The minions of A&E. No university, research centers, technical journals, scientists, associations of engineers, pilots, architects, firefighters and medical believe the lies and the demolition of the A&E. The same in Asia, Oceania, Canada, Europe and South America. The list below is today.
I have the link of all. Always find more on the internet. There evidence against the towers and WTC7.Only 0,0001% of U.S. engineers are in A&E. Without the universities the A&E will never convince the U.S. Congress to reopen anything to clear Al-Qaida. The A&E already been born defeated. As well as its false science.
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Perdue, School of Civil Engineering,
University of Texas at El Paso, Department of Computer, Department of Civil Engineering, Science & Department of Public Administration,
University of Notre Dame, Department of Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences and the Student Chapter of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
If buildings were falling from these kinds of fires there would be skyscrapers falling down all over the world, but they aren’t, because they operate in reality
So silverstein actually talked about the possibility of demolition. Truthers seized on this not realizing That this was all happening as the day evolved, not premeditated. And the insurance was still paid! So obviously the insurance companies were in the loop. None have filed insurance fraud claims. Truthers don't even wonder why this is. Very sad
Here's the funny thing about it horjan. Silverstein was actually heard talking to his insurance company about possibly bringing 7 down in a demolition. He's reasoning was it was essentially destroyed by tower 1 and fire and he was concerned it would fall unpredictably. It consequently fell a short time after. But he was actually conferring with his insurance co on the matter, presumably to determine what doing such a thing would do to his claim.
@iss. U do see the smoke billowing from both sides don't you? The video is primarily of the north side which was the least effected, the south side was the most heavily involved. , but you can see the east and west sides are heavily involved can't u?
Ur issue with 7 again dismisses historical precedent (fire CAN and DOES weaken steel to the point of structural failure) and the FDNY observed the condition of 7 very closely. They determined inevitable collapse and created a perimeter while seemingly thousands were trapped, halting rescue because of it. R u seriously saying after losing 343 the dept would ignore evidence of CD if ANY existed? Think it thru before blindly following pricks like Alex jones.
@therogue. So u r saying explosive charges create fine cement dust? Really. Do u have any idea how much work is actually involved in attaching charges to exposed steel? Clearly you don't cuz if u did u'd realize right away the impossibility of doing so without detection. All the Sheetrock that would have to be removed, not to mention the fact that security (PAPD, not Securecom) would surely have noticed the literally tons of explosive material going in.
How Many totally involved multi alarm fires have you been to in NYC ? Fires DO NOT PULVERIZE well cured concrete turning it into portland cement as like in the Impact of WTC #1 just take note of the fine talc and paper and know they EXPLODED OUTWARD. crashing into and exploding out of are 2 completely different events but you would have us believe a building 300 yrds away collapsed into its own basement in 7.2 seconds some 9 hrs later because of "office fire's and then theres Larry's PULL IT ?
@TheRoguelement Ask Shamrock here - he was a firefighter. Also I've discussed the issues many times with a FDNY veteran who WAS there on 9/11. He goes by the handle 'Triforcharity' on JREF if you want to ask him yourself.
You're just reciting a string of talking points (there are probably hundreds of them), which is not a meaningful argument, to be blunt.
You brought up 'pull it'! Really? You might as well add 'the hole in the pentagon was too small for a plane' LOL
@AlienEntity1 And unfortunately only the mentally blind and foolish can buy the government's bullshit. "War on Terror." Right because if Iraq's main export outlet wasn't Petroleum we would've still went to war.
@sit. Wait a second, I answered ur post 1st!! Oh well
And horjan, the point about the insurance virtually debunks all moronic truther beliefs. Swiss re was on the hook for upwards of 4 billion. They sent adjusters to the site right away. They have the most to lose financially and yet they paid the claim. Not one mention of insurance fraud by them.
@Shamrock3939 Yeah, and if Silverstein destroyed wtc 7, wouldn't the insurance companies at least investigate what happened on 911? The insurance argument is, as you say, ridiculous.
So many truther myths, so little time....sigh. You kill one with facts and another one pops up - kind of like athlete's foot only it affects the minds of truthers. Too bad there isn't a spray to cure it.... pfffft!! Gone!
Cool. Codeman changed his handle. Umm Larry Silverstein did not make 7 billion. Just another stupid truther talking pt. the insurance goes to the rebuild. He paid a couple million a month in rent since 9/11 with no income. Bush brother left the security company a year before 9/11 and 6 months before his brother became president. Please explain how demolition would cause "fine powder".
After watching the blazing inferno in Madrid burn for 24 hours continuously and never structurally failing, it's laughable that people would think a floor or two on fire would cause this unbelievably massive structure to crumble to dust...haha ...19 terrorist, 6 that are still alive with no training flew incredible maneuvers, police knew bc of a passport found in the dust, pres and attorney gen. say they never thought of planes, military says they had drills for this and were having one that day
@SuperCodeman23 Congratulations! You've won the award for the most discredited nonsense contained in one comment!
You laugh at things you do not understand, that's the real problem. Simple minded nitwits like you who've never completed a graduate physics course think they know it all..... newsflash - you don't.
What are your sources behind these claims and underlying accusation? Truther websites right? Or other truthers? Stop recycling truther nonsense, and actually do some work for your self, go look for the answers to your questions on your own, remove your bias filter, accept the answers you get, then talk. The thing about saying things like "says they never thought of planes" etc is that you know nothing of whats behind that. As for the military drills, and what it means.
Just wondering about Larry Silverstein's profit of 7 billion off the insurance, as well as the United Airlines put options, or the fact that WTC towers were recently "rewired" and much construction was taking place the weeks before. Workers said a fine dust was distributed around as though people were drilling concrete. Bush's cousin or brother was with security, Bin ladin's were meeting Bush Sr. that morning, Bin ladin's were blamed, most heavily secured pentagon was penetrated with no fight..
@SuperCodeman23 Don't forget to include these and more moronic myths in your next comment.
Get your 'Yes, I can recite more whackadoodle 9/11 conspiracy myths in one sentence than you' package now by calling this toll-free number, and we'll send you the '10 truther canards which are based on nothing' value pak with your order.
Don't delay, this is a limited time con, get your truther myths now by calling, and have your credit card ready! Operators are standing by...
The fact that Silverstein had insurance, as any owner would, doesn't at all work as evidence of guilt. If it did, any insurance company could say, you insured your car, or your house, and now it's on fire, therefore you did this yourself, because you "gained" from it. Do you think the Pentagon could fight back as a building on its own? Do you think there were missiles there ready to fire at any incoming airplanes? Biased logic like this can be found all over your comments
@sit. Pre 9/11 there were 7 bldgs, although bldg 7 wasn't technically on the site, it was considered apart of the complex. Bldgs 1&2 were the twin towers (bldg 1 was the north tower, the 1st one struck by a jet). Bldg 3 was actually a hotel. Bldgs 4,5 and 6 were not very tall. You could walk to each bldg without crossing any street (except for7). There was a large plaza right in the middle of the complex
@sitidol The world trade center was basically a whole block composed of many different buildings, WTC 1 and 2 were the most prominent, but there were others that were crushed and destroyed when the towers fell. No need to apologize for asking, that's the only way you learn! Take care.
Apparently u r more informed and smarter then the FDNY, NYPD, PAPD, city engineers, steel workers and demolition teams, not to mention all the big structural engineering firms across be globe. Sorry lee, it's u who need to do the research and not blindly follow richard gage and Alex jones.
The largest insurance company in Switzerland, (a notoriously anti war country,) pays out over 4 billion in what u believe is an obvious case of insurance fraud and the best comeback u have is I need to do research.? If u r hinting at the law suit, even that supports a terrorist attack and Silverstein properties lost the suit
And again, 400 + 1st responders die, many are sick today and yet there isn't any support for ur type among them. That should tell u something but apparently u r more info
After the death of 400 + 1st responders, do u really believe if ANY evidence of CD exists that u could keep the FDNY, NYPD, PAPD from coming forward with what would have been literally tons of evidence? Especially since so many are sick today from exposure to toxins. If u pay attention, the depts as a whole r really upset by the EPA and Whitman over air quality but no one is outraged by what u claim is evidence of CD
Also, why did Swiss reinsurers pay up to 4 billion if ANY evidence of CD exi
@lee. What u don't understand is that men cleaned up the debris. NONE found any evidence of CD. That's just a fact. Yes, explosions were heard. U claim there are 1st responders and cleanup guys (steel workers, etc) who claim CD? I retired from FDNY 6 years ago. I Can't find one guy who supports CD. Vodvarka tried to get a movement going and nobody who was there joined him.
By the way, there were NO perfectly cut beams. That's a typical truther lie. The site was cleaned up ostensibly by demotion teams. They cut the beams u see in the dismantling process. Don't u think they would have been alarmed (along with EVERYBODY down there) if evidence like that existed. And please tell me how demolition causes concrete to become powder?
@Shamrock3939 even is it was cut before or after.. still overwhelming evidence... tiny explosions here n there, puffs of concrete vaporized, lil flashes of light, PEOPLE WAVING IN THE HOLE PLANE FLEW THREW... shamrock, take a second to allow yourself to say, its probably possible then go over the facts.. dont just shut urself down like u have been programmed to do..
