@MegaYeshua33 Footage of Firefighters talking about how they were inside one of the towers and they described it "looks like a foundry". Did you see those iron workers cutting steel? High amounts of heat can bend steel like we saw that day and days after. Your telling me fire from a burning building was hot enough to do that? I thought it was only hot enough to weaken the steel? Your in denial until you can answer these. One day you will learn the truth and remember how foolish you were.
@enjoiwrx heat softens steel, How do you know that was not molten glass pouring from the corner of wtc2. I could care less what any president has to say. When 911 happened i thought it was great that the 3rd world finally struck back. To be honest. Also some of the people jumping out of the building were on fire.
• A petition to launch a real, public, subpoena-empowered, criminal investigation of the events of Sept. 11, 2001 is on the White House website. 5,000 signatures needed by 28 October 2011. Please go & sign that petition, & tell all your friends who care about the truth of 9/11. We need a new fully independent commission to investigate this horrified tragedy.
David Aaronovitch reminds me of David Brents more intelligent and respected older brother...mybe that why the Brentmiester General turned out to be such a loser
@neilus ?? How does that make sense? Aaronovitch is a real person and Brent is a fictional character. How about if you join the rest of us in reality?
Awesome program, its amazing how conspiracy theorists still won't accept it. I like what that rolling stones magazine journalist said. "They want something they know they'll never get...complete access to all files within the government"
@TheAceman88 You are incorrect. In the U.S. The National Geographic Channel is 25% owned by National Geographic Television & Film and 75% Fox Cable Networks (News Corporation).
@amh4176 What? How to make people scared with spooky music and more and more questions? They get their theories thrown in their faces in this show, and they just shrug it off and call "straw man". The truth movement is completely pathetic.
@AceofDlamonds Loose Change is really a messy grab bag of thinly sourced conspiracy claims. It lacks cohesive narrative that would otherwise give it some credit.
@AceofDlamonds Then you obviously have not watched this NatGeoTV video above. The whole world knows that the official story is false, only a few brainwashed US citizens still cling to the 'Muslims did 9/11' conspiracy theory.
The whole world? That is a fucking lie. Only Ahmadinejad and his stupid followers believe everything he tells him in Iran......as for the other countries.....they can believe.....they just lack proof.
And it still remains........you have no proof of your conspiracy theory religion. The harrit paper, the base of the whole demolition belief, is refuted many times already. No reputable engineer cares about that shit paper....lol I can cite 10 methodological flaws from the top..
@AceofDlamonds Its the other way around: Nobody is speculating but the believers in the 'Muslims did 9/11' theory, which is not supported by any hard FACTS whatsoever!
The paper by Harrit et al. has never been refuted because no refutation has ever been peer-reviewed and published, not even in a vanity publication! I would agree that the findings of Harrit et al. are not the best proof for an inside job: The symmetrical, accelerating collapses through greatest resistance are the best evidence!
Harrit's paper has been critiqued by quite a bit of scientists (at least those who know about it!). Almost noone cares about it and it hasn't been famous because it has never been peer reviewed and published independently........you don't gather 5 truther friends and 1 fence sitter saying we believe these chemicals could only mean "thermite", when they represent thousands of tons of building material.
There were no bombs found and the sounds weren't as loud as a demo. god...
The "inside job" theory was just made up on the spot......it is their very job to prove that only an alternative series of events could have caused the 9/11 incident. Muslim extremism exists.....that is a FACT. Osama and KSM were engineers and had planned this for a while......and Al Qaida takes pride in what they do, like always.
Every one of these facts is responded to with Ad Hoc explanations from the conspiracy t side....it's just baseless.....get real.
@AceofDlamonds Jewish and christian and muslim extremism exist. No doubt, but off-topic.
Even if OBL and KSM (i would confess everything they wanna hear BEFORE being waterboarded) were the masterminds behind the 9/11 terror (i doubt it; OBL denied it repeatedly; all alleged 9/11 terrorists are claimed to be dead yet the wars continue), who rigged the three skyscrapers in NYC?!? Do you want their accomplices to walk free and maybe commit other crimes?!? Why are you unwilling to investigate them??
OBL denied it repeatedly? Source? OBL was said to have denied it from an unknown source, but later Al Qaida claimed pride in the attacks.
What accomplices are you talking about? You don't even know that they exist. Fact is, noone can rigg three enourmous buildings with that much explosive and equipment and remain undetected. I suppose all 9/11 deniers want to be engineers. Well, please go to school first. Jones/Harrit paper is bogus and noone really cares about it.
@AceofDlamonds "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. [...] I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. [...] It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam." -OBL
When you google "Binladen denies 9/11" you will find all the sources you need. (CIA, CNN, BBC etc.).
I can recommend the lectures by Webster Tarpley about 9/11. He has made some very interesting research.
Harrit et al. have submitted their paper to the peer review and have even revised it before publishing. If you had read it, you would have noticed! So please blabber on about something you don't know anything about.
No scientist or engineer can reproduce the collapses under lab conditions!
Harrit's paper isn't peer reviewed properly!! do you know anything about peer review??!! look at the authors for fucks sake....they are truthers themselves and fence-sitters. You can't publish it in a reputable journal that way, no wonder they did it with Bentham.Take Harrit's paper, walk to your nearest University, take it to the department of engineering/tech or chemistry/physics, and present it as a properly written scientific paper. I guarantee you it will be rejected.
@AceofDlamonds Of course the "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" paper was properly peer reviewed! One of those peers even went public. But by your definition, ANY author of such a paper, or peer reviewer who accepts it, would be a 'tinfoilhat-wearing twoofer'. Nice ad hominem!
Reproduce accelerating symmetrical complete collapse through the path of greatest resistant under lab conditions (ANY structure and/or material!), and i'll shut up!
LOL you don't know what the hell your talking about. There was no active thermite observed in the samples, which were not even made sure to be pure, something very unscientific. Second, Jones et al skips over several several other possible compounds from the gigantic towers that could account for the chemicals that HE THINKS, means "nanothermite". Now tell me, how is THAT scientific? This supposedly revolutionary journal isn't acknowledged by any major chemistry branch. WOW
@AceofDlamonds An independent French scientist, who still believes the "Muslims did 9/11" conspiracy theory, confirmed most of the findings of Harrit et al.
Galileo Galileis findings were rejected by most of his peers and the establishment. Does that mean to you that there are indeed crystal spheres out there that the planets are attached to?
PS: Yesterday i met somebody who like you still believes that "Muslims did it", and freedom of religion allows it. But don't start wars over your believe!
More importantly, Rummel, besides the fact that Jones and friends skip all those other compounds, what makes him think "nanothermite" would create a very loud controlled demolition? It wasn't loud and explosive at all! It was rumbling and tumbling. Why nano thermite anyway? Jones recently changed his damn mind after he looked over his own paper a couple times. Even he realizes it may be bullshit and has since said those chips were just "fuses" for "some other explosive". Right.
@AceofDlamonds You sound like an disgruntled Steven Jones fanboy. Why don't we stop arguing until you can reproduce the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 under laboratory conditions? (You have complete freedom of choice of materials and structure!) Any accelerating complete collapse through the path of greatest resistance would silence me and earn you a Nobel prize in physics! Are you afraid of experiments? They are at the core of the scientific method!
Reproduce the collapse? LOL Square cube law....you can't compare small scale falls to mega-scale phenomena. Can we reproduce evolution? no, but we can observe this phenomenon through fossils and geology of the Earth. The path of least resistance is the path down if you are trying to argue it would tip over (which is the most pathetic argument thus far). Noone is looking for a Nobel Prize but Harrit and Jones so deserve one if they could put a good theory together. =P
Again, I want Jones and Harrit or ANY OF THE 1500 people (or the 11 structural engineers) at AE9/11 to make a good paper and have it reviewed by an independent board.....a board other than their own makeshift slop. There are dozens to choose from in the US; dozens of prestigious Engineering institutions.......Purdue, MIT, Stanford, Illinois, GIT, Delaware, etc. . And AE has made zero progress with any kind of paper so far. Good fight AE9/11.....good fight .... ;)
The "inside job" theory was just made up on the spot......it is their very job to prove that only an alternative series of events could have caused the 9/11 incident. Muslim extremism exists.....that is a FACT. Osama and KSM were engineers and had planned this for a while......and Al Qaida takes pride in what they do, like always.
Every one of these facts is responded to with Ad Hoc explanations from the conspiracy t side....it's just baseless.....get real.
I find it almost laughable that truthers still don't see the total absurdness in their theories. There have been so many acceptable explanations for the strange happenings of 9/11 that disprove their theories, yet they still will not accept that their whole case is flawed. They clearly have problems with government and authority and they don't know how to cope with their anger and grief affectively.
I find it almost laughable that truthers still don't see the total absurdness in their theories. There have been so many acceptable explanations for the strange happenings of 9/11 that disprove their theories, yet they still will not accept that their whole case is flawed. They clearly have problems with government and authority and they don't know how to cope with their angry and grief affectively.
KJC24 sez: "There is no logical motive for destroying WTC7, and whats more... ITS NOT POSSIBLE."
in spite of incontrovertible evidence that WTC 7 WAS DEMOLISHED
kjc24 obviously believes otherwise.
what is not possible in the REAL world; that structural damage could be done to a steel framed 41 story skyscraper leaving it strong enough to stand for hours, and have a fire in the building later cause the complete
JREF and other scientists are way ahead of you twoofers in scientific knowledge. Are you a structural engineer? Do you parrot David Ray Griffin and Gage's bullshit to make ur claim that only controlled demolition could do what happened at 9/11?
