this man is a scientific hero to me (the rest of the famous and especially American Nobel price winners are just .... i do not know what kind of word i should use......they are not a truthful scientists) the only one who asked the questions when something strange had happened and used his knowledge to find the reason...... peace price for him!!!!
berletka 6 months ago
And about him saying, Osama is not wanted by the F.B.I. Ummmm they put him on their No.1 terrorist list to be caught!! He is a fool, towards the end.
2Trueforyouu 6 months ago
@2Trueforyouu Placing Bin Laden on " their No.1 terrorist list to be caught!!! " and listing him as officially wanted for the crime itself are two completely different things, you absolute donut.
jonnyboymellor 6 months ago
@jonnyboymellor No, this guy said exactly, "The F.B.I didn't evem put him on their wanted list". The F.B.I put his name on the National List for wanted terrorists and acts. Which is basically crime.
2Trueforyouu 6 months ago
@2Trueforyouu lol ur dumb as hell, Osama was on the most wanted list since 1992 for other things, but never for "orchestration of WTC destruction". look it up smart ass. Also he is write there was no criminal investigation and there was no indictment to Iran or Pakistan from the U.N to make them give up Osama's location which they new all along if you watch the news. Do some research my friend.
Kingj56 6 months ago
Ha i laugh; "Tonnes, TONNES of explosives were used!" ...after woman speaks..."Well but we havent found any evidence of explosives". Ahhh yeaaah.
2Trueforyouu 6 months ago
"you can either speak out or you can live in shame" So true. The world needs more ethically motivated people like Niels Harrit. Fortunately, more and more experts are coming out - go to the ae911truth (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth) website to see a *very* touching preview of the new documentary "9/11 Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out".
Finnquirer 7 months ago
who listens to men and women of science anyway....this man is talking test tubes and facts.....
Bexly 7 months ago
The New Odessa File.
Former professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University, Dr. Judy Wood discussed how the destruction of buildings in NYC on 9-11 was the result of directed energy technology
k9thru12 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Steven Jones circumvent the peer review process by not showing his nanothermite paper to the chief editor & print it without her approval?
If the WTC was destroyed by CD & not fire, how do you explain the exterior columns buckling under heat and stress loads 18 minutes after impact?
If the WTC was destroyed via CD, how did the charges survive the plane impacts & how did the perpetrators know where the planes would hit?
ctcole77 7 months ago
DiceyJJ Harrit, Jones, Chandler, and the other scholars at AE911 are brave men, we need to find WHO produced and sprayed this nano-thermite in WTC 1, 2, and 7, and how they "got past" security, or did "security" consent to it?
DiceyJJ 8 months ago
@DiceyJJ Ummm, they are truthers, not scholars.... Can't be both.
lijebaley01 8 months ago
Even when other scientist from other countries say it don't make sense.. Americans still don't get it.. Like he said, who are the fools?
PAGEN3 8 months ago
@PAGEN3 Those that see the resultant iron microspheres from the of heating iron gray chips with a 6000F torch and call them the results of a thermitic reaction. They be the fools.
lijebaley01 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Investigate the use of nano-thermic and conventional type explosives in the demolition of WTC 1, 2 & 7!
AlexTronic777 8 months ago
Funkadelic2, There still is nothing in harrits paper that shows thermite. How you guys come up with the thermite theory based on the spheroid found after the 6000F ignition test of the gray steel chip, I'll never know. Why can't you show me why it isn't paint?
lijebaley01 8 months ago
Could the most audacious terrorist attack in history be a sophisticated masterpiece of demolition? Yes, absolutely! The evidence is so huge and so clear that as Dr. Harrit says the knowledgeable people either must ask for a new and honest-to-Goodness investigation or live in shame.
eerginer 8 months ago
after watching tons of videos on the "plane crash" in the Pentagon, the "wreckage of Flight 93" the nose of the plane going through the building intact, and thousands more, leaves me only one conclusion. There is no worse deaf as those who not want to hear so blind as those who will not see ...
then, the attack was against anyone but against the American people and their credibility.
davidoballes 8 months ago
@Funkadelic2 The sounds levels might be "anomalous", in a comparison to a standard controlled demolition where you have to blow things.
I will tell you what they are. They are absurd. This is physically impossible. One charge required to cut the core columns in this building would be hard enough to accept. Let alone 47 more and that does not begin to address some 60 columns per side on the tower.