@Shamrock3939 so the truthers have become the conspiracy theory? thats a conspiracy theory shamrock ima dismiss that..? Sound right? about the powder check this video watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q&feature=related
@lee. So I guess the FDNY are in on it. They r the ones who saw "major fires on many floors". And now ur argument has changed. Before it was "fires cannot cause collapse of steel bldgs ". Now since u were proven wrong about that u have qualified it by saying the other steel bldgs were involved with infernos. The FDNY says there were major fires so I suppose u'll have to change it to "infernos in NYC"
@Shamrock3939 in fernos yea right buddie.. and dont matter to me if they say one thing and others say another.. im looking at the facts. Those fires were not hot enough period. Your name dropping FDNY.. might as well say NYPD, and FBI and CIA.. Ive heard lots of FDNY say both sides.. Why are there 2 stories of that day from FDNY.. Could it be some dont want to believe like you dont want to believe. I admit its crazy to think this but i cant look past the facts. Some say this some
AS FOR A REASON?!? Its in the bible, they are in control of this world. Same reason they lie about history, bible facts, dinosaurs, evolution, that list goes on.. Get right with God for truth.. ITS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE.. our fight is against rulers, people of power, they WILL SUCCEED in this world up until Jesus comes you WILL BE Fooled unless you have God's help thats point blank. Last days non believers will grow. Evil is here Satan is here and hes working on each of u diligently. Believe that
Dont let this guys talk you into thinking this building collapse due to a fire.. ANY OTHER STEEL BUILDING THAT DID was IN-GULFED in FLAMES for hours.. not just couple of floors i mean an inferno. Anyone that thinks this building came down like it did because of couple of floors on fire is completely brainwashed or working for the govt. Beams cut perfectly on wtc1 n 2, vaporized concrete, loud explosions before any collapse, ground floors completely mangled before any collpase.. the list goes on
@lee. The video is at least 3 hours before collapse. I know this because the FDNY secured the area long before it collapsed. The reporter would not have been there after this time. So the windows would not have been blown out by CD unless u believe they used a 3 plus hour count down demolition.
Those floors r on fire at that depth of the bldg so the window breakage isn't all that intriguing
@AlienEntity1 I was just curious to see what was your overall opinion about the video since they are all professionals on different fields. Does not the video make you doubt a little bit? I myself found this video but also all your responses very interesting. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
@abe. Do u know how many architects and engineers there actually are? That u are impressed by that number is sad. That represents less then 1% of architects and engineers. How many of those are actually structural engineers like the ones who investigated and determined cause? How many of those has EVER published a peer reviewed journal article? Fact is people like u have made Richard gage a lot of money.
The mistake u make is that u believe what is seen on video is a simultaneous global collapse when in reality what is seen on video is really just the north face of the bldg. the interior collapse started a full 6 seconds before the walls. The bldg had an odd design in that it had very little redundant support. It was known to be a vulnerable design (con Ed substation). Again, no one on site reported any signs of demotion before , during or after. I guess ur just smarter then everyone there
If u actually watch video of collapse, there was a sequence to it. The east penthouse clearly collapsed 1st. The collapse progressed east to west. And in fact the bldg did in fact fall towards the south. This is not so obvious in the videos available but is seen in the debris pile.
I am just curious why u think u know more about what must have caused it then those who investigated.
Theres no way that areas unaffected by fire damage would collapse into itself unless there was demolition......Sure fire could weaken areas of the structure and cause it to collapse in those areas first....but to collapse completely into itself with no lean or topple perfectly? to many questions about that kind of result from just fire!
@Titan7170 Your entire post is an argument from incredulity - basically 'I don't understand, therefore it can't have happened'.
This is not a valid scientific approach, it's just a cop-out.
You probably are not very knowledgeable in structural engineering or fire science, or computer engineering and modeling. Therefore you cannot expect to comprehend those sciences without some serious study.
@AlienEntity1 why is there more than 700 architects and engineers challenging the "official" story? none of them know what they're talking about? it doesnt really take much brain power to see that the US government is very corrupt, and that they either the provoked the attacks and let them happen, or had a hand in it themselves.
@Abe91195 The problem with a blanket 'argument from authority' is that it really means nothing scientifically.
If AE911Truth wanted to make a valid scientific argument they'd suck it up and go thru the proper scientific process - get their work published in an established, peer-reviewed scientific journal or engineering journal.
But they haven't bothered to do that. I think they know they can bamboozle enough people with rhetoric and videos. That's enough for them
@AlienEntity1 Im sure if the government wanted a building demolished silently they could do it......thermite,dexpan and who knows what other methods can be used to do something like this.......if you are saying that just fire dropped this building then it even makes a stronger case..... their thoughts" just let it burn itll crumble into itself" Im sure engineers working for the government would know this. Something is very wrong about certain aspects of this whole 9/11 situation!
@AlienEntity1 In addition I guess you are very knowledgable in Structural engineering,fire science, and computer engineering and modeling yourself so you have all the answers.....of course someone with this kind of knowledge is going to spend extensive amounts of time on youtube educating the uneducated lmao! On the net you can be anyone.....live the fantasy my friend! hahahaha!
@Titan7170 The leaders of the truth movement have seized on a number of superficial memes which they use as propaganda/talking points to convince lay people with.
Memes such as:
Freefall = controlled demolition
symmetry = controlled demolition
fires cannot bring down large buildings
etc etc.
The problem is, NONE of those things are reliable, true or empirical tests. They're actually ARGUMENTS FROM INCREDULITY disguised as facts.
I believe that the U.S. government lies about various things, but, the whole 911 conspiracy "thing" is incredibly daffy. The U.S. doesn't need much provocation to go to war, either. We went to war, in Viet Nam, as the result of a false flag operation called the "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" - some small gun boats supposedly firing on a Navy vessel (it never happened). But to believe the U.S. would plot and carry out 911 makes no sense - it's transparently crazy. It makes no sense, on any level.
@guymerritt Precisely, don't truthers think that two planes flying into the twin towers would be enough to start a war? Why bring down building 7 as well and increase the costs and the risk of being exposed? What an idiotic waste that would be.
@titam. FEMA, American society of civil engineers, society of fire protection engineers, National fire protection association, American institution of steel construction, council of tall bldgs and urban habitat, structural engineers association of NY. All headed by structural engineers, all involved in determining the cause of collapse of 7. All agree fire did it. Who do you have. Richard gage? Not even an engineer. That you don't care what those firms say is just sad
@titan. Are u a structural engineer? Cuz I'll give you several structural engineering firms who completely disagree with ur assessment. And you won't be able to show me ANY structural engineering firms who agree with you. I'll take the words and the peer reviewed assessments of the PHDs over you any day of the week.
@dad. 1st it didn't collapse in its own footprint. 2nd ur not willing to change ur mind renders any new investigation moot. 3rd. The FDNY determined 7 would collapse early in the day. They abandoned trapped civies and colleagues because they knew it would collapse, it was that dangerous. They watched it fall. None report explosive demolition sounds during collapse. None report finding any evidence of CD in the debris. These are facts not in dispute and ur unwillingness to accept it is just pig
@death. Look up kadar toy factory and delft technical university fire. steel structures collapsed due to fire alone. Qualifying it by saying they weren't sky scrapers is stupid. Bottom line, fire can and does weaken exposed steel to the point of failure. It's an historical fact.
And the reason NIST didn't look for explosives is the investigators on the ground FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVE DAMAGE. Yes I'm screaming. It's not complicated
I do not believe the official story. nothing you can say will change that . all I'm asking for is a new investigation.Why did NIST avoid researching explosives? If you have proof of high rise buildings falling peculiarly similar to controlled demo's due to fire, please elaborate. I would like to hear your opinion. I am speaking of building 7 . I'm sure you are aware of fire damage causing buildings to fall but not "sink" into their own footprint like 7 did.
@dadsjav68 "I do not believe the official story. nothing you can say will change that"
Are you serious? That is a disgracefully close minded thing to say! This sounds like faith. Is the 911 conspiracy theory some kind of a cult?? To call yourself a truther is grossly hypocritical. No one who cares about the truth uses phrases like "nothing you can say will change that."
You are an insult to the victims of 911 and you are a disgrace.
@dad. U r wrong. Historically there have been steel bldgs that have come down due to fire alone. It's a fact. Sadly most truthers do not know this so they repeat lies they have heard from other truthers.
@dadsjav68 Why do you people keep repeating these myths? Do you think it helps to uncover 'truth'???
Of course fires bring steel buildings down. They have many times in history.
Ask yourself a simple question: If fire cannot destroy a steel building, then why do steel buildings require that SFRM (fire insulating foam) be sprayed onto all structural steel, BY CODE??
And ur point about the govt lying is not untrue. It's just in this case they wouldn't have the means to control the story. Too many variables, too many potential witnesses make it unrealistic. Thousands watched the event in real time. Any conspiracy would know this would be the case. A more plausible argument would be the govt ALLOWED it to happen. But the notion of rigging 3 bldgs without detection or defection just doesn't cut muster.
@faby. The man u r referring to was Rich Riscorla. And to me he is an important aspect to this whole debate. U r correct in saying he was keenly aware of the terrorist threat and remained steadfast in protecting the company he worked for. I find it highly unlikely such a man would miss the literally tons of material going into the bldgs that would be required for demolition. His antenna was up since the bombing.
@bommel. U may not understand my point, but ur referencing that 5 and 6 were closer then 7 but did not collapse is another irellevent point. Did u know that a tree not 50 feet from tower 2 survived the collapses and still stands today? Further, a handful of people actually survived tower 1's collapse from the inside. Making sweeping generalities of should have happened is an exercise in futility
And if u dont believe in something that has been scientifically established by many structural engineering firms and is accepted by nearly the entire scientific community then yes, it is incumbent upon u to prove ur theory. That's how science works in the real world. If the FDNY says that major fires on many floors involved 7 after tower 1 collapsed, then u have to prove otherwise.
@bommel. So I guess u will contd with the idea that u know better then the professionals? The Windsor bldg was a reinforced bldg, none of the wtc bldgs were. Apples and oranges. Typical of a truther
@bommel. Yes, burning debris caused by tower 1's collapse. Confirmed by the FDNY. U doubt that the tower collapse caused this, the FDNY disagrees with u. U must have taken a break when I 1st stated this.
As a matter of fact the FDNY reported burning debris (at least 1 vehicle) caused by cascading fiery debris before the towers even collapsed. How can this be?