They have nothing on the engineers at JREF and anywhere else in the world. Go read.
@AceofDlamonds Dude, why do you care what they believe. Let them believe whatever they want. They'll never admit it, because they know what idiots they'll look like. Actually....they want to believe it. It's not like they do anything anyway. All they do is make videos and talk about about it on youtube. Who cares.
I understand that the movement has died down, but I still hate scapegoating like this....it's pure bullshit. They go batshit insane and start blaming "the government" or the "NWO" for all the problems. Imagine if we had a loon in office, even worse, in a monarchy, where they would have unlimited power. Scary.
does Home Depot have better security cameras than the Pentagon?
KJC24 displays phenomenal IGNORANCE of what happened on 9-11-01.
kjc24 sez: "You can't demolish a building when it's full of people coming and going every day."
KJC24 that is EXACTLY what happened to WTC 1 and 2.
these people were murdered by this
DEMOLITION.
or, perhaps, to this day, in the twilight realm of your existence, you believe, as many do, that WTC 1 and 2 were not DEMOLISHED. that they merely "collapsed".
I bet Operation Northwoods and Condor operation is another conspiracy theory.They also forgot to debunk the WTC 7.OMFG let's not start another conspiracy theory.
Rupert Murdoch u spent millions to came up with this BS so called "debunked science"? This movie creates more questions rather than giving answers, u pathetic bastard! Not a single word about 7 tower, not a single word about the events after 9/11! Fake endless war on terror, brainwashing 24/7-365 all the people! Invasion in Afghan & Iraq based on lies, killing millions! Fake econ. crisis! Sellout of nations in Europe! Harsh measures! Endless Loans! Chems in skies! RFID card & the Chips coming!
Non of this mentions how the WTC buildings were designed to withstand a 737 crashing into the building. Not a significant difference between that and a 747 only that a 747 is lighter.
@enjoiwrx Yeah, truther fail to mention was that it was designed to withstand a strike by a 737 at landing speeds. No one can design a high rise building that can withstand a jet intentionally flying into it. Or rather, prevent it from having severe structural damage caused to it. It's clear that the twin towers didn't just topple over once the planes struck them.
@camalusthegodofwar Yeah. A jet going 4-500mph head on into a skyscraper is going to cause some major fucking damage. It's so funny when they get all "that's impossible" on us..as if we were talking about shooting a rubber band into it.
@enjoiwrx Clearly you have never researched a 747 compared to a 737. A 747 was the biggest passenger jet in the world when 911 happened. It held 45,000 gals of fuel, and has 4 engines and a 200= ft wingspan.
@MegaYeshua33 Your point being? What that a 747 cut through ALL the central concrete support beams and knocked the first ever steel encased, concrete column filled sckyscraper in about an hour. Pulverizing concrete and twisting steel like high amounts of heat bent the steel beams? Then underneath ground zero kept burning at thousands of degrees for months after the attack. Blackouts for 2 weeks before the attacks. Bomb sniffing dogs removed days before the attack. Iraq had WMDs? Make sense?
@enjoiwrx No two 767s cut through the structure of the buildings, causing massive fires witch heated the steel weakening it until total collapse. If a 747 would of hit it. It probably would of knocked out 60 to 70% of the beams and instantly dropped it. And if it were to of hit it low enough maybe even toppled it over sideways killing even more people. Thank god they were to stupid to use 747s. And if they were such complete liars. Why did they not just plant WMDs in Iraq?
@MegaYeshua33 You still didn't answer any of the facts i asked you. Did the planes cut through the concrete support columns which is what supports all the weight? 60 to 70% of the beams, wow, i didn't know the planes hit multiple points up and down the towers. Why was concrete pulverized? Why did the buildings fall at free fall speeds which means no resistance. Why was there molten metal below ground zero for months? Massive fires, thats why FD said they could knock it out with two lines.
@enjoiwrx The core only supported 60% of the weight. And you made the claims that there were no difference between a 747 and a 737. Witch proved you do not fact check anything you say, and that you just make up shit up and call it the truth. And yes the columns did go from top to bottom of the buildings. They were all connected to one another. And by the way you did not even know what type of planes hit the building. If you would like me to be your tutor anymore you will need to pay me.
@MegaYeshua33 i admit i am wrong about the difference in planes. Yet you still ignore the other facts i have asked you. Why are you afraid?? Even pictures of the aftermath show beams that were cut at angles like at a demolition. Why would i have a tutor who ignores everything else. I may not be a pilot or an architecht but there are thousands who call bullshit. Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth, Pilots for 9/11 truth. They put their jobs on the line not me. Why believe when they always lie
@enjoiwrx That steel was cut by iron workers after the towers fell, Another richard gage theory proving wrong. Why do you believe AE for truth when their leader is consistently caught lying.
@MegaYeshua33 Its obvious you like to believe liars like bush and obama. When you can explain to me why there was molten metal underneath ground zero for months i will leave you alone. Explain in some of the footage you can see molten metal coming out from the towers close to impact point. Don't even come to me with "because of the jet fuel it was so hot", yet you can see victims waving for help in the two giant holes. Are you in denial sir? The beams were bent from a high amt of heat, explain??
@MegaYeshua33 10 years later and lie upon lie given to the people. Most people woke up now because of where the economy is. They don't buy the lies anymore. Why are we supposed to believe what they tell us when they keep lying. WMDs in Iraq, Nope! Troops deployed to Afghanistan Sept.10th, Public infromation, not reported. Also not reported on Sept. 10th 2001, Rumsfeld testifing about 2.3 trillion in unaccounted for transactions. Files kept where, Boom plane hit the pentagon sorry destroyed
thank you for showing this. i put this comment on october 2010 . it was monday and i was excited to watch it on tv but then it never aired. instead it showed some koran crap stuff.nobody wanted to see . it was litery depressing. kjc24 you rock.
Troofers remind me of religious fucks that answer actual points and conversational debates with "WELL ITS JUST WHAT I BELIEVE"
They refuse to open their minds to even the POSSIBILITY, for just a moment to consider the evidence, to the other view(s).
It's like someone that feels they ALWAYS are taking the moral high ground, but in reality they are just so lost in their own head and feel they are the enlightened ones that nothing can save them.
Great series. I have only one problem. Now it is obvious that National Geographic is in on the plot! Damn how deep does this thing go?! But seriously you truthers need to realize that "common sense" does not apply here. There is no such thing as common sense when talking about things like structural engineering. Did the WT7 collapse look like a controlled demolition to me? Sure it did. but I'm not an engineer. You guys need to find some error in the NIST report and prove it wrong.
THANKS FOR POSTING THIS! This is one of many documentaries that analyzes and debunks ALL of the 9-11 Truthers, Infowars, and Alex Jones nutjobs out there. Some think they are so clever when they say "The WTC were designed to withstand a plane impact...blah blah blah..." ok genius, Titanic was designed to be unsinkable, how did that work out? KJC there is no use in arguing with them. They have to cling to this conspiracy because they are emotionally invested in it.
The Truthers like Avery, Griffin, and Jones will never admit that their theory is bull, and they know it, mark my words, not one of the three I mention above believes this. They continue with this movement becouse this is their Job, they sell their books, movies, they have they pay to join clubs, they are the leaders of a group, they have celebrity and power of a sort, they get on TV, even though its based on a lie to them its worth it. To the average truther, it wastes years of their lives.
they are asking for a new investigation- and it is you who freely continues to deny them that right. why stand in their way if they are wrong? Are you going to protest in the street NOT to have a new investigation? Are you going to tell the victims family to listen to never question what the government tells you? If you allow yourself to believe that anyone who questions something is automatically thrown into a conspiracy category- it may be YOU one day who is thrown into a category as well
@FutureLaugh You know, I personally don't mind of they have a new investigation. I just dont want to get the bill for a totally unnecessary redundant investigation. Pay privately. There already was the BIGGEST investigation in history...But you guys found a few things you think are odd,,,but when professionals look at those same things they say they are not odd or strange. There isnt a mystery as to what happened. Ive studied it since it happened. The offical story is real.
BIGGEST investigation that was grossly cheaper than the bill clinton sex scandal? that 7/10 911 commissioners didnt agree with the official story? That there is no logical reason building 7 fell into its own foot print? This was the greatest failure in american history and it changed all of our lives and the way we live them- so although you may think its redundant- would it hurt? Its getting to the point where people who believe the governments explanation fully are a minority at this point
@FutureLaugh Let me debunk you a bit budy... building 7 hit other buildings when it fell = that means it did not fall into its own footprint...that is a standard Truther claim that you will find has never been made by anyone ............
are you saying that it didnt implode into itself - that it toppled onto other buildings? Because outside of your youtube post, i have never heard anythng about that so how did you? And the official 911 commission report on building 7 was inconclusive and called for more investigation. Lets entertain what you said is true- since when do steel reinforced concrete buildings, not partially, but completely collapse due to fires?