If this is what you claim believe me everyone shooting this would have IRON clad proof
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles You DO hear what could easily be interpreted as explosive events on several recordings. At 1 : 57 in this clip
"/watch?v=qhyu-fZ2nRA"
you can hear it quite clearly. 3 seconds later the buidling has just started to come down (compare with other sequences the position of the tilting top section), so obviously that BOOM occured before, or just as the collapse began. At 8 : 32 NJ Burkett bursts out: "A huge explosion" - which you DO hear.
And don't forget the NYFD oral histories.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 ( Quote from the chief).
The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. (END)
Hardly a hidden mystery or "Smoking Gun!!". MULTIPLE companies were dealing with this place
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Can't be more of a smoking gun, no matter the fires, which were (according to NIST on floors 7,8,9, 11, 12 and 13. They were unevenly distributed throughout the floors, and about the alleged scoop-out NIST finally said:
"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".
Forget about the scoop-out claim, the NIST report is about fire.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Ok I'll forget about it. I wasn't there. But Chief Dan Nigro was. All day in fact. And had this to say about it
"Conspiracy theories abound and i believe they are all without merit"
Lets get a little Logical here. Some group of people are going to rig up a bunch of explosives. On beams hidden behind electrical conduit and drywall. To implode a building with some file cabinets and computers?
What purpose? Not like it is erased permanently.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Dan Nigro says "conspriacy theories...are without merit"..? Does that mean the official account is without merit..?
William Rodriquez was there too, in WTC 1 when it was hit, and he felt explosions from below. Does his testimony mean less than Nigros, and in that case why?
Brian Clarke heard "all those boom-boom explosions", when he got out of the South Tower when it started to come down. Does that mean he did no hear "boom-boom explosions"..?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 I saw both the FDNY chief and the Metallurgist who examined the steel in B7 on a fairly recent documentary. He said there was NO sign of thermite on any of the steel and that it failed from a prolonged exposure to fire. Or as he put it.. " A rapid erosion event not explosive or thermitic in nature".. Basically the steel underwent rapid rusting for all intents and purposes. The connections became so brittle that it failed and precipitated across the structure.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles And that metalurgist also examined and commented on the steel that was documented in the FEMA Appendix C, showing sulfidation and intergranular melting..?
Where is that documentary btw..?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 No.. no.. no no..!!! I have had exactly this experience. I have stood with a pro news camera shooting a CD a block away. I know what a shaped charge sounds like in person and in an editing suite.. (more like FEELS like!!). There is no way on God's green earth ANY of these are shaped charges going off. Not even close. Not remotely so. Yes these people blurt out "Huge Explosion" the top of the building is coming apart. VERY VERY different to what is happening AUDIO wise.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles You are comparing a STANDARD controlled demolition to something that you don't even know what it was. Who has ever claimed those blasts occuring before and at onset was chaped charges..??
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 You can "Standard Controlled Demolition" this all you like!!! It does not change the fact the a huge steel beam needs to be cut with a high explosive charge (RDX or similar). These are the largest steel beams and require considerable explosives to cut. ONE shaped charge this size will produce a VERY large report. (LET ALONE 47!!!!!) This is not a subtle event in the slightest. Its not something going to be masked or "Hidden" behind falling debris.. uh uh!!.
Its absurd
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Incendiaries could have been used to pre-weaken the structure, then, something explosive obviously came into action (you could hear the booms yourself), and what then happend during the collapse could not have been that easy to distinguish above the roar of the collapse.
Certainly not more absurd than the idea of THREE self-destructing buildings, totally crushing themselves almost at the acceleration of gravity, due only to gravity.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Why because a jet hitting it at full power can't accomplish that task on its own?
Sound travels at 1100 ft/sec. I mapped out about half a dozen camera positions just for the hell of it one day. ABC NEWS shoots from about 800 feet from the tower. Another one in front of Trinity Church is about 1200 feet away (give or take). these cameras record the ambient street sounds PERFECTLY... We know the mics are working. Not one sound comes from the tower (charges).
Aint happenin
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles No one has ever claimed these were standard controlled demolitions, so why resorting to comparing with such ones? There are booms heard, and lots of testimonies of explosions. It happened.