@bommel. U doubt that falling debris could have caused those fires but then u are totally ignoring the point of view of the FDNY who were actually there and witnessed the whole thing. U seem remarkably self assured. Are U really suggesting u know more then the eye witnesses whose very careers involve determining the cause of fires? Gimme a break.
@babylove. Don't u think the cars would have moved positions, perhaps overturned or at least become mangled if that was the result from bombs? All I see are burned out shells of cars that were aflame.
Any idea, how the fire in WTC7 started? Falling debris? Doubt that! And how big are the chances, that 3 buildings with a steel structure are collapsing on one day, because of a fire, although it never happened before?
@Bommelmensch We know exactly how the fires started, same thing happened to WTC 5 and 6, which were set on fire by the flaming debris from the tower collapses.
RU suggesting that the massive fires in WTC 5, 6 and 7 were not caused by the tower collapses? If so, what evidence do you have to back up that opinion?
As far as the odds, apparently they were quite high. Nobody in history had ever flown high-speed jets into 110-story towers before, so we have no precedents.
@AlienEntity1 Why should I prove something is not there? It's you who has to prove that debris is in the building! Same with religious numb nuts, who ask Atheists to prove there is no God!
Also, there was no structural damage by the debris and fire wouldn't explain the collapse! Search for 'Windsor Building'!
@Bommelmensch It's called burden of proof. If you are claiming that something other than the flaming debris caused the fires, then you need to support that argument with evidence.
On the other hand, since you say you doubt debris caused it, you of course cannot prove that it didn't. So actually you set yourself up for an impossible situation.
Don't blame me.
And instead of addressing the questions put to you, you've changed the subject.
@Bommelmensch You are making several false statements now. They are not true.
1) you falsely claim there was 'no structural damage'. That's just false and stupid
2) you falsely claim that 'fire wouldn't explain collapse'
Not only are you trying to prove a negative, which you've admitted is impossible (which shows you are not being rational), but you have no evidence that the fires in WTC 7 couldn't cause collapse.
@Bommelmensch What's the point of using another building to address WTC 7? The structures are not the same, so why would you expect them to behave the same?
In fact, towers have collapsed due to fires. But not in 2006 or 2007 - in 2008 a tower of the University of Delft collapsed from fire alone.
So that essentially kills your argument, even while it was a fallacious argument to begin with.
@Bommelmensch Another problem with your Apples vs Oranges argument lies in the fact that the steel portion of the Windsor tower in Madrid DID COLLAPSE from the fire.
Only the reinforced concrete part withstood the fire.
So again, unknowingly you are disproving your own arguments because you don't understand the subject well enough. The steel in Madrid DID FAIL, thus proving that fires cause steel buildings to fail......
@Bommelmensch If you wanted to make a direct critique of the NIST hypothesis, you'd have to show, in engineering terms, why their idea of thermal expansion leading to failure of joints and bolts is incorrect.
Did you know that not a single truther has published an alternative hypothesis in a peer-reviewed engineering journal?
Not one.
Yet there are now between 40 and 50 peer-reviewed papers which support the mainstream consensus. The science is devastating to your arguments.
@Bommelmensch Don't forget to include, in your engineering analysis, your reasoning as to how multiple floors could collapse in WTC 5 due to thermal expansion (which is a proven fact which you're probably ignorant of), but NOT in WTC 7.
ie we already have empirical proof that fires did and can cause steel to fail. It's not in dispute.
You truthers really have your work cut out for you, arguing against reality and fact. Yikes!
@AlienEntity1 There is empirical proof before 9/11? Why didn't WTC 5 and 6 collapse, although they stood between WTC 1 and 7, getting actually damage by debris and burning out entirely?
And you do notice, that in order to fall in that manner, nearly in free fall speed, the columns must have failed nearly simultanously.
I am argumenting with logic, backed by scientific facts! Why do you press yourself against the obvious? Would it shatter your reality?
@Bommelmensch Many steel buildings have collapsed partially or completely due to fire prior to 9/11, yes. Also the U. Delft collapse happened AFTER 9/11, in 2008.
WTC 5 experienced 4 floors of collapse due to fire. So while it didn't totally collapse, it also was not a tall building, it had no heavy mass above the fire area.
You need to make arguments using engineering, not just from incredulity. That's very important if you want to think critically.
@Bommelmensch Neither of the towers fell near freefall, only about 64% of freefall acceleration.
WTC 7 took almost 18 seconds from start to finish. That is much slower than freefall. Only about 15% of the collapse was near freefall, and only about halfway thru the collapse.
No controlled demolition in history has behaved that way. And CD's do not fall at freefall anyway. Check the facts before you believe the myths.
Kevin J. LaMalva, Jonathan R. Barnett, Ph.D. and Donald O. Dusenberry, P.E.
'The major fire-induced collapse that occurred in WTC 5 involved the portion of the building that had Gerber framing .. and simply supported central girder spans with shear connections to the stubs... raised the possibility that this structure had a vulnerability..'
Provide a link to that and maybe we could discuss it. Who heard a countdown? Where was he? What was he doing? When did he hear it? I've never heard of such a person so it's impossible to comment without further info
But on the surface of it, do ur really think a conspiracy of this type would be dumb enough to count down the sequence so that people could hear it?
@Shamrock3939 See my posts below about Kevin McPadden.
Again one wonders why, IF his story were accurate, dozens of others didn't hear the same thing....
But they didn't. No other onlookers claim to have heard this, only McPadden. Who knows what was being said? Frantic cries of 'Run, run, run' or 'Get out' or 'evacuate'.
Finally, it makes no sense at all that there would be a publicly broadcast 'countdown' for a secret demolition. This defies any sense of logic.
@cr0uchingtiger IIRC this is another interesting case where a guy was interviewed at one time and gave one story, then later 'embellished' it so it became more exciting and controversial.
He overheard (a paramedic?) talking on a two-way radio and thought he heard pulsed statements. Later he said it was a countdown.
Besides the major problem that he's changed his story to be more incriminating, there's also the problem that anybody would've heard the 'countdown' if it were real.
@cr0uchingtiger Ah, found it - Kevin McPadden ' I couldn't hear what it was saying but it was like pulsed - whatever the speech was on there it was pulsed - and that means to me most likely it was a countdown."'
a) Couldn't hear what was said
b) speculated about what was said - 'most likely' ie he doesn't know.
Later, he claims to have heard '"three, two, one" from the radio before the building collapsed. '
@AlienEntity1 Thanks for clearing that up. Learning about this is a journey of the self, man. It's become a religion to many. The facts tend to point to a rough conclusion but I don't think we'll ever really know what happened. The new JFK.
@cr0uchingtiger Oh! You're welcome! Yeah well it's very interesting to see how various kinds of people form conclusions and opinions.
I think the main problem with 9/11 truth is that people are sloppy when it comes to verifying the various claims. The ones who become diehards really stick with their opinions no matter what; no amount of facts are going to change their minds.
I'm basically interested in combating the myths, but I realize that I'm not going to persuade everyone.
@cr0uchingtiger What I do think is important is to try to balance the myths and legends with as many facts as possible, so that at least the casual observer might see another POV on the matter.
It's taught me a lot about people, not all of it very complimentary either... I now understand that there is a lot of bigotry and paranoia out there. Just looking at the recent Republican primaries, I think politicians are a big part of the problem - they're a bunch of dishonest shills.
@AlienEntity1 I think politicians are the biggest problem our species faces! But yeah, this whole thing is crazy because the conspiracy makes more sense at a distance, but when you get closer it all vanishes. That said, I still think there's a layer of suspicion that we'll never get to the bottom of. All I know is, that move gave birth to the Patriot act and at least furthered the totalitarian agenda, carried forward by Obama and soon to be Romney.
@cr0uchingtiger Oh dear! I do hope Romney isn't the next US President. I'm not very impressed with Obama but I think he's still a better choice overall. (Choice of evils though).
@dbetsa. The view is of the north side of the bldg. the bldg was gashed from a chunk of tower 1 on the south side. The fires were much more extreme on the south side and even on this video u can see major fires on the east and west flanks. The FDNY observed and determined potential collapse was a very real threat. The secured the area and watched it fall a few hours later. NO evidence of demolition was seen or heard during, and after collapse. Not much else to say really
This video shows broken windows and fires on a few floors, not enough damage to explain the free fall collapse...but very good evidence to support a new investigation...
@glower125 Where have you been all these years? Why haven't you brought out the truth earlier? You have to spread the word on youtube, and soon enough George Bush will be behind bars, but only if you spread this news on enough youtube videos. Go!
@kkk. Instead of believing lines fed by the truther movement , let's use a little basic logic 1st. U seem to be equating the sounds of explosions in the lobbies of 1 & 2 with the collapse of the towers which u admit collapsed from the top down. Please explain why then, the towers did not collapse from the base? What purpose would said explosions have other then provide fodder for conspiracy theorists.
The more we try and argue about how 9/11 was fake (Which it wasn't), the more that the scumbags who were responsible for this feel victorious. In their eyes, they took out two 500,000 Ton towers and killed 3,000 people, and they made Americans think it was their own government. Get a grip people.
@lostinthegame77 watch this moron: /watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ&list=LL7KedEYkVGhSgXCBcU0cnLQ&index=2&feature=plpp_video
Independent structural engineers now what happend, are gonna argue against proffesionals? I'm studying it also, and this shit isn't real, these buildings made to be stand. Govrnm. took them down with explosives..
@kkkerdokk Watch this dumbass: /watch?v=i11Yo3qKZV8
The Department of Civil Engineering looked into it, it was absolutely possible for a boeing 767 to take down this building due to the lightweight steel trusses that held the wall to the base of the WTC. Argue that please.