@FutureLaugh What I;m saying is this.....It did not land in its own foot print like you guys claim....when those buildings fell they crashed into the surrounding buildings and damaged them all severely....get it...that is NOT IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT. I was their and those buildings were scattered over block
@FutureLaugh And yes...Im saying it collapsed due to the fires...Remeber a jumbo jet did smash into it at 500+MPH it was loaded with a full tank of jet fuel for a cross country trip.....what do you find weird about that....i've never understood how anyone who saw those planes smash into those buildings can assume they couldnt collapse....they did collapse...and it started at the spot where the plane hit....so are you saying that some planted explosives survived the plane hit and fire??
the building was built to be so strong it could handle a boeng 707. So the building did exactly what it was supposed to do. i believe the fires according to the fire department were minor and under control. But you have a good point that i never heard anyone address before- if there were pre planted explosives in the building- how were they effected by the exploding planes? im not an explosive expert but wouldnt some of them go off prematurely?
@FutureLaugh Hey...... it was built to sustain a 707, flying slow and they did not assume it would be fully loaded with fuel....dont ask me why,,,,,my guess would be because no building in the world can stand up to something like that happening......the head engineer who built the towers admits they did not figure in a fuel load ......not one engineer has ever claimed the buildings should not have collapsed....no credible engineers from anywere are surprised they collapsed,,,,
if your agrument is that because building debris hit other buildings- that is proof it didnt implode on itself- i believe you are incorrect. Youve seen the video of the building collapsing into itself; and YES i imagine debris would hit other buildings either way. How does this prove any of your points other than the wtc7 was demolished and had debris fly from it much like the twin towers? I would say this argument is moot
@FutureLaugh@RBlack999 Please watch this one part of a debate it shows how the Truthers lie to us all.........Please people just watch this one part....its amazing how the Truther is lying and it is with one of the SCHOLARS here is the link Hardfire SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / FETZER / ROBERTS / WIECK / 2ND PROGRAM it on GOOGLEVIDEOS
@FutureLaugh Hey man, if they want to pay for a new investigation,,,,great,,,I'm all for that,,,I just dont want to spend one penny of my taxes to do it.....I have actually researched this and all these theories Truthers keep using as an excuse for a new investigation are RETARDED IDEAS....So just dont try to spend my taxes an you leprechaun search OK
@FutureLaugh So tell me this....how should this new investgation be pain for...????? if you say through soley private funds I'll agree with you 100%.. But I would also ask one thing....Before it should be allowed you should have to bring forward one piece of evidence that your theories are true....And you dont have any....and dont try to bring up that little pile of Dust Griffin has been running around with for years now....its contaminated and is NEGATIVE FOR THERMITE...hes just an idoit
Fantastic documentary. Some very good insights into the mind of conspiracy theorists. They hit the nail on the head with the idea that conspiracy theorists have trouble accepting the sincerity of others yet never doubt their own sincerity.
thatis, they do an excellent job of portraying truthers as conspiracy theorists. Your opinion is exactly the point they wanted to propogate. I would of expected perhaps something more unbiased from the television show. The truthers are being scrutinized for asking questions and refuting the evidence served to them- and the aggressors of the show shrug their questions with psychological analysis for why they ask questions in the first place
which keep its own PPLz in dark far away from the reality of the world
like USS liberty sunk by israeli ?
like WMD in IRAQ?
this 911 is no exception to it
i m not an american but i have many freinds from there
when i sit eat and talk to them there r nice and very helpful pplz but these poor american public don`t know what is going around them and who is playing with their lives and who is using them
"I have this bet, its a really irritating one for you; but in twenty years in time when im on my death bed. You'll come to me and say you know that silly theory i had back in 2009... I repent" - ROFL more like "Remember that 2009 theory i had, I was right, now die you fucken bastard."
nat geo cant show the clips of wtc 7, or even complete clips of wtc 1 and 2 falling completely because it would defeat their purpose, which is of course is to confuse and mislead the public some more. if they did show the wtc 1 ,2 and 7 clips too often people would pick up on the fact that they are falling way too fast to be just caused by fire.
fact: when concrete fiber board is shot at with an aluminum tube @500mph it will be punctured. why dont thye try it with concrete walls? because it will show them to be liars?
God thats hilarious. Do you have any idea how many crappy videos on YouTube get 5 stars? And you use this as a basis for what is true or not?
There is no logical motive for destroying WTC7, and whats more... ITS NOT POSSIBLE. You can't demolish a building when it's full of people coming and going every day.
Twoofers to this day have still not shown how thermite can cut steel.
perhaps you have read 'operation northwoods' perhaps not. but there was no logical reason for it to be written in the first place. d.c. has been infiltrated by a very evil group of men, for you to take their side blindly is testament to how much research you really have done.
Operation Northwoods was a logistical exercise and not an actual operation, which is one reason it's declassified. Somehow, in their infinite wisdom, Loose Morals decided it would help their cause.
you are so full of crap you stink to high heaven, logistical exercise? yeah right, lets just sit around the pentagon spending taxpayers dollars planning to blow up parts of florida for an exercise and then blame it on cuba. the words to describe such an exercise are BULLFUCKINGSHIT.
@KJC24 nah dude i agree with u about many things but now ur just being short of bout tower 7 they actualy shoud realy investegate that shit or dont u agree?
have you looked at the crash site of flight 93 yet? if you think twoofers are nuts what will you think of a hole in the ground that has been there since at least 1994 and had an engine dug up from it? what is an engine doing in a hole from 1994? that is a legitimate question some people in government have yet to answer.
1979 - Just another lie perpetrated by the 911 bowel movement. All the actual eye witnesses, first responders and cleanup crew comprising of many hundreds of people are lying? Stop getting sucked in.
first hand video footage depicting the site right after the supposed crash and no wreckage, a photo on file with USGS from 1994 clearly showing the hole where mr beamer was supposedly dug up at and you DONT think someone is lying? if anyone was caught up in this fiasco it was you for believing a plane crashed there in the first place. to still deny it is living in denial.
I'd love to shove a false flag operation up David Ray Griffins ass. The man is such lying old fag I cant believe anyone would listen to his bullshit and lies.
also I watched a documentary called "911 press for truth"... for the Bush administration to carry this out would be unlikely, not for the military industrial complex, who stole 2.3 trillion dollars from the american people, that's 8000 dollars for every single american, child... etc. that was announced in spetember 10 2001, the next day everyone forgets... in the doc im pointing out a CIA involvement with the ISI seems clear...
Besides I watched that BBC doc on tower 7, which said fire brought it also down... but then I saw this video from a tower burning in Madrid, really engulfed in flames, not even close to the fires at tower 7 and of course it didn't collapse as any other high rise has done in the past... BESIDES all this reconsideration there's again the chemical proof, as stated in a PEER REVIEWED paper published in the dutch journal the Environmentalist...
The madrid tower was a reinforced concrete building. That's different to the WTC which was an entirely steel framed building and thus more vulnerable to fire. In the Madrid tower, the steel collapsed in 2 hours whilst the concrete remained strong despite fires.
Chemical proof? Stephen Jones has nanothermite, but only wants other twoofers to examine it. He debunks himself but not giving it to MIT or any material science institution. He knows it's not nanothermite, he's a liar like you.
...there's an insider, a former manager working at Underwriters Labs, a lab conducting damage experiments for NIST, who admitted data was manipulated, the fires never proved hot enough to EVEN soften steel, however computer models were manipulated as he states... he was fired.
They never conducted damage experiments. You mean they conducted fire tests on undamaged insulated floor systems. Far from being not hot enough to soften the steel, even WITH fire proofing, they had to halt 2 of the 4 tests because they were about to collapse.
They were right to fire him for telling lies under their company logo. He was thrown out of court too on all counts.
LOL... you know th ebuildings were built to withstand plane impacts with fuel on them, maybe you should do some reconsideration, ppl could walk through the "inferno" from the top of the south tower, at least watch "911 press for truth", you start from there... and then investiagte the CIA, ISI connections...
They were not built with a 550mph fully loaded 767. Leslie Robertson who designed the buildings says the fuel load was never considered and it was considering a 707 at approach speed.
Edna Cintron at the gash in the tower in NO way contradicts the NIST temperature models. All the heat was on the other side of the towers were the combustables were pushed. Maybe if you would read these reports instead of getting your information from junk conspiracy websites, then you'd learn a thing or two.
compare with WTC 7, this other tower burning for 24 hours didn't collapse
watch?v=6hSPFL2Zlpg&NR=1
use some common sense, have u thought of the radius of heat such an inferno would cause? refering to Edna C., and besdies look all the CIA connections before the events...
"Suspicious profits sit uncollected
Airline investors seem to be lying low" google that and there are many many other cases
1st video: 1 column? He did not mention the speed of the aircraft, the amount of damage it would do, or the effect of the fires. He obviously never did extensive research on it and did not have the benefit of hindsight.
2nd video: You do realize that this building was built AFTER 9/11 and it was also built to withstand EARTHQUAKES?
Google "ARUP tall orders" and you'll see them talk about building after 9/11. They built this building.
lol... many buildings have been built before to withstand earthquakes, oh I didn't know they based their construction blueprints on the faults of the twin towers having in mind making it stronger than them... oh probably they didnt... The towers were built to withstand hurricanes, multiple impacts, etc. u know... ill make some reasearch on that building but i doubt it was as strong as the twin towers
I've been watching more documentaries and I believe again you are mistaken... apparently people on the south tower, could cross the zone of impact through the only remaining stairway coming from the upper floors, there's even a photograph of a woman standing right at the impact zone, the building didn't get hot enough to damage the strucutral integrity of the towers, even the smoke wasn't white meaning oxygen rich, rather the flames were dying... besides there's an insider...