A jet hitting at full power doing what...?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles And if you are not completely set on blindfolds, you should be capable of seeing very distinctive white flashes occurring both circled and lots of other ones in this clip:
/watch?v=MPSW_eHnsfM
and clearly visible through the dust clouds in this clip:
/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc
Not in itself PROOF of controlled demoliton, but on top of all the other things indicting something must have been present moving mass out of the way, it sure should be considered.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 The building fails at the impact floor. Not 10 stories below or above that.
And charges necessary to implode this building would blow the aluminum cladding off the tower!! WITH EASE!! It would also easily shatter windows in the vicinity.
And the "Squibs" everybody loves to push as being evidence of a CD. A charge capable of severing those columns would blow out with FAR more force than that
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles You keep on talking about charges. We do not see standard controlled demolitions, and therefore we do not know how they were performed. And you keep ignoring all of the evidence that actually do speak very clearly of the presence of additional energy to blow the concrete to dust and scattering huge steel columns hundreds of feet outside of the footprint of the buildings and also disinterating about half of the victims beyond identification even by DNA.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 It makes no difference to say this is not a "Standard CD". We are talking about explosives here. Up down, sideways, back to front.. It doesn't matter how it was (alleged) to be done That is irrelevant!!. And you don't seem to understand that insisting this building is "aided" by explosives is in NO WAY seen in the manner it falls. Explosives REMOVE resistance. There is no reason for material to be hurled 3 blocks if explosives are going off. That is NOT what we see!!
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles The only thing you base your dismissal on is comparison to standard controlled demolitions. Yes, I've seen and heard them too. The WTC "collapses" certainly were NOT standardad controlled demolitions.
You have not even begun to explain the absent deceleration of the roofline of the falling top section of WTC 1 on alleged impact with the lower part of the building. How can it both disintegrate, and still crush the lower part of the building at freefall acceleration?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Again... "Standard" non Standard CD.. Is Irrelevant. The most salient aspect is explosives. That is a constant that does not change across any "Situation". or how ever you want to "Allege" it was done.
The WTC does not fall REMOTELY like a CD. It is utter total chaos. There is nothing controlled about it.
The analogy is like sitting on a stool and charges blow out the legs. You fall straight down. you don't fall across the room.
Or 2 blocks away.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles WTC 7, which did collapse from the lower floors, did come down EXACTLY like a controlled demolition, and we even have CD people saying "It is controlled demolition, without a doubt. A team of experts did this". WTC 1 and 2 came down top-down, otherwise with several features of controlled demolition. No escaping that fact just by saying it did not sound like standard controlled demolitions. And saying we hear nothing is not true at all.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 That's another one happening in dead silence. ( I can show you)
What team of experts? (Larry Moe and Curly?). And ZERO CD material found afterward? Hardly!!
I spoke to the very company who was involved in much of this stuff. He told me HUNDREDS of trained people were there.
These people suddenly have no clue how to do their job? As if!!
And chief Dan Nigro who was responsible for B7 stood in front when it fell. Not one sound was heard.
Its allot of BS dude
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles You mean the thermetic residue wasn't found, just becuas it was verified by independent scientists? And iron micro-spheres found in abundance by boht RJ Lee and US GS..?
Nigro, yes I've heard. I've heard other witnesses saying the exact opposite, so don't be hung-up on him. Who exactly did you speak to? And what kind of trained people was there to look for explosives remains...? No one was sent specifically to look for explosives remains.
BS on, you don't answer the questions.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Oh.. so the chief is going to hear nothing and some other "TM" guy is going to hear charges going off?. I don't know if you realize (You don't!!) how utterly stupid that remark is. I can tell you from experience that had ANY.. ANY!!! of the buildings in question had charges in them (to the level that is alleged).. Every single camera shooting this within........a mile!! would be absolutely OVERFLOWING!! with audio proof. It would not even REMOTELY be a question.
Its absurd
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Kevin MCPadden, thank you. He was an emegency worker. And suddenly, becuase his testimony doens't match your ideas, he is "TM"..? Can you be more obvioulsly biased...?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Numbers and Math don't lie. (Unless of course the event is not taking place.. Which it wasn't) and the numbers simply don't add up or make sense.