@lostinthegame77 yes I'm sure you looked through 2h video with 5 minutes (y)
Yes, I'm gonna watch yours, but how do explain the eyewitnesses who were in the basement in WTC who saw exposions? Experts agree that to implode a building from the top down, as in the case with the Towers, the central core and foundation need to first be pulled and destroyed ..
@kkkerdokk Don't start moving the goalposts. Competent, qualified teams of physics and engineering experts have studied the collapses and proven, USING MATHEMATICS and full engineering models, that the towers could indeed collapse the way they did.
You can only refute that by addressing the mathematics and engineering. Nobody has yet done that in a legitimate scientific forum, such as Journal of the ASCE.
Not one single paper in 10 years from 9/11 'Truth'. Pathetic.
@kkkerdokk But the explosions and fireballs in the basements and lobbies are not in dispute, we know they happened, and we know why.
The list of eyewitnesses who saw or felt the giant fireballs as they went down elevator shafts is long. These happened immediately following the plane impacts, no exceptions.
Even in the basement, the smell of jet fuel was present. So we know what caused the fuel-air explosions.
Only truthers deny the obvious reality. Their agenda overrides logic.
@AlienEntity1 I salute you sir. Your head seems to be in the right place, unlike the rest of these mindless imbeciles. Those buildings came down due to weakening of steel trusses from the fire and impact, which in turn lead to a floor on floor chain reaction to the ground. It's just foolish, and insulting to the victims to think otherwise.
@lostinthegame77 Thank you very much indeed. I got involved in this nonsense because I realized that a lot of truthers were getting info from watching youtube videos - so I decided the myths and legends needed to be addressed here as well.
We benefit from people like you who stand up for science and reason rather than succumbing to the half-crazed rantings which are unfortunately rampant on the internet.
@kkkerdokk Strawman argument and massive argument from authority - the claims made are not supported by
a) empirical science
b) peer-reviewed science published in appropriate established journals
But on the other hand, there are between 40 and 50 peer-reviewed studies published in engineering and fire science journals which support the mainstream consensus that fires caused the collapse.
You can make 100 youtube videos, it won't help you argue against reality.
@lostinthegame77 In many ways American culture is noticeably degenerating - instead of being a world leader, it is becoming more myopic, self-indulgent and just plain stupid.
From the dumbing down of politics to the dumbing down of science and the scientific process (at least to the general public), it looks worse and worse.
In America today equal time and coverage is given to Climate Change denial, even when the science is fairly solid. No wonder people believe myths.
@lostinthegame77 Continued - no wonder average Americans believe myths, they're being fed this kind of mind-numbing nonsense all the time:
America is the greatest country
God loves America over all other countries
Atheists can't be trusted
Climate change is a hoax
So why shouldn't they believe that 9/11 was an inside job? It's no more wrong than all the other myths, I guess. Just sad to see America decline so quickly.
I love the "no video at the pentagon" argument. 50 or so see a jet crash into the bldg, many recognizing the red and blue logo. Hundreds clean it up, finding jet parts as well as body parts. But this guy needs to see video. As if the "conspirators" would fire a missle at the bldg with hundreds of potential witnesses and hope no one would notice that it wasn't a jet. Stupid beyond belief.
As far as the military goes: they were just as confused as everyone else was. During the coverage of the event: one of the reporters at NBC working at the Pentagon (who was there when American flight 77 struck) said that United 175 originated out of Newark, which we know is where United flight 93 originated. Which blip out of the 4,500 other blips, were they supposed to chase down?
The minions of A&E. No university, research centers, technical journals, scientists, associations of engineers, pilots, architects, firefighters and medical believe the lies and the demolition of the A&E. The same in Asia, Oceania, Canada, Europe and South America. The list below is today.
aczjbr 2 hours ago
I have the link of all. Always find more on the internet. There evidence against the towers and WTC7.Only 0,0001% of U.S. engineers are in A&E. Without the universities the A&E will never convince the U.S. Congress to reopen anything to clear Al-Qaida. The A&E already been born defeated. As well as its false science.
New York City Fire Department
Fort Myer Fire Department.
International Association of Fire Chiefs
aczjbr 2 hours ago
International Association of Fire Fighters
Arlington Professional Fire Fighters Association, IAFF; Arlington.
Fairfax County Fire and Rescue,
New York City Department of Environmental Protection.
Kappler Safety Group
InterAgency Board for Equipment Standardization and InterOperability
Emergency Medical Services, Oklahoma City Fire Department.
Science & Technology Policy Institute Rand
North Carolina State University, Center for Research Textile Protection & Comfort
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Washington State Urban Search and Rescue
Occupational Health & Environmental Safety, 3M Company.
New York City Department of Environmental Protection.
New York City Office of Emergency Management.
Kappler Safety Group
Bechtel Group, Inc.
Oklahoma City National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center;
American College of Medical Toxicology;
ArchitectureWeek . com
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Fire Protection Engineering . com
McGraw-Hill Construction Online
NFPA . ORG . FOR
Scientific American . com
Enr.com - Engeneerin news
PDHengineer . com
Wiley Interscience
Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE
Popular Mechanics
Skeptic . com
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Applied Research Associates, Inc.
Century Dynamics, Inc.Concord,CA,
Cagley & Associates, Consulting Structural Engineers, Rockville, Montgomery, Maryland,
Thornton-Tomasetti Engineers, NY, NY
DeStefano Associates, and is a Partner in the firm of Coastal Engineering Partners.
Gilsanz Murray Steficek, a structural engineering and building envelope consulting firm.
Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc., San Francisco, CA
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Comment removed
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Myers, Houghton & Partners, Inc. Structural Engineers, Long Beach CA
Teng & Associates, Inc. in Chicago.
Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc.
American Institute of Steel Construction Inc, Chicago(AISC),
American Society of Civil Engineers(ASCE),123,000 members,
American Institute of Architects(AIA),80,000 members
American Concrete Institute(ACI),20,000 members spanning 108 countries.
American Council Of Engineering Companies(ACEC),6,000 independent engineering companies
aczjbr 2 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
American Society of Mechanical Engineers(ASME),120,000 members
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics(AIAA),35,000 members
American Institute of Chemical Engineers(AIChE),40,000 members
American Standards Institute(ANSI),125 mil empresas e 3.500 mil members,
Association of de Wall & Ceiling Industry,2.000 members that are primarily wall and ceiling contractors
Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH),
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Department of Design and Construction(DDC) in NY,1,200 members
International Union of Operating Engineers, Canada & USA, Training Center,
Geneva College is a comprehensive Christian college of the arts, sciences and professional studies. Beaver Falls, PA.
International Metallographic Society,
Institute of Structural Engineers Association of New York(SEAoNY),
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE),370,000 members
Minerals, Metals & Materials Society,15,000 members
aczjbr 2 hours ago
National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA),12 mil members,
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA),70,000 individuals around the world,
Structural Engineering Institute (SEI),
Society for Fire Protection Engineering (SFPE),
Atlantic International University, Civil Engineering Department, Miami
Columbia University, Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science
California Polytechnic State University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
aczjbr 2 hours ago
Cornell University, School Civil and Environmental Engineering & Department of Crop Soil Sciencies
Florida International University, School Civil and Environmental Engineering
Lehigh University, Department Civil Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Engineering Department,
Michigan State University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Northwestern University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering & Research Experiences for Teachers Program
aczjbr 2 hours ago
National Academy of Engineering,
Princeton University, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering
Pennsylvania State University, Protective technology center & College of Engineering,
State University of New York at Albany,Doctor of Arts & architecture
Stanford University,Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Syracuse University,Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Ohio State University,Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic
aczjbr 2 hours ago
University of Akron, Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Arizona, Engineering Civil Department,
University of Colorado, Engineering Civil Department,
University of Chicago, NORC at the Department of Security, Energy, and Environment
University of Delaware, Department of Sociology, Criminal Justice, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Louisville, Department of Urban and Public Affairs
aczjbr 2 hours ago
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Perdue, School of Civil Engineering,
University of Texas at El Paso, Department of Computer, Department of Civil Engineering, Science & Department of Public Administration,
University of Notre Dame, Department of Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences and the Student Chapter of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
aczjbr 2 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Department of Civil Engineering
Washington State University; Department of Political Science, Criminal Justice, School of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science.
Youngstown State University, Banco de Dados de Pesquisas Tecnológicas (TRD) & Copper Data Center (CDC)
aczjbr 2 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If buildings were falling from these kinds of fires there would be skyscrapers falling down all over the world, but they aren’t, because they operate in reality
tweetmail87 4 hours ago
Comment removed
tweetmail87 4 hours ago
So silverstein actually talked about the possibility of demolition. Truthers seized on this not realizing That this was all happening as the day evolved, not premeditated. And the insurance was still paid! So obviously the insurance companies were in the loop. None have filed insurance fraud claims. Truthers don't even wonder why this is. Very sad
Shamrock3939 4 hours ago
Here's the funny thing about it horjan. Silverstein was actually heard talking to his insurance company about possibly bringing 7 down in a demolition. He's reasoning was it was essentially destroyed by tower 1 and fire and he was concerned it would fall unpredictably. It consequently fell a short time after. But he was actually conferring with his insurance co on the matter, presumably to determine what doing such a thing would do to his claim.
Shamrock3939 4 hours ago
where is the rest of this?
Andrewboobtube 14 hours ago
@Andrewboobtube There is some more available but this is the clip I got hold of.
Here's another: watch?v=NiRuuY1tcEc
AlienEntity1 12 hours ago
@iss. U do see the smoke billowing from both sides don't you? The video is primarily of the north side which was the least effected, the south side was the most heavily involved. , but you can see the east and west sides are heavily involved can't u?
Shamrock3939 23 hours ago
I cant see any major fire on WTC 7 in this video
IssKristSlashAxl 23 hours ago
Ur issue with 7 again dismisses historical precedent (fire CAN and DOES weaken steel to the point of structural failure) and the FDNY observed the condition of 7 very closely. They determined inevitable collapse and created a perimeter while seemingly thousands were trapped, halting rescue because of it. R u seriously saying after losing 343 the dept would ignore evidence of CD if ANY existed? Think it thru before blindly following pricks like Alex jones.