If you finished watching as I did...my conclusion goes.... after watching complete National Geographic Science & Conspiracy the most fundamental interrogants weren't ansewered, see my comments below, this doc is weak weak... can't assimilate its claims applying critical logic, I found more science and reason in this link:
It took them 2 years to simply model the impact. To accurately model the full collapse of the building would have taken a hell of a lot longer, and in fact would probably have not even been possible given the chaos of the collapse and the limitations of the CPU's
Precisely so it proved nothing, we already know the building was hit by a plane, now the question... could that possibly had caused the damage required to bring down... or apparently pulverize dozens of floors below since it collapsed at free fall speed like if the floors ontop the impact crushing the ones below met no resistance, pulverizing the concrete and steel below or crushing them like jello? Thousands of tiny pieces of and pulverized bone were found ontop an adjacent building...
You act like they did the simulation for the benefit of truthers. That's not why they did it. You act like explosives can puliverize concrete when they CANT. Watch my video on this subject. They also don't throw out heavy objects like that. Not unless you get one BIG bomb, which is impossible to disguise. You obviously have no idea how the explosives in a demolition work. The towers didn't fall at freefall speed either. You fail to have even basic powers of observation.
Yes, that's not why they did it, however the simulation adds nothing to the debate if it can't simulate the collapse, they show the plane impact WEAKEND the columns and assume that brought it down, not showing how it actually could've weaken it for collapse, yes it was not the intent, therefore it adds not much to the debate.
Nearly free fall speed, could you explain then, please, how could the buildings be crushed so fast?
There IS no debate. Unless you call it a debate between mice and men, where truthers be the mice and the entire civil engineering community be the man. Nobody in mainstream science doubts the explanation for the collapse of the towers.
Watch my "one way crush down not possible?" video, and there you will see a building have supports over 1 floor removed in the middle of the building, and the top part crushes the bottom part using only it's weight. It all happens at a very high speed.
YES, however height is a key word and u yourself said it: What surprises me is the actual surface area of the floors compared to the buildings height. WTC was able to focus its weight over a much smaller area.
Of every demolition I have seen using the hydraulic technique, no matter how hight or how much/little surface area on the floors, the building is stil able to destroy itself using its own weight and gravity.
I don't know what you mean about MIT. I only know of 1 person who graduated from MIT who is a truther.
I've seen other Verinage demolition videos and they seem quite convincing, however there are still various interrogants like the collapse of building 7 and the explosive chemicals found in the air... don't u agree? :) Indeed, it was somewhat enlightening that you pointed to those vids. but not all question have been answered... as I said, building 7, there were other buildings closer to the towers and those didn't collapse even more intriguing... no mention of it in the 911 commission report
Explosive chemicals? If you can show how those chemicals shouldn't have been in the building anyway, I'll listen.
Buildings closer did collapse, at least internally or partically. But since they were not high rise buildings, it would be hard for them to come down completely since no momentum can be gained in buildings less than 10 floors.
explosive chemicals... on the paper I previously pointed, I've just watched a BBC documentary on tower 7, they show it's possible for fire alone to have brought the building down, however thanks to this little discussion it became clear to me I was focusing my attention wrongly in trying to understand the nature of what happened, emerging from people's incredulity on how the attacks could've been conducted...
...could've been possibly conducted in the first place by osama bin laden and al qaeda alone against US intelligence... talking of the country that could probably stop a nuclear missile with its national missile defense, why not a plane? then how could it happen? everyone asked, was it an inside job, truthers are not being completely irrational but they might be focusing their energies in the wrong place, trying to explain this major national attack inconsistency...
what if it indeed this major inconsistency exists for some reason... What if the administration knew about the attacks and did nothing? Why they didn't respond? Why did they let it happen?
AND more... this is from peer reviewed paper: Investigators monitoring air quality at the World Trade Center, after the September 11th attacks, found extremely high levels of volatile organic chemicals as well as unusual species that had never been seen before in structure fires. Data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicate striking spikes in levels of benzene, styrene, and several other products of combustion... from The Environmentalist
... the dust cloud took those pieces there... as if the floors were exploding one by one and pulverizing as well the people inside... cancelling resistance for the floors ontop, even though in one video of the collapse it is clear how the floors ontop the impact when they start to fall diminish their volume and get reduced before they begin crushing the ones below, as if they were exploding, pulverizing, before the ones below started doing so... how can the floors ontop be crushed first?
NatGeo misses something, it says: Using blueprints... Purdue Uni, along with the American Society of Civil Engineers, created a model ...north WTC tower and a scaled 767 jetliner...The final simulation showed the internal destruction of supporting columns..and the resulting fires that softened the steel framework of the building and brought it down.. I SHOULD add that (they suppose) brought it down, because the simulation does not include a "real time" collapse, doesent even mention collapse
And the experiments, like the weakening of the steel column, even if it did gave way to a collapse of the floors ontop the impact how could the collapse of those floors ontop the rest of the structure happen at free fall speed as if those floors falling and crushing the ones below met no resistance? Why didn't they explain it? I thought they would
I thought the simulation would physically "simulate" the collapse but just the impact? It only simulates the plane crash but not the structural failure? Isn't the collapse what's in debate?
They don't explain the collapse of bulidng 7?? National Geographic just shows 10 seconds of that building's collapse without a word about it!? at 0:34 How can they not mention the sudden collapse of a 47 floors tall building?
And what about the simulation of the plane's impact into the towers, it explains the destruction from the impact but doesn't explain the collapse!!! I'm surprised, I love NatGeo but this was very weak
Sad to see NG, as well as so many ppl being played for a fool and used like a tool. "Experts" will tell you how a blatant lie in now held as truth.
MrNoblemanoflove 1 month ago
SUNY Purchase is part of the conspiracy because they didn't admit Dylan Avery into the film school. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
m015094 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@MegaYeshua33 Footage of Firefighters talking about how they were inside one of the towers and they described it "looks like a foundry". Did you see those iron workers cutting steel? High amounts of heat can bend steel like we saw that day and days after. Your telling me fire from a burning building was hot enough to do that? I thought it was only hot enough to weaken the steel? Your in denial until you can answer these. One day you will learn the truth and remember how foolish you were.
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
@enjoiwrx heat softens steel, How do you know that was not molten glass pouring from the corner of wtc2. I could care less what any president has to say. When 911 happened i thought it was great that the 3rd world finally struck back. To be honest. Also some of the people jumping out of the building were on fire.
MegaYeshua33 3 months ago
@SheriffBrettKeane Look where those lies got the country into now. Its all connected. PIG oink oink!!
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
• A petition to launch a real, public, subpoena-empowered, criminal investigation of the events of Sept. 11, 2001 is on the White House website. 5,000 signatures needed by 28 October 2011. Please go & sign that petition, & tell all your friends who care about the truth of 9/11. We need a new fully independent commission to investigate this horrified tragedy.
plau0088 4 months ago
Dylan Avery is a sack of lying bullshit!! Nice way to make some money by leading the gullible astray, Dylan!
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
Truthers are retards
terrymanning1 5 months ago
David Aaronovitch reminds me of David Brents more intelligent and respected older brother...mybe that why the Brentmiester General turned out to be such a loser
neilus 8 months ago
@neilus ?? How does that make sense? Aaronovitch is a real person and Brent is a fictional character. How about if you join the rest of us in reality?
NonnyMus1 5 months ago
Awesome program, its amazing how conspiracy theorists still won't accept it. I like what that rolling stones magazine journalist said. "They want something they know they'll never get...complete access to all files within the government"
callum1131 9 months ago
you have more thumbs down then up.
dylan avery is my hero!!! and terrymannning sucks cock
mindfuckerification 9 months ago
@mindfuckerification Wow. Another intelligent comment from a truther. No wonder your stupid movement is over with morons like you in their ranks.
Still Dylan Avery is grateful because he's got rich from idiots like you.
terrymanning1 9 months ago
you have more thumbs down then up.
mindfuckerification 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The National Geographic Channel is a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of News Corporation. Also know as Fox. Enough said.
TheAceman88 9 months ago
The National Geographic Channel is a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of News Corporation. Also know as Fox. Enough said.
TheAceman88 9 months ago
@TheAceman88 You are incorrect. In the U.S. The National Geographic Channel is 25% owned by National Geographic Television & Film and 75% Fox Cable Networks (News Corporation).
erikk77 9 months ago
@TheAceman88 LMAO BEST COMMENT OF THE DAY HANDS DOWN. Thanks for dropping knowledge on these fools.
Rememberthename8 5 months ago
@amh4176 What? How to make people scared with spooky music and more and more questions? They get their theories thrown in their faces in this show, and they just shrug it off and call "straw man". The truth movement is completely pathetic.
Swazi4 10 months ago
@amh4176
Loose Change is just about the most biased, one-sided, and unprofessional bullshit I've ever seen on YouTube.
AceofDlamonds 10 months ago 20
@AceofDlamonds Loose Change is really a messy grab bag of thinly sourced conspiracy claims. It lacks cohesive narrative that would otherwise give it some credit.
erikk77 9 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Then you obviously have not watched this NatGeoTV video above. The whole world knows that the official story is false, only a few brainwashed US citizens still cling to the 'Muslims did 9/11' conspiracy theory.
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
The whole world? That is a fucking lie. Only Ahmadinejad and his stupid followers believe everything he tells him in Iran......as for the other countries.....they can believe.....they just lack proof.