This building is 2500 feet away. Turn up your sound and forward to 3 min mark.
watch?v=rUSyWs9z9N8&feature=related
This video was shot about 1200 feet from the tower. And we hear NOTHING!! No charges
watch?v=gJbGm7GE1tA&feature=fvwrel
I can show you a dozen more no different. 12 cameras audio suddenly not working that day?
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles You are still claiming you did not hear the booms in the clip I gave you...?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles You are basing most of your conclusions on the SOUND issue. And all of the other parameters, physical featurs which can not be explained by merely gravity-driven collapses..? What is pulverizing the concrete? What is causing all three buildings to come straight down? What is causing them to come down at close to freefall acceleration? What is causing all those white flashes? And the wall of the South Tower to blow out? And cancelling the angular momentum?
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 What is causing all those white flashes? And the wall of the South Tower to blow out? And cancelling the angular momentum?
(sorry what is Angular momentum??)
I am kind of dumbfounded you have such trouble understanding this.
What is causing it??
About 1/3 of 500,000 tons in motion.
Pretty basic easy stuff!!
White Flashes? (WINDOWS busting)
Go and spend some time REALLY looking at close up video. Its all there to see. Easily. NOVA vid is a really good one.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles "sorry what is Angular momentum??"
Did you initially call me and Richard Gage and other scientists "morons"..? Here:
h t t p ://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Angular_momentum
A tip for you: It's a good idea to moderate on the mocking thing.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles "Numbers and Math don't lie. (Unless of course the event is not taking place)"
Very true. And it did take place. There were over 2 seconds of actual freefall for Building 7, and there were no deceleration of the top section of WTC 1 on alleged impact with the lower part of the building. There is no escaping these facts, and the implications seem very obvious - something moved the mass out of the way, whether you heard distinct cracking bangs or not. Booms could be heard though.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Moving mass out of the way? Hardly!! Softening and failing columns? Absolutely. If you notice the antennae starts down just prior to the out side of the building. Which suggest the core columns have failed and considering how that tower was hit makes entire sense. The plane hit it square on to the core.
Booms? Absolutely. You can hear the floors landing on each other and firemen in the 6th floor stairway spoke about that. They NEVER mentioned explosives.
Hmm?!!
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Ever stop to consider Kevin Cosgrove? Trapped on the 105th floor. EMT records a conversation with him for almost 10 mins. A recording that picks up Kevin and his office mates just feet away. Speaking normally. Not only do we hear no explosions taking place Kevin does not even react to any and you would figure in his alarmed state he certainly would had something exploded. We hear nothing right up to collapse. Cross ref this with ABC news and a DOZEN more vids NO DIFFERENT.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Kevin Cosgrove? Well, if you care to crank up the volume, and listen more carefully to that phone call than what you obviously did look when you called the white flashes circled in the Tinerotiman clip "windows", you might as well hear a noise that could very well be interpreted as sounds of the booms we can hear in the videos, which occured BEFORE the building started to come down.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Now, all these aspects you bring up are not useful very much more than to back up opinions (yes, the same goes for me using them), but you don't answer the crucial questions about the physics. What cancelled the angular momentum? What caused the missing jolt of the falling top of WTC 1..? What caused freefall acceleration for WTC 7..?
No escaping.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 I have no clue what you are talking about. What is "Angular Momentum"?? I have never heard that and i don't understand what you are saying.
B7 was entirely expected to collapse. Sorry but it was. And the building did not come straight down. It leaned over backwards a little bit. And the Penthouse started down first. EXACTLY as described by NIST and the researched video and eye witness testimony.
Dude. its a structure. Its not going to take endless amounts of torture.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
Comment removed
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles Building 7 wasn't expected to come down, but after the two first, VERY unexpected collapses (why did 300 firefigthers die..?) it was feared that it might collapse too, yes. But please, read the NIST report on Building 7 before commenting further. Do you think, btw, that the collapse simulation looks anything like the actual collapse? And is heat conductivity set to ZERO good science..? And compared to how buildings "normally" falls, it came down extremely symmetrically. Period.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 Yeah it was expected. Very much so!! The main water main was in operative. It had a nearly 15 story gash taken out of it from falling debris. It was basically evacuated because they did not want any more men killed that day.. (Hence the "pull it term). It had very rich oxygen fed fire burning all day on many floors. Heavily involved. The FDNY had transits on it and determined it was sagging a moving. They said.. "Forget it its going to go"..