Shamrock3939 1 day ago
@therogue. So u r saying explosive charges create fine cement dust? Really. Do u have any idea how much work is actually involved in attaching charges to exposed steel? Clearly you don't cuz if u did u'd realize right away the impossibility of doing so without detection. All the Sheetrock that would have to be removed, not to mention the fact that security (PAPD, not Securecom) would surely have noticed the literally tons of explosive material going in.
Shamrock3939 1 day ago
How Many totally involved multi alarm fires have you been to in NYC ? Fires DO NOT PULVERIZE well cured concrete turning it into portland cement as like in the Impact of WTC #1 just take note of the fine talc and paper and know they EXPLODED OUTWARD. crashing into and exploding out of are 2 completely different events but you would have us believe a building 300 yrds away collapsed into its own basement in 7.2 seconds some 9 hrs later because of "office fire's and then theres Larry's PULL IT ?
TheRoguelement 1 day ago
@TheRoguelement Ask Shamrock here - he was a firefighter. Also I've discussed the issues many times with a FDNY veteran who WAS there on 9/11. He goes by the handle 'Triforcharity' on JREF if you want to ask him yourself.
You're just reciting a string of talking points (there are probably hundreds of them), which is not a meaningful argument, to be blunt.
You brought up 'pull it'! Really? You might as well add 'the hole in the pentagon was too small for a plane' LOL
AlienEntity1 1 day ago
@TheRoguelement Pick one issue that you think is very compelling, and we'll discuss it.
But don't throw a shower of these talking points, you come across as a bot or spammer. anybody can cut and paste, but few really understand science.
AlienEntity1 1 day ago
@AlienEntity1 And unfortunately only the mentally blind and foolish can buy the government's bullshit. "War on Terror." Right because if Iraq's main export outlet wasn't Petroleum we would've still went to war.
CorporalActivist 31 minutes ago
@sit. Wait a second, I answered ur post 1st!! Oh well
And horjan, the point about the insurance virtually debunks all moronic truther beliefs. Swiss re was on the hook for upwards of 4 billion. They sent adjusters to the site right away. They have the most to lose financially and yet they paid the claim. Not one mention of insurance fraud by them.
Shamrock3939 1 day ago
@Shamrock3939 Yeah, and if Silverstein destroyed wtc 7, wouldn't the insurance companies at least investigate what happened on 911? The insurance argument is, as you say, ridiculous.
Horjan 5 hours ago
So many truther myths, so little time....sigh. You kill one with facts and another one pops up - kind of like athlete's foot only it affects the minds of truthers. Too bad there isn't a spray to cure it.... pfffft!! Gone!
AlienEntity1 1 day ago
@AlienEntity1 you sound so fucking cocky....like you know anything....lame ass fucking loser.....maybe next time you'll be in the tower.....bitch..
SuperCodeman23 18 hours ago
Cool. Codeman changed his handle. Umm Larry Silverstein did not make 7 billion. Just another stupid truther talking pt. the insurance goes to the rebuild. He paid a couple million a month in rent since 9/11 with no income. Bush brother left the security company a year before 9/11 and 6 months before his brother became president. Please explain how demolition would cause "fine powder".
Shamrock3939 1 day ago
It must be a conspiracy!!!!
SuperCodeman23 1 day ago
After watching the blazing inferno in Madrid burn for 24 hours continuously and never structurally failing, it's laughable that people would think a floor or two on fire would cause this unbelievably massive structure to crumble to dust...haha ...19 terrorist, 6 that are still alive with no training flew incredible maneuvers, police knew bc of a passport found in the dust, pres and attorney gen. say they never thought of planes, military says they had drills for this and were having one that day
SuperCodeman23 1 day ago
@SuperCodeman23 Congratulations! You've won the award for the most discredited nonsense contained in one comment!
You laugh at things you do not understand, that's the real problem. Simple minded nitwits like you who've never completed a graduate physics course think they know it all..... newsflash - you don't.
AlienEntity1 1 day ago
What are your sources behind these claims and underlying accusation? Truther websites right? Or other truthers? Stop recycling truther nonsense, and actually do some work for your self, go look for the answers to your questions on your own, remove your bias filter, accept the answers you get, then talk. The thing about saying things like "says they never thought of planes" etc is that you know nothing of whats behind that. As for the military drills, and what it means.
Horjan 5 hours ago
Just wondering about Larry Silverstein's profit of 7 billion off the insurance, as well as the United Airlines put options, or the fact that WTC towers were recently "rewired" and much construction was taking place the weeks before. Workers said a fine dust was distributed around as though people were drilling concrete. Bush's cousin or brother was with security, Bin ladin's were meeting Bush Sr. that morning, Bin ladin's were blamed, most heavily secured pentagon was penetrated with no fight..
SuperCodeman23 1 day ago
@SuperCodeman23 Don't forget to include these and more moronic myths in your next comment.
Get your 'Yes, I can recite more whackadoodle 9/11 conspiracy myths in one sentence than you' package now by calling this toll-free number, and we'll send you the '10 truther canards which are based on nothing' value pak with your order.
Don't delay, this is a limited time con, get your truther myths now by calling, and have your credit card ready! Operators are standing by...
AlienEntity1 1 day ago
The fact that Silverstein had insurance, as any owner would, doesn't at all work as evidence of guilt. If it did, any insurance company could say, you insured your car, or your house, and now it's on fire, therefore you did this yourself, because you "gained" from it. Do you think the Pentagon could fight back as a building on its own? Do you think there were missiles there ready to fire at any incoming airplanes? Biased logic like this can be found all over your comments
Horjan 1 day ago
@sit. Pre 9/11 there were 7 bldgs, although bldg 7 wasn't technically on the site, it was considered apart of the complex. Bldgs 1&2 were the twin towers (bldg 1 was the north tower, the 1st one struck by a jet). Bldg 3 was actually a hotel. Bldgs 4,5 and 6 were not very tall. You could walk to each bldg without crossing any street (except for7). There was a large plaza right in the middle of the complex
Shamrock3939 2 days ago
Sorry to ask but i'm not american... so how many WTC are there? as far as i know 2! so whats WTC 6 and WTC 7?
sitidol 2 days ago
@sitidol The world trade center was basically a whole block composed of many different buildings, WTC 1 and 2 were the most prominent, but there were others that were crushed and destroyed when the towers fell. No need to apologize for asking, that's the only way you learn! Take care.
punishedexistence 1 day ago
@punishedexistence Thank you for such a kind reply. Really appreciate it.
sitidol 1 day ago
funny no dead bodies
solidfun27 2 days ago
Apparently u r more informed and smarter then the FDNY, NYPD, PAPD, city engineers, steel workers and demolition teams, not to mention all the big structural engineering firms across be globe. Sorry lee, it's u who need to do the research and not blindly follow richard gage and Alex jones.
Shamrock3939 2 days ago
The largest insurance company in Switzerland, (a notoriously anti war country,) pays out over 4 billion in what u believe is an obvious case of insurance fraud and the best comeback u have is I need to do research.? If u r hinting at the law suit, even that supports a terrorist attack and Silverstein properties lost the suit
And again, 400 + 1st responders die, many are sick today and yet there isn't any support for ur type among them. That should tell u something but apparently u r more info
Shamrock3939 2 days ago
OMG 5:23
wrestling932 2 days ago
After the death of 400 + 1st responders, do u really believe if ANY evidence of CD exists that u could keep the FDNY, NYPD, PAPD from coming forward with what would have been literally tons of evidence? Especially since so many are sick today from exposure to toxins. If u pay attention, the depts as a whole r really upset by the EPA and Whitman over air quality but no one is outraged by what u claim is evidence of CD
Also, why did Swiss reinsurers pay up to 4 billion if ANY evidence of CD exi
Shamrock3939 3 days ago
@Shamrock3939 then i believe u need to do more research.
leescotty2001 2 days ago
@lee. What u don't understand is that men cleaned up the debris. NONE found any evidence of CD. That's just a fact. Yes, explosions were heard. U claim there are 1st responders and cleanup guys (steel workers, etc) who claim CD? I retired from FDNY 6 years ago. I Can't find one guy who supports CD. Vodvarka tried to get a movement going and nobody who was there joined him.
Shamrock3939 3 days ago
I agree it came down demolition style just like the other towers.
cyraization 3 days ago
By the way, there were NO perfectly cut beams. That's a typical truther lie. The site was cleaned up ostensibly by demotion teams. They cut the beams u see in the dismantling process. Don't u think they would have been alarmed (along with EVERYBODY down there) if evidence like that existed. And please tell me how demolition causes concrete to become powder?
Shamrock3939 3 days ago
@Shamrock3939 even is it was cut before or after.. still overwhelming evidence... tiny explosions here n there, puffs of concrete vaporized, lil flashes of light, PEOPLE WAVING IN THE HOLE PLANE FLEW THREW... shamrock, take a second to allow yourself to say, its probably possible then go over the facts.. dont just shut urself down like u have been programmed to do..
leescotty2001 3 days ago
@leescotty2001 LOL talk about programmed, you're reciting truther talking points like bot.
FYI Edna Cintron, the lady waving in the hole, jumped to her death. I'm sure it was really comfortable for her and she just was getting bored.
You guys know nothing. After 10 years you still know nothing.