And it still remains........you have no proof of your conspiracy theory religion. The harrit paper, the base of the whole demolition belief, is refuted many times already. No reputable engineer cares about that shit paper....lol I can cite 10 methodological flaws from the top..
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Its the other way around: Nobody is speculating but the believers in the 'Muslims did 9/11' theory, which is not supported by any hard FACTS whatsoever!
The paper by Harrit et al. has never been refuted because no refutation has ever been peer-reviewed and published, not even in a vanity publication! I would agree that the findings of Harrit et al. are not the best proof for an inside job: The symmetrical, accelerating collapses through greatest resistance are the best evidence!
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
Harrit's paper has been critiqued by quite a bit of scientists (at least those who know about it!). Almost noone cares about it and it hasn't been famous because it has never been peer reviewed and published independently........you don't gather 5 truther friends and 1 fence sitter saying we believe these chemicals could only mean "thermite", when they represent thousands of tons of building material.
There were no bombs found and the sounds weren't as loud as a demo. god...
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
continued...
The "inside job" theory was just made up on the spot......it is their very job to prove that only an alternative series of events could have caused the 9/11 incident. Muslim extremism exists.....that is a FACT. Osama and KSM were engineers and had planned this for a while......and Al Qaida takes pride in what they do, like always.
Every one of these facts is responded to with Ad Hoc explanations from the conspiracy t side....it's just baseless.....get real.
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Jewish and christian and muslim extremism exist. No doubt, but off-topic.
Even if OBL and KSM (i would confess everything they wanna hear BEFORE being waterboarded) were the masterminds behind the 9/11 terror (i doubt it; OBL denied it repeatedly; all alleged 9/11 terrorists are claimed to be dead yet the wars continue), who rigged the three skyscrapers in NYC?!? Do you want their accomplices to walk free and maybe commit other crimes?!? Why are you unwilling to investigate them??
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
OBL denied it repeatedly? Source? OBL was said to have denied it from an unknown source, but later Al Qaida claimed pride in the attacks.
What accomplices are you talking about? You don't even know that they exist. Fact is, noone can rigg three enourmous buildings with that much explosive and equipment and remain undetected. I suppose all 9/11 deniers want to be engineers. Well, please go to school first. Jones/Harrit paper is bogus and noone really cares about it.
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. [...] I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. [...] It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam." -OBL
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
When you google "Binladen denies 9/11" you will find all the sources you need. (CIA, CNN, BBC etc.).
I can recommend the lectures by Webster Tarpley about 9/11. He has made some very interesting research.
Harrit et al. have submitted their paper to the peer review and have even revised it before publishing. If you had read it, you would have noticed! So please blabber on about something you don't know anything about.
No scientist or engineer can reproduce the collapses under lab conditions!
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
Harrit's paper isn't peer reviewed properly!! do you know anything about peer review??!! look at the authors for fucks sake....they are truthers themselves and fence-sitters. You can't publish it in a reputable journal that way, no wonder they did it with Bentham.Take Harrit's paper, walk to your nearest University, take it to the department of engineering/tech or chemistry/physics, and present it as a properly written scientific paper. I guarantee you it will be rejected.
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Of course the "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" paper was properly peer reviewed! One of those peers even went public. But by your definition, ANY author of such a paper, or peer reviewer who accepts it, would be a 'tinfoilhat-wearing twoofer'. Nice ad hominem!
Reproduce accelerating symmetrical complete collapse through the path of greatest resistant under lab conditions (ANY structure and/or material!), and i'll shut up!
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
LOL you don't know what the hell your talking about. There was no active thermite observed in the samples, which were not even made sure to be pure, something very unscientific. Second, Jones et al skips over several several other possible compounds from the gigantic towers that could account for the chemicals that HE THINKS, means "nanothermite". Now tell me, how is THAT scientific? This supposedly revolutionary journal isn't acknowledged by any major chemistry branch. WOW
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds An independent French scientist, who still believes the "Muslims did 9/11" conspiracy theory, confirmed most of the findings of Harrit et al.
Galileo Galileis findings were rejected by most of his peers and the establishment. Does that mean to you that there are indeed crystal spheres out there that the planets are attached to?
PS: Yesterday i met somebody who like you still believes that "Muslims did it", and freedom of religion allows it. But don't start wars over your believe!
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds
More importantly, Rummel, besides the fact that Jones and friends skip all those other compounds, what makes him think "nanothermite" would create a very loud controlled demolition? It wasn't loud and explosive at all! It was rumbling and tumbling. Why nano thermite anyway? Jones recently changed his damn mind after he looked over his own paper a couple times. Even he realizes it may be bullshit and has since said those chips were just "fuses" for "some other explosive". Right.
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@AceofDlamonds You sound like an disgruntled Steven Jones fanboy. Why don't we stop arguing until you can reproduce the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 under laboratory conditions? (You have complete freedom of choice of materials and structure!) Any accelerating complete collapse through the path of greatest resistance would silence me and earn you a Nobel prize in physics! Are you afraid of experiments? They are at the core of the scientific method!
RummelsdorfLabs 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
Reproduce the collapse? LOL Square cube law....you can't compare small scale falls to mega-scale phenomena. Can we reproduce evolution? no, but we can observe this phenomenon through fossils and geology of the Earth. The path of least resistance is the path down if you are trying to argue it would tip over (which is the most pathetic argument thus far). Noone is looking for a Nobel Prize but Harrit and Jones so deserve one if they could put a good theory together. =P
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@RummelsdorfLabs
Again, I want Jones and Harrit or ANY OF THE 1500 people (or the 11 structural engineers) at AE9/11 to make a good paper and have it reviewed by an independent board.....a board other than their own makeshift slop. There are dozens to choose from in the US; dozens of prestigious Engineering institutions.......Purdue, MIT, Stanford, Illinois, GIT, Delaware, etc. . And AE has made zero progress with any kind of paper so far. Good fight AE9/11.....good fight .... ;)
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RummelsdorfLabs
continued...
The "inside job" theory was just made up on the spot......it is their very job to prove that only an alternative series of events could have caused the 9/11 incident. Muslim extremism exists.....that is a FACT. Osama and KSM were engineers and had planned this for a while......and Al Qaida takes pride in what they do, like always.
Every one of these facts is responded to with Ad Hoc explanations from the conspiracy t side....it's just baseless.....get real.
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
wtf? these people should have waited a couple of years to release this, This Worlds FUCKED UP!!!
LilSpankey93 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I find it almost laughable that truthers still don't see the total absurdness in their theories. There have been so many acceptable explanations for the strange happenings of 9/11 that disprove their theories, yet they still will not accept that their whole case is flawed. They clearly have problems with government and authority and they don't know how to cope with their anger and grief affectively.
pwnedlikeanub 10 months ago
I find it almost laughable that truthers still don't see the total absurdness in their theories. There have been so many acceptable explanations for the strange happenings of 9/11 that disprove their theories, yet they still will not accept that their whole case is flawed. They clearly have problems with government and authority and they don't know how to cope with their angry and grief affectively.
pwnedlikeanub 10 months ago
@amh4176 you know they made loose change originally to be a fiction flim
retard
jonLukasC 11 months ago
The guy at 0:28 sounds like Jiminy Glick.
thecandidate0607 11 months ago
WTC,7? was not mentioned. those demo guys been well paid off.
tell me how and why did WTC,7 came down? mutha fuckas
EminemDirtyDozen 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HANGAR 17
JFK AIRPORT, NEW YORK
ZERO PIECES OF STEEL FROM WORLD TRADE CENTER 7.
WHY IS THAT?
bIZAROsPRMN11 1 year ago
KJC24's total disconnect from reality.
KJC24 sez: "There is no logical motive for destroying WTC7, and whats more... ITS NOT POSSIBLE."
in spite of incontrovertible evidence that WTC 7 WAS DEMOLISHED
kjc24 obviously believes otherwise.
what is not possible in the REAL world; that structural damage could be done to a steel framed 41 story skyscraper leaving it strong enough to stand for hours, and have a fire in the building later cause the complete
DEMOLITION in less than 7 seconds.
bIZAROsPRMN11 1 year ago
@bIZAROsPRMN11
Do you even read the method of collapse? dumbass.
JREF and other scientists are way ahead of you twoofers in scientific knowledge. Are you a structural engineer? Do you parrot David Ray Griffin and Gage's bullshit to make ur claim that only controlled demolition could do what happened at 9/11?
They have nothing on the engineers at JREF and anywhere else in the world. Go read.
AceofDlamonds 10 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Dude, why do you care what they believe. Let them believe whatever they want. They'll never admit it, because they know what idiots they'll look like. Actually....they want to believe it. It's not like they do anything anyway. All they do is make videos and talk about about it on youtube. Who cares.
WallStwizkid 5 months ago
@WallStwizkid
I understand that the movement has died down, but I still hate scapegoating like this....it's pure bullshit. They go batshit insane and start blaming "the government" or the "NWO" for all the problems. Imagine if we had a loon in office, even worse, in a monarchy, where they would have unlimited power. Scary.
AceofDlamonds 5 months ago
does Home Depot have better security cameras than the Pentagon?
KJC24 displays phenomenal IGNORANCE of what happened on 9-11-01.
kjc24 sez: "You can't demolish a building when it's full of people coming and going every day."