At 5pm it did. Big whoop.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles There is NO proof of that alleged scoop-out, sorry. We know it was heavily damaged by debris from WTC 1 (how did it get hurled away that far btw, considering how massive the debris was...?), but that doesn't in any way make it more plausible for the building NOT to fall over. Rathe the opposite.
Angular momenum, yes. Please read, it is still no more nutty than ordinary PHYSICS.
h t t p://911research.wtc7. net/wtc/analysis/collapses/shattering. html
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 I thought you knew everything?? . I've seen the pictures dude. Carved out nearly top to bottom on the back side of it. And i don't quite understand how you simply disregard what professionals who were dealing with it have to say about it. Pretty ignorant actually. How did it get hurled that far?? Easy. The WTC is 1200 feet high. Distance over height!! All the more reason AGAINST explosives. A charge going off would permit material to fall DOWN.. not out.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@Funkadelic2 PLEASE!!!... don't send me Chandler videos!! I have had it up to here with all of these white collar "CT" people. He is another one who is what i like to call "Brilliantly" miss informed. Sorry David Explosives don't detonate in a sound vacuum. Yeah this guy is a physics prof. Whoop de do. I can guarantee you he hasn't stood with a news camera shooting a CD a block away and knowing what the experience is like. I have and i know from experience what a load of BS this is.
roquefortfiles 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles If you don't like Chandler then look up other clips of the same sequences. The point is NOT Chandler, but what can be seen in the videos. You do the wathing, and turn off the audio if you don't like his voice.
You are also tired of hearing about "squibs", but you don't even comment on what can be seen shooting out from the side of the South Tower BEFORE the building starts to come down. It's WELL above airplane impact level.
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
@roquefortfiles If you look carefully at the west side wall, several stories ABOVE the level of airplane impact (which is on the opposite side) of the South Tower at approximately 1 : 59 into this clip:
/watch?v=DifdrPTerhE
you can see the wall blowing out BEFORE the collapse initiation. What do you suggest caused all that
Funkadelic2 9 months ago
I too have built cutting boxes much more compact and much more effecient. I have tested on the exact same size beams and the welded and mechanical joints as well. I can cut 40 full size beams cross beams connections in 4 seconds and they fall at the same time. The slower thermite burns as it falls and steel turns to liquid. Watch my videos watch steel turn to water.
TheBelldiver 9 months ago
Here it is 2011 and the STUPID murderous USA still wants to preach the same BS. So... I see water boarding as the sport which should be entertained to bring out signed confessions. Of course it's hard to get a team together to play water boarding. Nobody wants to be IT!
TheBelldiver 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A Florida engineer, Jonathan Cole, recently demonstrated how to use packaged thermite to cut steel girders, box columns, and bolts. See my video:
Incendiary Experiments
punxsutawneybarney 9 months ago
Im no scientist but im not retarded either. Just open your eyes and think about it a little bit. Only 16 million dollars were invested in total on the events of 9/11 and 50 million was invested on the clinton affair. Thas reall odd? If the government really has nothing to hide then why are there so many questions unanswered and why do they drag their feet so much. it took bush 144 to put together a 9/11 comission to investage usually commision on events like this one are set up within 10 days.y?
hickey023 10 months ago 3
@hickey023 16 million dollars is all the investigative agencies requested during their investigation of the 9/11 attacks. If they needed more money for the investigation they would've asked for it and the Government would have easily invested. It's a no brainer. Just because it cost less to investigate doesn't mean it's suspicious or any evidence of wrong doing on the Government's part. Also: The Clinton investigation was funded by the Republican party, NOT the U.S. Government. Check your facts.
NowKillYourself 9 months ago
hey dip shit thermite can and is used to weld steel together
nesb6569 10 months ago
Thermite huh? Lets do some quick calculations on that. 47 int columns. 240 Ext Columns. 287 total. We'll half that to 144 for arguments sake. How much thermite do you need to cut ONE column? 50? 80 pounds.. Lets say 100 pounds per column. That's 14,400 pounds of thermite in the building. 7 TONS of the shit.!! (#1 do you believe that? cause i sure as hell don't). #2 do you HONESTLY think this would result in "Scanning electron microscopic" residue left over?
Kinda doubt it. A silly story
roquefortfiles 10 months ago