AlienEntity1 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Shamrock3939 so the truthers have become the conspiracy theory? thats a conspiracy theory shamrock ima dismiss that..? Sound right? about the powder check this video watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q&feature=related
leescotty2001 3 days ago
@lee. So I guess the FDNY are in on it. They r the ones who saw "major fires on many floors". And now ur argument has changed. Before it was "fires cannot cause collapse of steel bldgs ". Now since u were proven wrong about that u have qualified it by saying the other steel bldgs were involved with infernos. The FDNY says there were major fires so I suppose u'll have to change it to "infernos in NYC"
Shamrock3939 3 days ago
@Shamrock3939 in fernos yea right buddie.. and dont matter to me if they say one thing and others say another.. im looking at the facts. Those fires were not hot enough period. Your name dropping FDNY.. might as well say NYPD, and FBI and CIA.. Ive heard lots of FDNY say both sides.. Why are there 2 stories of that day from FDNY.. Could it be some dont want to believe like you dont want to believe. I admit its crazy to think this but i cant look past the facts. Some say this some
leescotty2001 3 days ago
@leescotty2001 'Those fires were not hot enough period.' You have no idea what you're talking about, period.
AlienEntity1 2 days ago
watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q&feature=related
leescotty2001 3 days ago
AS FOR A REASON?!? Its in the bible, they are in control of this world. Same reason they lie about history, bible facts, dinosaurs, evolution, that list goes on.. Get right with God for truth.. ITS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE.. our fight is against rulers, people of power, they WILL SUCCEED in this world up until Jesus comes you WILL BE Fooled unless you have God's help thats point blank. Last days non believers will grow. Evil is here Satan is here and hes working on each of u diligently. Believe that
leescotty2001 3 days ago
Dont let this guys talk you into thinking this building collapse due to a fire.. ANY OTHER STEEL BUILDING THAT DID was IN-GULFED in FLAMES for hours.. not just couple of floors i mean an inferno. Anyone that thinks this building came down like it did because of couple of floors on fire is completely brainwashed or working for the govt. Beams cut perfectly on wtc1 n 2, vaporized concrete, loud explosions before any collapse, ground floors completely mangled before any collpase.. the list goes on
leescotty2001 3 days ago
@lee. The video is at least 3 hours before collapse. I know this because the FDNY secured the area long before it collapsed. The reporter would not have been there after this time. So the windows would not have been blown out by CD unless u believe they used a 3 plus hour count down demolition.
Those floors r on fire at that depth of the bldg so the window breakage isn't all that intriguing
Shamrock3939 3 days ago
Why is there perfect rows of broken windows? 4 floors total and 2 rows together... Like thats where the demo's blew off at..
leescotty2001 3 days ago
exactly, burned straight down to the steel.
chrysalis72 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlienEntity1, I would like to know your opinion about this 9/11 video. Thanks!!!
watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ
tavomix70 4 days ago
@tavomix70 Why don't you pick something specific from the video that interests you?
AlienEntity1 4 days ago
@AlienEntity1 I was just curious to see what was your overall opinion about the video since they are all professionals on different fields. Does not the video make you doubt a little bit? I myself found this video but also all your responses very interesting. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
tavomix70 4 days ago
why does the video stop so suddenly? i want to see the rest god dammit
muserocks18 5 days ago
@abe. Do u know how many architects and engineers there actually are? That u are impressed by that number is sad. That represents less then 1% of architects and engineers. How many of those are actually structural engineers like the ones who investigated and determined cause? How many of those has EVER published a peer reviewed journal article? Fact is people like u have made Richard gage a lot of money.
Shamrock3939 5 days ago
The mistake u make is that u believe what is seen on video is a simultaneous global collapse when in reality what is seen on video is really just the north face of the bldg. the interior collapse started a full 6 seconds before the walls. The bldg had an odd design in that it had very little redundant support. It was known to be a vulnerable design (con Ed substation). Again, no one on site reported any signs of demotion before , during or after. I guess ur just smarter then everyone there
Shamrock3939 6 days ago
If u actually watch video of collapse, there was a sequence to it. The east penthouse clearly collapsed 1st. The collapse progressed east to west. And in fact the bldg did in fact fall towards the south. This is not so obvious in the videos available but is seen in the debris pile.
I am just curious why u think u know more about what must have caused it then those who investigated.
Shamrock3939 6 days ago
Theres no way that areas unaffected by fire damage would collapse into itself unless there was demolition......Sure fire could weaken areas of the structure and cause it to collapse in those areas first....but to collapse completely into itself with no lean or topple perfectly? to many questions about that kind of result from just fire!
Titan7170 6 days ago 6
@Titan7170 Your entire post is an argument from incredulity - basically 'I don't understand, therefore it can't have happened'.
This is not a valid scientific approach, it's just a cop-out.
You probably are not very knowledgeable in structural engineering or fire science, or computer engineering and modeling. Therefore you cannot expect to comprehend those sciences without some serious study.
Realize your limitations, don't blame others.
AlienEntity1 6 days ago
@AlienEntity1 why is there more than 700 architects and engineers challenging the "official" story? none of them know what they're talking about? it doesnt really take much brain power to see that the US government is very corrupt, and that they either the provoked the attacks and let them happen, or had a hand in it themselves.
Abe91195 5 days ago
@Abe91195 Well there are hundreds of thousands of architects and engineers who disagree with these others.
btw the numbers on AE911Truth petition are not all engineers or architects, and even those are often dubious. So don't just believe the propaganda.
Fact is, every major engineering school in the world accepts the mainstream hypothesis of fire induced collapse. None of them disagree.
If AE911Truth members 'believe' the WTC was CD'd, they're just wrong. It's as simple as that.
AlienEntity1 4 days ago
@Abe91195 The problem with a blanket 'argument from authority' is that it really means nothing scientifically.
If AE911Truth wanted to make a valid scientific argument they'd suck it up and go thru the proper scientific process - get their work published in an established, peer-reviewed scientific journal or engineering journal.
But they haven't bothered to do that. I think they know they can bamboozle enough people with rhetoric and videos. That's enough for them
AlienEntity1 4 days ago
@AlienEntity1 Im sure if the government wanted a building demolished silently they could do it......thermite,dexpan and who knows what other methods can be used to do something like this.......if you are saying that just fire dropped this building then it even makes a stronger case..... their thoughts" just let it burn itll crumble into itself" Im sure engineers working for the government would know this. Something is very wrong about certain aspects of this whole 9/11 situation!
Titan7170 5 days ago
@AlienEntity1 In addition I guess you are very knowledgable in Structural engineering,fire science, and computer engineering and modeling yourself so you have all the answers.....of course someone with this kind of knowledge is going to spend extensive amounts of time on youtube educating the uneducated lmao! On the net you can be anyone.....live the fantasy my friend! hahahaha!
Titan7170 5 days ago
@Titan7170 The leaders of the truth movement have seized on a number of superficial memes which they use as propaganda/talking points to convince lay people with.
Memes such as:
Freefall = controlled demolition
symmetry = controlled demolition
fires cannot bring down large buildings
etc etc.
The problem is, NONE of those things are reliable, true or empirical tests. They're actually ARGUMENTS FROM INCREDULITY disguised as facts.
You just don't realize it yet.
AlienEntity1 6 days ago
I believe that the U.S. government lies about various things, but, the whole 911 conspiracy "thing" is incredibly daffy. The U.S. doesn't need much provocation to go to war, either. We went to war, in Viet Nam, as the result of a false flag operation called the "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" - some small gun boats supposedly firing on a Navy vessel (it never happened). But to believe the U.S. would plot and carry out 911 makes no sense - it's transparently crazy. It makes no sense, on any level.
guymerritt 6 days ago
@guymerritt Precisely, don't truthers think that two planes flying into the twin towers would be enough to start a war? Why bring down building 7 as well and increase the costs and the risk of being exposed? What an idiotic waste that would be.
Pirate44444 6 days ago
@titam. FEMA, American society of civil engineers, society of fire protection engineers, National fire protection association, American institution of steel construction, council of tall bldgs and urban habitat, structural engineers association of NY. All headed by structural engineers, all involved in determining the cause of collapse of 7. All agree fire did it. Who do you have. Richard gage? Not even an engineer. That you don't care what those firms say is just sad
Shamrock3939 6 days ago
@titan. Are u a structural engineer? Cuz I'll give you several structural engineering firms who completely disagree with ur assessment. And you won't be able to show me ANY structural engineering firms who agree with you. I'll take the words and the peer reviewed assessments of the PHDs over you any day of the week.
Shamrock3939 6 days ago
@dad. 1st it didn't collapse in its own footprint. 2nd ur not willing to change ur mind renders any new investigation moot. 3rd. The FDNY determined 7 would collapse early in the day. They abandoned trapped civies and colleagues because they knew it would collapse, it was that dangerous. They watched it fall. None report explosive demolition sounds during collapse. None report finding any evidence of CD in the debris. These are facts not in dispute and ur unwillingness to accept it is just pig
Shamrock3939 6 days ago
@death. Look up kadar toy factory and delft technical university fire. steel structures collapsed due to fire alone. Qualifying it by saying they weren't sky scrapers is stupid. Bottom line, fire can and does weaken exposed steel to the point of failure. It's an historical fact.
And the reason NIST didn't look for explosives is the investigators on the ground FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVE DAMAGE. Yes I'm screaming. It's not complicated
Shamrock3939 6 days ago
why are all the comments on Youtube cateewampuss?
dadsjav68 6 days ago
it just does not work that way....never
dadsjav68 6 days ago
I do not believe the official story. nothing you can say will change that . all I'm asking for is a new investigation.Why did NIST avoid researching explosives? If you have proof of high rise buildings falling peculiarly similar to controlled demo's due to fire, please elaborate. I would like to hear your opinion. I am speaking of building 7 . I'm sure you are aware of fire damage causing buildings to fall but not "sink" into their own footprint like 7 did.
dadsjav68 6 days ago
@dadsjav68 If your mind is closed to new information, why ask for it? You make no sense.
If you're going to be that illogical, there's no discussion to be had. I might as well talk to my cat.