KJC24 that is EXACTLY what happened to WTC 1 and 2.
these people were murdered by this
DEMOLITION.
or, perhaps, to this day, in the twilight realm of your existence, you believe, as many do, that WTC 1 and 2 were not DEMOLISHED. that they merely "collapsed".
bIZAROsPRMN11 1 year ago
I bet Operation Northwoods and Condor operation is another conspiracy theory.They also forgot to debunk the WTC 7.OMFG let's not start another conspiracy theory.
Incawarlord 1 year ago
Truthers are scum.
Illumirage 1 year ago
Rupert Murdoch u spent millions to came up with this BS so called "debunked science"? This movie creates more questions rather than giving answers, u pathetic bastard! Not a single word about 7 tower, not a single word about the events after 9/11! Fake endless war on terror, brainwashing 24/7-365 all the people! Invasion in Afghan & Iraq based on lies, killing millions! Fake econ. crisis! Sellout of nations in Europe! Harsh measures! Endless Loans! Chems in skies! RFID card & the Chips coming!
Kickbasser 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The creepy thing is I ripped all 10 parts of this documentary off here with Wondershare YouTube Downloader.
Then I extracted the audio from them in .wav format. In total the 10 .wav files added up to 911 MB.
Weird man, weird.
areuter727 1 year ago
Comment removed
areuter727 1 year ago
Comment removed
DrD0000M 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Conclusion: Truthers should be sterilized.
Arguing with them is pointless.
DrD0000M 1 year ago 2
Non of this mentions how the WTC buildings were designed to withstand a 737 crashing into the building. Not a significant difference between that and a 747 only that a 747 is lighter.
enjoiwrx 1 year ago
@enjoiwrx Yeah, truther fail to mention was that it was designed to withstand a strike by a 737 at landing speeds. No one can design a high rise building that can withstand a jet intentionally flying into it. Or rather, prevent it from having severe structural damage caused to it. It's clear that the twin towers didn't just topple over once the planes struck them.
camalusthegodofwar 1 year ago
@camalusthegodofwar Yeah. A jet going 4-500mph head on into a skyscraper is going to cause some major fucking damage. It's so funny when they get all "that's impossible" on us..as if we were talking about shooting a rubber band into it.
WallStwizkid 5 months ago
@enjoiwrx Clearly you have never researched a 747 compared to a 737. A 747 was the biggest passenger jet in the world when 911 happened. It held 45,000 gals of fuel, and has 4 engines and a 200= ft wingspan.
MegaYeshua33 3 months ago
@MegaYeshua33 also 737 has a 90ft wingspan, And they said it could withstand a 707
MegaYeshua33 3 months ago
@MegaYeshua33 Your point being? What that a 747 cut through ALL the central concrete support beams and knocked the first ever steel encased, concrete column filled sckyscraper in about an hour. Pulverizing concrete and twisting steel like high amounts of heat bent the steel beams? Then underneath ground zero kept burning at thousands of degrees for months after the attack. Blackouts for 2 weeks before the attacks. Bomb sniffing dogs removed days before the attack. Iraq had WMDs? Make sense?
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
@enjoiwrx No two 767s cut through the structure of the buildings, causing massive fires witch heated the steel weakening it until total collapse. If a 747 would of hit it. It probably would of knocked out 60 to 70% of the beams and instantly dropped it. And if it were to of hit it low enough maybe even toppled it over sideways killing even more people. Thank god they were to stupid to use 747s. And if they were such complete liars. Why did they not just plant WMDs in Iraq?
MegaYeshua33 3 months ago
@MegaYeshua33 You still didn't answer any of the facts i asked you. Did the planes cut through the concrete support columns which is what supports all the weight? 60 to 70% of the beams, wow, i didn't know the planes hit multiple points up and down the towers. Why was concrete pulverized? Why did the buildings fall at free fall speeds which means no resistance. Why was there molten metal below ground zero for months? Massive fires, thats why FD said they could knock it out with two lines.
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
@enjoiwrx The core only supported 60% of the weight. And you made the claims that there were no difference between a 747 and a 737. Witch proved you do not fact check anything you say, and that you just make up shit up and call it the truth. And yes the columns did go from top to bottom of the buildings. They were all connected to one another. And by the way you did not even know what type of planes hit the building. If you would like me to be your tutor anymore you will need to pay me.
MegaYeshua33 3 months ago
@MegaYeshua33 i admit i am wrong about the difference in planes. Yet you still ignore the other facts i have asked you. Why are you afraid?? Even pictures of the aftermath show beams that were cut at angles like at a demolition. Why would i have a tutor who ignores everything else. I may not be a pilot or an architecht but there are thousands who call bullshit. Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth, Pilots for 9/11 truth. They put their jobs on the line not me. Why believe when they always lie
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
@enjoiwrx That steel was cut by iron workers after the towers fell, Another richard gage theory proving wrong. Why do you believe AE for truth when their leader is consistently caught lying.
MegaYeshua33 3 months ago
@MegaYeshua33 Its obvious you like to believe liars like bush and obama. When you can explain to me why there was molten metal underneath ground zero for months i will leave you alone. Explain in some of the footage you can see molten metal coming out from the towers close to impact point. Don't even come to me with "because of the jet fuel it was so hot", yet you can see victims waving for help in the two giant holes. Are you in denial sir? The beams were bent from a high amt of heat, explain??
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
@MegaYeshua33 10 years later and lie upon lie given to the people. Most people woke up now because of where the economy is. They don't buy the lies anymore. Why are we supposed to believe what they tell us when they keep lying. WMDs in Iraq, Nope! Troops deployed to Afghanistan Sept.10th, Public infromation, not reported. Also not reported on Sept. 10th 2001, Rumsfeld testifing about 2.3 trillion in unaccounted for transactions. Files kept where, Boom plane hit the pentagon sorry destroyed
enjoiwrx 3 months ago
thank you for showing this. i put this comment on october 2010 . it was monday and i was excited to watch it on tv but then it never aired. instead it showed some koran crap stuff.nobody wanted to see . it was litery depressing. kjc24 you rock.
AwesomePower1234 1 year ago
Why dont trufers do a collection for KSM defense if they believe they were innocent
Obelisk2290 1 year ago
Nice documentary. I was hoping for some info on WTC7 aswell though.
Redbeardian 1 year ago
Truthers are evidence that Al Quaeda won.
Tylonous 1 year ago
Troofers remind me of religious fucks that answer actual points and conversational debates with "WELL ITS JUST WHAT I BELIEVE"
They refuse to open their minds to even the POSSIBILITY, for just a moment to consider the evidence, to the other view(s).
It's like someone that feels they ALWAYS are taking the moral high ground, but in reality they are just so lost in their own head and feel they are the enlightened ones that nothing can save them.
Assaultpredator 1 year ago
Great series. I have only one problem. Now it is obvious that National Geographic is in on the plot! Damn how deep does this thing go?! But seriously you truthers need to realize that "common sense" does not apply here. There is no such thing as common sense when talking about things like structural engineering. Did the WT7 collapse look like a controlled demolition to me? Sure it did. but I'm not an engineer. You guys need to find some error in the NIST report and prove it wrong.
LordDavidVader 1 year ago
@amh4176 The government couldn't cover up a blow job!
soulinite 1 year ago
THANKS FOR POSTING THIS! This is one of many documentaries that analyzes and debunks ALL of the 9-11 Truthers, Infowars, and Alex Jones nutjobs out there. Some think they are so clever when they say "The WTC were designed to withstand a plane impact...blah blah blah..." ok genius, Titanic was designed to be unsinkable, how did that work out? KJC there is no use in arguing with them. They have to cling to this conspiracy because they are emotionally invested in it.
DarthByss 1 year ago
The Truthers like Avery, Griffin, and Jones will never admit that their theory is bull, and they know it, mark my words, not one of the three I mention above believes this. They continue with this movement becouse this is their Job, they sell their books, movies, they have they pay to join clubs, they are the leaders of a group, they have celebrity and power of a sort, they get on TV, even though its based on a lie to them its worth it. To the average truther, it wastes years of their lives.
JPPolachek 1 year ago
they are asking for a new investigation- and it is you who freely continues to deny them that right. why stand in their way if they are wrong? Are you going to protest in the street NOT to have a new investigation? Are you going to tell the victims family to listen to never question what the government tells you? If you allow yourself to believe that anyone who questions something is automatically thrown into a conspiracy category- it may be YOU one day who is thrown into a category as well
FutureLaugh 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh You know, I personally don't mind of they have a new investigation. I just dont want to get the bill for a totally unnecessary redundant investigation. Pay privately. There already was the BIGGEST investigation in history...But you guys found a few things you think are odd,,,but when professionals look at those same things they say they are not odd or strange. There isnt a mystery as to what happened. Ive studied it since it happened. The offical story is real.
JPPolachek 1 year ago
BIGGEST investigation that was grossly cheaper than the bill clinton sex scandal? that 7/10 911 commissioners didnt agree with the official story? That there is no logical reason building 7 fell into its own foot print? This was the greatest failure in american history and it changed all of our lives and the way we live them- so although you may think its redundant- would it hurt? Its getting to the point where people who believe the governments explanation fully are a minority at this point
FutureLaugh 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh Let me debunk you a bit budy... building 7 hit other buildings when it fell = that means it did not fall into its own footprint...that is a standard Truther claim that you will find has never been made by anyone ............
JPPolachek 1 year ago
are you saying that it didnt implode into itself - that it toppled onto other buildings? Because outside of your youtube post, i have never heard anythng about that so how did you? And the official 911 commission report on building 7 was inconclusive and called for more investigation. Lets entertain what you said is true- since when do steel reinforced concrete buildings, not partially, but completely collapse due to fires?
FutureLaugh 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh What I;m saying is this.....It did not land in its own foot print like you guys claim....when those buildings fell they crashed into the surrounding buildings and damaged them all severely....get it...that is NOT IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT. I was their and those buildings were scattered over block
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh And yes...Im saying it collapsed due to the fires...Remeber a jumbo jet did smash into it at 500+MPH it was loaded with a full tank of jet fuel for a cross country trip.....what do you find weird about that....i've never understood how anyone who saw those planes smash into those buildings can assume they couldnt collapse....they did collapse...and it started at the spot where the plane hit....so are you saying that some planted explosives survived the plane hit and fire??
JPPolachek 1 year ago
the building was built to be so strong it could handle a boeng 707. So the building did exactly what it was supposed to do. i believe the fires according to the fire department were minor and under control. But you have a good point that i never heard anyone address before- if there were pre planted explosives in the building- how were they effected by the exploding planes? im not an explosive expert but wouldnt some of them go off prematurely?
FutureLaugh 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh Hey...... it was built to sustain a 707, flying slow and they did not assume it would be fully loaded with fuel....dont ask me why,,,,,my guess would be because no building in the world can stand up to something like that happening......the head engineer who built the towers admits they did not figure in a fuel load ......not one engineer has ever claimed the buildings should not have collapsed....no credible engineers from anywere are surprised they collapsed,,,,
JPPolachek 1 year ago
if your agrument is that because building debris hit other buildings- that is proof it didnt implode on itself- i believe you are incorrect. Youve seen the video of the building collapsing into itself; and YES i imagine debris would hit other buildings either way. How does this prove any of your points other than the wtc7 was demolished and had debris fly from it much like the twin towers? I would say this argument is moot
FutureLaugh 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FutureLaugh@RBlack999 Please watch this one part of a debate it shows how the Truthers lie to us all.........Please people just watch this one part....its amazing how the Truther is lying and it is with one of the SCHOLARS here is the link Hardfire SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / FETZER / ROBERTS / WIECK / 2ND PROGRAM it on GOOGLEVIDEOS
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh Hey man, if they want to pay for a new investigation,,,,great,,,I'm all for that,,,I just dont want to spend one penny of my taxes to do it.....I have actually researched this and all these theories Truthers keep using as an excuse for a new investigation are RETARDED IDEAS....So just dont try to spend my taxes an you leprechaun search OK
JPPolachek 1 year ago
@FutureLaugh So tell me this....how should this new investgation be pain for...????? if you say through soley private funds I'll agree with you 100%.. But I would also ask one thing....Before it should be allowed you should have to bring forward one piece of evidence that your theories are true....And you dont have any....and dont try to bring up that little pile of Dust Griffin has been running around with for years now....its contaminated and is NEGATIVE FOR THERMITE...hes just an idoit
JPPolachek 1 year ago
Fantastic documentary. Some very good insights into the mind of conspiracy theorists. They hit the nail on the head with the idea that conspiracy theorists have trouble accepting the sincerity of others yet never doubt their own sincerity.
Daytimeofnight 2 years ago
thatis, they do an excellent job of portraying truthers as conspiracy theorists. Your opinion is exactly the point they wanted to propogate. I would of expected perhaps something more unbiased from the television show. The truthers are being scrutinized for asking questions and refuting the evidence served to them- and the aggressors of the show shrug their questions with psychological analysis for why they ask questions in the first place
FutureLaugh 1 year ago
how can one believe on US government
which keep its own PPLz in dark far away from the reality of the world
like USS liberty sunk by israeli ?
like WMD in IRAQ?
this 911 is no exception to it
i m not an american but i have many freinds from there
when i sit eat and talk to them there r nice and very helpful pplz but these poor american public don`t know what is going around them and who is playing with their lives and who is using them
who is taking advenatge of their naiveness.???
indiankute 2 years ago
in 1939 everyone who wasnt believe the poland threat to germany where called weirdo!!!
50 years later everyone agreed Hitler was the worst tyran conspirationnist!!
fear is the best motivation to go on war espacially for cheaper OIL and army supplie....
ddboris 2 years ago
a hit piece if i ever saw one, now i believe JFK was hit by the lone gunman...
yuchoobstalker 2 years ago
definitely a hit piece.....i guess the gulf of tonkin wasn't staged either....
etight504 2 years ago
"I have this bet, its a really irritating one for you; but in twenty years in time when im on my death bed. You'll come to me and say you know that silly theory i had back in 2009... I repent" - ROFL more like "Remember that 2009 theory i had, I was right, now die you fucken bastard."
justinmathew111 2 years ago
sick fuck
Treblaine 2 years ago
@justinmathew111
Just because we bust your fantasies, don't get all pissy on us.
The people who believed Gulf of Tonkin and Pearl Harbor were staged events are dead and considered stupid, why won't you be?
OF COURSE, You COULD go to Fresh Kills Landfill, get some steel (they are giving it away to charities) , and test it yourself. (Just ask NYU)
OR, you could present ANY PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, you don't have to be an internet Twoofer, you could just go investigate.
But, NO, huh?
Merlin5x5 2 years ago
nat geo cant show the clips of wtc 7, or even complete clips of wtc 1 and 2 falling completely because it would defeat their purpose, which is of course is to confuse and mislead the public some more. if they did show the wtc 1 ,2 and 7 clips too often people would pick up on the fact that they are falling way too fast to be just caused by fire.
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
fact: when concrete fiber board is shot at with an aluminum tube @500mph it will be punctured. why dont thye try it with concrete walls? because it will show them to be liars?
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
God thats hilarious. Do you have any idea how many crappy videos on YouTube get 5 stars? And you use this as a basis for what is true or not?
There is no logical motive for destroying WTC7, and whats more... ITS NOT POSSIBLE. You can't demolish a building when it's full of people coming and going every day.
Twoofers to this day have still not shown how thermite can cut steel.
Dumbasses with tin hats on their head.
KJC24 2 years ago 16
perhaps you have read 'operation northwoods' perhaps not. but there was no logical reason for it to be written in the first place. d.c. has been infiltrated by a very evil group of men, for you to take their side blindly is testament to how much research you really have done.
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
Operation Northwoods was a logistical exercise and not an actual operation, which is one reason it's declassified. Somehow, in their infinite wisdom, Loose Morals decided it would help their cause.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
you are so full of crap you stink to high heaven, logistical exercise? yeah right, lets just sit around the pentagon spending taxpayers dollars planning to blow up parts of florida for an exercise and then blame it on cuba. the words to describe such an exercise are BULLFUCKINGSHIT.
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
@KJC24
Love your logic and unwillingness to let these apparently self righteous people run wild on your channel.
Right on man.
Assaultpredator 1 year ago
@KJC24 nah dude i agree with u about many things but now ur just being short of bout tower 7 they actualy shoud realy investegate that shit or dont u agree?
gertaarz 1 year ago
@KJC24 its called 9/11 the great thermite debate look it up for god sakes!
TheWeaponsmith69 1 year ago
Thanks for putting up that vid KJC. I don't think it screened in Australia yet.
Too much airtime was given to griffins & co. We all know why those guys won't do any REAL experiments, or pay for another investigation.
They also fail to understand a 150 ton jet at 500mph creates over 382,000 tons of kinetic energy (K=0.5mv2).
It amazes me how these fools not knowing anything about science feel they have the ability to mock real scientists.
If laughter is the best medicine, I'm very healthy!
MrOllyK 2 years ago
have you looked at the crash site of flight 93 yet? if you think twoofers are nuts what will you think of a hole in the ground that has been there since at least 1994 and had an engine dug up from it? what is an engine doing in a hole from 1994? that is a legitimate question some people in government have yet to answer.
watch?v=yNVcTIo9y9A
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
1979 - Just another lie perpetrated by the 911 bowel movement. All the actual eye witnesses, first responders and cleanup crew comprising of many hundreds of people are lying? Stop getting sucked in.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
first hand video footage depicting the site right after the supposed crash and no wreckage, a photo on file with USGS from 1994 clearly showing the hole where mr beamer was supposedly dug up at and you DONT think someone is lying? if anyone was caught up in this fiasco it was you for believing a plane crashed there in the first place. to still deny it is living in denial.
vengencefrom1979 2 years ago
I'd love to shove a false flag operation up David Ray Griffins ass. The man is such lying old fag I cant believe anyone would listen to his bullshit and lies.
terrymanning1 2 years ago
forget about the black smoke argument, that's a bad one, but check out all the others...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
watch my playlist raising questions on 911
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
also I watched a documentary called "911 press for truth"... for the Bush administration to carry this out would be unlikely, not for the military industrial complex, who stole 2.3 trillion dollars from the american people, that's 8000 dollars for every single american, child... etc. that was announced in spetember 10 2001, the next day everyone forgets... in the doc im pointing out a CIA involvement with the ISI seems clear...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
Besides I watched that BBC doc on tower 7, which said fire brought it also down... but then I saw this video from a tower burning in Madrid, really engulfed in flames, not even close to the fires at tower 7 and of course it didn't collapse as any other high rise has done in the past... BESIDES all this reconsideration there's again the chemical proof, as stated in a PEER REVIEWED paper published in the dutch journal the Environmentalist...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
The madrid tower was a reinforced concrete building. That's different to the WTC which was an entirely steel framed building and thus more vulnerable to fire. In the Madrid tower, the steel collapsed in 2 hours whilst the concrete remained strong despite fires.