AlienEntity1 6 days ago
@dadsjav68 "I do not believe the official story. nothing you can say will change that"
Are you serious? That is a disgracefully close minded thing to say! This sounds like faith. Is the 911 conspiracy theory some kind of a cult?? To call yourself a truther is grossly hypocritical. No one who cares about the truth uses phrases like "nothing you can say will change that."
You are an insult to the victims of 911 and you are a disgrace.
Pirate44444 6 days ago
@dad. U r wrong. Historically there have been steel bldgs that have come down due to fire alone. It's a fact. Sadly most truthers do not know this so they repeat lies they have heard from other truthers.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
fire or not , fire does not bring a building down! the temps are not accurate.not even close
dadsjav68 1 week ago
@dadsjav68 Why do you people keep repeating these myths? Do you think it helps to uncover 'truth'???
Of course fires bring steel buildings down. They have many times in history.
Ask yourself a simple question: If fire cannot destroy a steel building, then why do steel buildings require that SFRM (fire insulating foam) be sprayed onto all structural steel, BY CODE??
Do you realize how silly your argument is?
AlienEntity1 6 days ago
@AlienEntity1 I am not aware of any other steel buildings being brought down by fire.
deathnocturne 6 days ago
also frame 4;47 a good shot.
Henzerling 1 week ago
frame 4;47 What is wrong with this picture?? Anyone? anyone??
Henzerling 1 week ago
@Henzerling ?? What do you mean?
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
And ur point about the govt lying is not untrue. It's just in this case they wouldn't have the means to control the story. Too many variables, too many potential witnesses make it unrealistic. Thousands watched the event in real time. Any conspiracy would know this would be the case. A more plausible argument would be the govt ALLOWED it to happen. But the notion of rigging 3 bldgs without detection or defection just doesn't cut muster.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago 5
@faby. The man u r referring to was Rich Riscorla. And to me he is an important aspect to this whole debate. U r correct in saying he was keenly aware of the terrorist threat and remained steadfast in protecting the company he worked for. I find it highly unlikely such a man would miss the literally tons of material going into the bldgs that would be required for demolition. His antenna was up since the bombing.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
none of us know anything on who did what.
The US has a great way of hiding the truth, don't they?
All we know is that this is one of the saddest dates in history.
Also compared to the 1993 bombing of the twin towers before
the actual attack. Thankfully, a well trained security gaurd that knew
the towers were main targets of terrorist attacks, did numerous
drills after the bombing and saved thousands. He himself didn't make it out trying to get as many people out before the collapse i 2001
fabymcr1 1 week ago
@bommel. U may not understand my point, but ur referencing that 5 and 6 were closer then 7 but did not collapse is another irellevent point. Did u know that a tree not 50 feet from tower 2 survived the collapses and still stands today? Further, a handful of people actually survived tower 1's collapse from the inside. Making sweeping generalities of should have happened is an exercise in futility
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
And if u dont believe in something that has been scientifically established by many structural engineering firms and is accepted by nearly the entire scientific community then yes, it is incumbent upon u to prove ur theory. That's how science works in the real world. If the FDNY says that major fires on many floors involved 7 after tower 1 collapsed, then u have to prove otherwise.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
@bommel. So I guess u will contd with the idea that u know better then the professionals? The Windsor bldg was a reinforced bldg, none of the wtc bldgs were. Apples and oranges. Typical of a truther
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
@bommel. Yes, burning debris caused by tower 1's collapse. Confirmed by the FDNY. U doubt that the tower collapse caused this, the FDNY disagrees with u. U must have taken a break when I 1st stated this.
As a matter of fact the FDNY reported burning debris (at least 1 vehicle) caused by cascading fiery debris before the towers even collapsed. How can this be?
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
@bommel. U doubt that falling debris could have caused those fires but then u are totally ignoring the point of view of the FDNY who were actually there and witnessed the whole thing. U seem remarkably self assured. Are U really suggesting u know more then the eye witnesses whose very careers involve determining the cause of fires? Gimme a break.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
@Shamrock3939 There were eyewitnesses inside WTC7, who saw burning debris?
You obviously took a break while you wrote this!
Bommelmensch 1 week ago
@babylove. Don't u think the cars would have moved positions, perhaps overturned or at least become mangled if that was the result from bombs? All I see are burned out shells of cars that were aflame.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
omg its obvious thoses cars and bus had bombs in them !!!!!!!!!!!! the seats were melted aways !!!!!!!!!! who would do such thing?
babylove85100 1 week ago
Any idea, how the fire in WTC7 started? Falling debris? Doubt that! And how big are the chances, that 3 buildings with a steel structure are collapsing on one day, because of a fire, although it never happened before?
Bommelmensch 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch We know exactly how the fires started, same thing happened to WTC 5 and 6, which were set on fire by the flaming debris from the tower collapses.
RU suggesting that the massive fires in WTC 5, 6 and 7 were not caused by the tower collapses? If so, what evidence do you have to back up that opinion?
As far as the odds, apparently they were quite high. Nobody in history had ever flown high-speed jets into 110-story towers before, so we have no precedents.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@AlienEntity1 Why should I prove something is not there? It's you who has to prove that debris is in the building! Same with religious numb nuts, who ask Atheists to prove there is no God!
Also, there was no structural damage by the debris and fire wouldn't explain the collapse! Search for 'Windsor Building'!
My view on the matter:
/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk
Plane hitting Empire State Building
/watch?v=cUlWpqLsOVs
This is our future, if we do not start to think!
/watch?v=lQQKKkRxwf0
Bommelmensch 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch It's called burden of proof. If you are claiming that something other than the flaming debris caused the fires, then you need to support that argument with evidence.
On the other hand, since you say you doubt debris caused it, you of course cannot prove that it didn't. So actually you set yourself up for an impossible situation.
Don't blame me.
And instead of addressing the questions put to you, you've changed the subject.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch You are making several false statements now. They are not true.
1) you falsely claim there was 'no structural damage'. That's just false and stupid
2) you falsely claim that 'fire wouldn't explain collapse'
Not only are you trying to prove a negative, which you've admitted is impossible (which shows you are not being rational), but you have no evidence that the fires in WTC 7 couldn't cause collapse.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch What's the point of using another building to address WTC 7? The structures are not the same, so why would you expect them to behave the same?
In fact, towers have collapsed due to fires. But not in 2006 or 2007 - in 2008 a tower of the University of Delft collapsed from fire alone.
So that essentially kills your argument, even while it was a fallacious argument to begin with.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch Another problem with your Apples vs Oranges argument lies in the fact that the steel portion of the Windsor tower in Madrid DID COLLAPSE from the fire.
Only the reinforced concrete part withstood the fire.
So again, unknowingly you are disproving your own arguments because you don't understand the subject well enough. The steel in Madrid DID FAIL, thus proving that fires cause steel buildings to fail......
You make it so easy.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch If you wanted to make a direct critique of the NIST hypothesis, you'd have to show, in engineering terms, why their idea of thermal expansion leading to failure of joints and bolts is incorrect.
Did you know that not a single truther has published an alternative hypothesis in a peer-reviewed engineering journal?
Not one.
Yet there are now between 40 and 50 peer-reviewed papers which support the mainstream consensus. The science is devastating to your arguments.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch Don't forget to include, in your engineering analysis, your reasoning as to how multiple floors could collapse in WTC 5 due to thermal expansion (which is a proven fact which you're probably ignorant of), but NOT in WTC 7.
ie we already have empirical proof that fires did and can cause steel to fail. It's not in dispute.
You truthers really have your work cut out for you, arguing against reality and fact. Yikes!
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@AlienEntity1 There is empirical proof before 9/11? Why didn't WTC 5 and 6 collapse, although they stood between WTC 1 and 7, getting actually damage by debris and burning out entirely?
And you do notice, that in order to fall in that manner, nearly in free fall speed, the columns must have failed nearly simultanously.
I am argumenting with logic, backed by scientific facts! Why do you press yourself against the obvious? Would it shatter your reality?
Bommelmensch 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch Many steel buildings have collapsed partially or completely due to fire prior to 9/11, yes. Also the U. Delft collapse happened AFTER 9/11, in 2008.
WTC 5 experienced 4 floors of collapse due to fire. So while it didn't totally collapse, it also was not a tall building, it had no heavy mass above the fire area.
You need to make arguments using engineering, not just from incredulity. That's very important if you want to think critically.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch Neither of the towers fell near freefall, only about 64% of freefall acceleration.
WTC 7 took almost 18 seconds from start to finish. That is much slower than freefall. Only about 15% of the collapse was near freefall, and only about halfway thru the collapse.
No controlled demolition in history has behaved that way. And CD's do not fall at freefall anyway. Check the facts before you believe the myths.
Reality is reality. Not mine or yours.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@Bommelmensch
Steel failing in fire:
watch?v=kuJJ6nC40d0
Study of steel failure in fire at WTC 5:
World Trade Center 5 Failure Analysis
Kevin J. LaMalva, Jonathan R. Barnett, Ph.D. and Donald O. Dusenberry, P.E.
'The major fire-induced collapse that occurred in WTC 5 involved the portion of the building that had Gerber framing .. and simply supported central girder spans with shear connections to the stubs... raised the possibility that this structure had a vulnerability..'
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
Provide a link to that and maybe we could discuss it. Who heard a countdown? Where was he? What was he doing? When did he hear it? I've never heard of such a person so it's impossible to comment without further info
But on the surface of it, do ur really think a conspiracy of this type would be dumb enough to count down the sequence so that people could hear it?
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
@Shamrock3939 See my posts below about Kevin McPadden.
Again one wonders why, IF his story were accurate, dozens of others didn't hear the same thing....
But they didn't. No other onlookers claim to have heard this, only McPadden. Who knows what was being said? Frantic cries of 'Run, run, run' or 'Get out' or 'evacuate'.
Finally, it makes no sense at all that there would be a publicly broadcast 'countdown' for a secret demolition. This defies any sense of logic.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
There was that one guy who claimed he heard a count down and then a series of booms? Any comments on that?
cr0uchingtiger 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger Yes, he was lying.
lostinthegame77 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger IIRC this is another interesting case where a guy was interviewed at one time and gave one story, then later 'embellished' it so it became more exciting and controversial.
He overheard (a paramedic?) talking on a two-way radio and thought he heard pulsed statements. Later he said it was a countdown.
Besides the major problem that he's changed his story to be more incriminating, there's also the problem that anybody would've heard the 'countdown' if it were real.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger ie, anybody with a radio on that frequency, like that paramedics or EMT or whatever he was....
So there would literally be dozens if not hundreds of people who would witness such an event.
Yet they didn't, or they're all remaining silent except for this one dude.
Which is more likely?
a) he thought he heard something, but was mistaken and likes the attention
b) there was an actual countdown to the collapses......
Use Occam's razor to decide if you like.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger Ah, found it - Kevin McPadden ' I couldn't hear what it was saying but it was like pulsed - whatever the speech was on there it was pulsed - and that means to me most likely it was a countdown."'
a) Couldn't hear what was said
b) speculated about what was said - 'most likely' ie he doesn't know.
Later, he claims to have heard '"three, two, one" from the radio before the building collapsed. '
Unfortunately not very credible for him.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@AlienEntity1 Thanks for clearing that up. Learning about this is a journey of the self, man. It's become a religion to many. The facts tend to point to a rough conclusion but I don't think we'll ever really know what happened. The new JFK.
cr0uchingtiger 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger Oh! You're welcome! Yeah well it's very interesting to see how various kinds of people form conclusions and opinions.
I think the main problem with 9/11 truth is that people are sloppy when it comes to verifying the various claims. The ones who become diehards really stick with their opinions no matter what; no amount of facts are going to change their minds.
I'm basically interested in combating the myths, but I realize that I'm not going to persuade everyone.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger What I do think is important is to try to balance the myths and legends with as many facts as possible, so that at least the casual observer might see another POV on the matter.
It's taught me a lot about people, not all of it very complimentary either... I now understand that there is a lot of bigotry and paranoia out there. Just looking at the recent Republican primaries, I think politicians are a big part of the problem - they're a bunch of dishonest shills.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@AlienEntity1 I think politicians are the biggest problem our species faces! But yeah, this whole thing is crazy because the conspiracy makes more sense at a distance, but when you get closer it all vanishes. That said, I still think there's a layer of suspicion that we'll never get to the bottom of. All I know is, that move gave birth to the Patriot act and at least furthered the totalitarian agenda, carried forward by Obama and soon to be Romney.
cr0uchingtiger 1 week ago
@cr0uchingtiger Oh dear! I do hope Romney isn't the next US President. I'm not very impressed with Obama but I think he's still a better choice overall. (Choice of evils though).
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@dbetsa. The view is of the north side of the bldg. the bldg was gashed from a chunk of tower 1 on the south side. The fires were much more extreme on the south side and even on this video u can see major fires on the east and west flanks. The FDNY observed and determined potential collapse was a very real threat. The secured the area and watched it fall a few hours later. NO evidence of demolition was seen or heard during, and after collapse. Not much else to say really
Shamrock3939 1 week ago
This video shows broken windows and fires on a few floors, not enough damage to explain the free fall collapse...but very good evidence to support a new investigation...
dbetsa 1 week ago
WTC 7 WAS BROUGHT DOWN. EVEN THEY CLAIM IT WAS BROUGHT DOWM. IT WAS RIGGED WITH EXPLOSIVES JUST LIKE THE 2 TOWERS.
glower125 1 week ago
@glower125 OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!OMG!
This is breaking news!!!
too bad there's zero evidence to back it up. Oh well.... :)
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@glower125 Where have you been all these years? Why haven't you brought out the truth earlier? You have to spread the word on youtube, and soon enough George Bush will be behind bars, but only if you spread this news on enough youtube videos. Go!
Horjan 1 week ago
@glower125 Then how was it rigged with explosives if the planes entered the towers?
Dumbass...
Rotneybot 1 week ago
@kkk. Instead of believing lines fed by the truther movement , let's use a little basic logic 1st. U seem to be equating the sounds of explosions in the lobbies of 1 & 2 with the collapse of the towers which u admit collapsed from the top down. Please explain why then, the towers did not collapse from the base? What purpose would said explosions have other then provide fodder for conspiracy theorists.
Shamrock3939 1 week ago 2
The more we try and argue about how 9/11 was fake (Which it wasn't), the more that the scumbags who were responsible for this feel victorious. In their eyes, they took out two 500,000 Ton towers and killed 3,000 people, and they made Americans think it was their own government. Get a grip people.
lostinthegame77 1 week ago 2
@lostinthegame77 watch this moron: /watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ&list=LL7KedEYkVGhSgXCBcU0cnLQ&index=2&feature=plpp_video
Independent structural engineers now what happend, are gonna argue against proffesionals? I'm studying it also, and this shit isn't real, these buildings made to be stand. Govrnm. took them down with explosives..
kkkerdokk 1 week ago
@kkkerdokk Watch this dumbass: /watch?v=i11Yo3qKZV8
The Department of Civil Engineering looked into it, it was absolutely possible for a boeing 767 to take down this building due to the lightweight steel trusses that held the wall to the base of the WTC. Argue that please.
lostinthegame77 1 week ago 2
@lostinthegame77 yes I'm sure you looked through 2h video with 5 minutes (y)
Yes, I'm gonna watch yours, but how do explain the eyewitnesses who were in the basement in WTC who saw exposions? Experts agree that to implode a building from the top down, as in the case with the Towers, the central core and foundation need to first be pulled and destroyed ..
kkkerdokk 1 week ago
@kkkerdokk Don't start moving the goalposts. Competent, qualified teams of physics and engineering experts have studied the collapses and proven, USING MATHEMATICS and full engineering models, that the towers could indeed collapse the way they did.
You can only refute that by addressing the mathematics and engineering. Nobody has yet done that in a legitimate scientific forum, such as Journal of the ASCE.
Not one single paper in 10 years from 9/11 'Truth'. Pathetic.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@kkkerdokk But the explosions and fireballs in the basements and lobbies are not in dispute, we know they happened, and we know why.
The list of eyewitnesses who saw or felt the giant fireballs as they went down elevator shafts is long. These happened immediately following the plane impacts, no exceptions.
Even in the basement, the smell of jet fuel was present. So we know what caused the fuel-air explosions.
Only truthers deny the obvious reality. Their agenda overrides logic.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@AlienEntity1 I salute you sir. Your head seems to be in the right place, unlike the rest of these mindless imbeciles. Those buildings came down due to weakening of steel trusses from the fire and impact, which in turn lead to a floor on floor chain reaction to the ground. It's just foolish, and insulting to the victims to think otherwise.
lostinthegame77 1 week ago
@lostinthegame77 Thank you very much indeed. I got involved in this nonsense because I realized that a lot of truthers were getting info from watching youtube videos - so I decided the myths and legends needed to be addressed here as well.
We benefit from people like you who stand up for science and reason rather than succumbing to the half-crazed rantings which are unfortunately rampant on the internet.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@kkkerdokk Strawman argument and massive argument from authority - the claims made are not supported by
a) empirical science
b) peer-reviewed science published in appropriate established journals
But on the other hand, there are between 40 and 50 peer-reviewed studies published in engineering and fire science journals which support the mainstream consensus that fires caused the collapse.
You can make 100 youtube videos, it won't help you argue against reality.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@kkkerdokk And don't call people morons. It's rude and inappropriate.
Here's some examples of empirical, scientific studies by qualified professionals:
'Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World
Trade Center and Building Demolitions' Bazant and Verdure, Journal of Engineering Mechanics
'Computer Simulation of Impact and Collapse of the New York World Trade Center North Tower on Sept 11.
X Quan and N.K. Birnbaum
20th International Symposium on Ballistics, 2002
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@lostinthegame77 In many ways American culture is noticeably degenerating - instead of being a world leader, it is becoming more myopic, self-indulgent and just plain stupid.
From the dumbing down of politics to the dumbing down of science and the scientific process (at least to the general public), it looks worse and worse.
In America today equal time and coverage is given to Climate Change denial, even when the science is fairly solid. No wonder people believe myths.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@lostinthegame77 Continued - no wonder average Americans believe myths, they're being fed this kind of mind-numbing nonsense all the time:
America is the greatest country
God loves America over all other countries
Atheists can't be trusted
Climate change is a hoax
So why shouldn't they believe that 9/11 was an inside job? It's no more wrong than all the other myths, I guess. Just sad to see America decline so quickly.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
@AlienEntity1 So then whats your standpoint on all of this? Do you believe that this was real, or fake?
lostinthegame77 1 week ago
@lostinthegame77 LOL, I believe 9/11 Truthers believe a new set of urban legends, of course.
The WTC towers fell due to fires, it's very plain to those who actually have enough brains to learn about it.
AlienEntity1 1 week ago
I love the "no video at the pentagon" argument. 50 or so see a jet crash into the bldg, many recognizing the red and blue logo. Hundreds clean it up, finding jet parts as well as body parts. But this guy needs to see video. As if the "conspirators" would fire a missle at the bldg with hundreds of potential witnesses and hope no one would notice that it wasn't a jet. Stupid beyond belief.
Shamrock3939 2 weeks ago
silly conspiracy theorist
Jcurvs99 2 weeks ago
As far as the military goes: they were just as confused as everyone else was. During the coverage of the event: one of the reporters at NBC working at the Pentagon (who was there when American flight 77 struck) said that United 175 originated out of Newark, which we know is where United flight 93 originated. Which blip out of the 4,500 other blips, were they supposed to chase down?
MrSkunkwork100 2 weeks ago