Chemical proof? Stephen Jones has nanothermite, but only wants other twoofers to examine it. He debunks himself but not giving it to MIT or any material science institution. He knows it's not nanothermite, he's a liar like you.
KJC24 2 years ago
...there's an insider, a former manager working at Underwriters Labs, a lab conducting damage experiments for NIST, who admitted data was manipulated, the fires never proved hot enough to EVEN soften steel, however computer models were manipulated as he states... he was fired.
watch?v=3FVJX79ohyU&feature=related
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
They never conducted damage experiments. You mean they conducted fire tests on undamaged insulated floor systems. Far from being not hot enough to soften the steel, even WITH fire proofing, they had to halt 2 of the 4 tests because they were about to collapse.
They were right to fire him for telling lies under their company logo. He was thrown out of court too on all counts.
KJC24 2 years ago
LOL... you know th ebuildings were built to withstand plane impacts with fuel on them, maybe you should do some reconsideration, ppl could walk through the "inferno" from the top of the south tower, at least watch "911 press for truth", you start from there... and then investiagte the CIA, ISI connections...
maybe you are wrong.
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
They were not built with a 550mph fully loaded 767. Leslie Robertson who designed the buildings says the fuel load was never considered and it was considering a 707 at approach speed.
Edna Cintron at the gash in the tower in NO way contradicts the NIST temperature models. All the heat was on the other side of the towers were the combustables were pushed. Maybe if you would read these reports instead of getting your information from junk conspiracy websites, then you'd learn a thing or two.
KJC24 2 years ago
747 fully loaded...
watch?v=p8Z_X8xgrF8
compare with WTC 7, this other tower burning for 24 hours didn't collapse
watch?v=6hSPFL2Zlpg&NR=1
use some common sense, have u thought of the radius of heat such an inferno would cause? refering to Edna C., and besdies look all the CIA connections before the events...
"Suspicious profits sit uncollected
Airline investors seem to be lying low" google that and there are many many other cases
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
1st video: 1 column? He did not mention the speed of the aircraft, the amount of damage it would do, or the effect of the fires. He obviously never did extensive research on it and did not have the benefit of hindsight.
2nd video: You do realize that this building was built AFTER 9/11 and it was also built to withstand EARTHQUAKES?
Google "ARUP tall orders" and you'll see them talk about building after 9/11. They built this building.
KJC24 2 years ago
lol... many buildings have been built before to withstand earthquakes, oh I didn't know they based their construction blueprints on the faults of the twin towers having in mind making it stronger than them... oh probably they didnt... The towers were built to withstand hurricanes, multiple impacts, etc. u know... ill make some reasearch on that building but i doubt it was as strong as the twin towers
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
the WTC could withstand a B 25 impact at the aproach speed of 180mph lost in the fog, not a 767 at 590 mph. Many times more kinetic energy
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
I've been watching more documentaries and I believe again you are mistaken... apparently people on the south tower, could cross the zone of impact through the only remaining stairway coming from the upper floors, there's even a photograph of a woman standing right at the impact zone, the building didn't get hot enough to damage the strucutral integrity of the towers, even the smoke wasn't white meaning oxygen rich, rather the flames were dying... besides there's an insider...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
If you finished watching as I did...my conclusion goes.... after watching complete National Geographic Science & Conspiracy the most fundamental interrogants weren't ansewered, see my comments below, this doc is weak weak... can't assimilate its claims applying critical logic, I found more science and reason in this link:
watch?v=b74naeawdCs
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
The simulation didn't show how the impact led to the collapse??
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
It took them 2 years to simply model the impact. To accurately model the full collapse of the building would have taken a hell of a lot longer, and in fact would probably have not even been possible given the chaos of the collapse and the limitations of the CPU's
KJC24 2 years ago
Precisely so it proved nothing, we already know the building was hit by a plane, now the question... could that possibly had caused the damage required to bring down... or apparently pulverize dozens of floors below since it collapsed at free fall speed like if the floors ontop the impact crushing the ones below met no resistance, pulverizing the concrete and steel below or crushing them like jello? Thousands of tiny pieces of and pulverized bone were found ontop an adjacent building...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
You act like they did the simulation for the benefit of truthers. That's not why they did it. You act like explosives can puliverize concrete when they CANT. Watch my video on this subject. They also don't throw out heavy objects like that. Not unless you get one BIG bomb, which is impossible to disguise. You obviously have no idea how the explosives in a demolition work. The towers didn't fall at freefall speed either. You fail to have even basic powers of observation.
KJC24 2 years ago
Yes, that's not why they did it, however the simulation adds nothing to the debate if it can't simulate the collapse, they show the plane impact WEAKEND the columns and assume that brought it down, not showing how it actually could've weaken it for collapse, yes it was not the intent, therefore it adds not much to the debate.
Nearly free fall speed, could you explain then, please, how could the buildings be crushed so fast?
watch this...
watch?v=iwN-koZt1Ig&feature=response_watch
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
There IS no debate. Unless you call it a debate between mice and men, where truthers be the mice and the entire civil engineering community be the man. Nobody in mainstream science doubts the explanation for the collapse of the towers.
Watch my "one way crush down not possible?" video, and there you will see a building have supports over 1 floor removed in the middle of the building, and the top part crushes the bottom part using only it's weight. It all happens at a very high speed.
KJC24 2 years ago
I saw it and you have a point... mais je vais recherche ;)
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
MIT is not mainstream?
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
YES, however height is a key word and u yourself said it: What surprises me is the actual surface area of the floors compared to the buildings height. WTC was able to focus its weight over a much smaller area.
when it could've gone sideways
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
Of every demolition I have seen using the hydraulic technique, no matter how hight or how much/little surface area on the floors, the building is stil able to destroy itself using its own weight and gravity.
I don't know what you mean about MIT. I only know of 1 person who graduated from MIT who is a truther.
KJC24 2 years ago
I've seen other Verinage demolition videos and they seem quite convincing, however there are still various interrogants like the collapse of building 7 and the explosive chemicals found in the air... don't u agree? :) Indeed, it was somewhat enlightening that you pointed to those vids. but not all question have been answered... as I said, building 7, there were other buildings closer to the towers and those didn't collapse even more intriguing... no mention of it in the 911 commission report
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
Explosive chemicals? If you can show how those chemicals shouldn't have been in the building anyway, I'll listen.
Buildings closer did collapse, at least internally or partically. But since they were not high rise buildings, it would be hard for them to come down completely since no momentum can be gained in buildings less than 10 floors.
KJC24 2 years ago
explosive chemicals... on the paper I previously pointed, I've just watched a BBC documentary on tower 7, they show it's possible for fire alone to have brought the building down, however thanks to this little discussion it became clear to me I was focusing my attention wrongly in trying to understand the nature of what happened, emerging from people's incredulity on how the attacks could've been conducted...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
...could've been possibly conducted in the first place by osama bin laden and al qaeda alone against US intelligence... talking of the country that could probably stop a nuclear missile with its national missile defense, why not a plane? then how could it happen? everyone asked, was it an inside job, truthers are not being completely irrational but they might be focusing their energies in the wrong place, trying to explain this major national attack inconsistency...
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
what if it indeed this major inconsistency exists for some reason... What if the administration knew about the attacks and did nothing? Why they didn't respond? Why did they let it happen?
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
AND more... this is from peer reviewed paper: Investigators monitoring air quality at the World Trade Center, after the September 11th attacks, found extremely high levels of volatile organic chemicals as well as unusual species that had never been seen before in structure fires. Data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicate striking spikes in levels of benzene, styrene, and several other products of combustion... from The Environmentalist
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
... the dust cloud took those pieces there... as if the floors were exploding one by one and pulverizing as well the people inside... cancelling resistance for the floors ontop, even though in one video of the collapse it is clear how the floors ontop the impact when they start to fall diminish their volume and get reduced before they begin crushing the ones below, as if they were exploding, pulverizing, before the ones below started doing so... how can the floors ontop be crushed first?
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
NatGeo misses something, it says: Using blueprints... Purdue Uni, along with the American Society of Civil Engineers, created a model ...north WTC tower and a scaled 767 jetliner...The final simulation showed the internal destruction of supporting columns..and the resulting fires that softened the steel framework of the building and brought it down.. I SHOULD add that (they suppose) brought it down, because the simulation does not include a "real time" collapse, doesent even mention collapse
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
And the experiments, like the weakening of the steel column, even if it did gave way to a collapse of the floors ontop the impact how could the collapse of those floors ontop the rest of the structure happen at free fall speed as if those floors falling and crushing the ones below met no resistance? Why didn't they explain it? I thought they would
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
I thought the simulation would physically "simulate" the collapse but just the impact? It only simulates the plane crash but not the structural failure? Isn't the collapse what's in debate?
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
They don't explain the collapse of bulidng 7?? National Geographic just shows 10 seconds of that building's collapse without a word about it!? at 0:34 How can they not mention the sudden collapse of a 47 floors tall building?
And what about the simulation of the plane's impact into the towers, it explains the destruction from the impact but doesn't explain the collapse!!! I'm surprised, I love NatGeo but this was very weak
NatralisticPantheist 2 years ago
thanks for posting these
sadgar 2 years ago
Truthers are nutjobs. Each & every one of them.
terrymanning1 2 years ago 2
Truthers vs saners
8sathompson 2 years ago