Listening to this makes me think it could be some sort of weapon we do not know about... pulverising material to less than 100 microns is damning evidence...
The implausibility of the official storyline is manifest too such a degree it's ridiculous and yet they blithely ignore the hardcore evidence regardless. WHAT ELSE ARE THEY GOING TO DO? THEY'VE BEEN CAUGHT. It's a tyrannical political regime totally divested of legitimacy. If 9/11 was staged, AND IT WAS, then you've declared an act of war against the body politic. Against the world.
come on really its not this complicating, simple history proves this was BS!! Do you know how many building have EVER callapsed? Yeah 3, wtc 1,2 and 7. For me I was sold after that, there is even one case when a b-52 bomber (consideribly larger than the 757) crashed into a building no callapse. Anyone that can think for themselves knows the gov story is such BS it stinks throught this nation. god save us all!
Lol people trying to debunk this gut should post their education credentials. Those of you denouncing this guy probably can't spell some of his credentials without the use of a spell check program.
There are so many scientific aspects relating to the collapse of the towers, that simply can not be denied. The laws of physics and nature are what they are and do not just alter of their own accord, however, man can use opposing science to alter the physical and natural effects. Can any debunker please give evidence of how the towers fell at free fall speed, all three of them? Without first removing or severely weakening the floors below. Scientifically impossible.
@sequins91 Prof. Bazant has published 2 papers on that topic. If we want to proof anything we have to falsify them. Arguing on Youtube doesn´t further anything I fear. It´s just a war with words.
Explosives powerful enough to "eject" those huge pieces of steel would have been clearly recorded on tape for miles around, not just from a few eyewitnesses. When a 110 story building collapse while on fire it would be expected that everything in it would be pulverized.
Somethings aren't ever that obvious. Even the government sponsored reports say fire was the main cause of the collapse. not the planes. Skyscrapers like the twin towers are built with redundancy so that weight can redistribute itself. One plane crash would not cause the collapse.
@TimothyRaymond1 an 800tone plane brought down a 700,000tonne building? Compared to the buildings the planes were pretty small. And the official theory is that the fires left over from the explosion burned until the building fell into itself; Other than the explosion the planes have very little to do with the explanation of why the buildings fell; though i get that from reports from a few years ago so it could have changed by now, I dont know, I stopped researching it and went out for some air.
@TimothyRaymond1 NIST concluded the core colums buckled because of office fires. Prof. Bazant calculated the impact of the upper 10 stories of the building destroyed the lower 92 because nearly 8 stories buckled. The planes just ignited the fires and weakend the building around the impact zone, but without office fires they would not have collapsed.
You're a fucking imbecile. There was not enough energy in the upper 10 stories to demolish NINETY-TWO STORIES BELOW. Learn some fucking physics, retard.
@fertilizerspike What are fucking physics? The only kind of physics you know of course! The physics I learned at university are about laws of nature and mathematics. By just calling names and shouting you will convince nobody. Just the opposite.
@fertilizerspike Just to informe you: I also question the validity of this so called "collapse theories". But arrogant people who come bullying others damage the "truth" movement. We have to argue with facts and mathemaical models not with name calling. Be polite or keep your mouth shut. I just told what we have to disproof if we want to win the argument. If we can´t publish an article that destroys Bazants arguments then we have lost. So leave me alone.
Why hasn't Mr. King's claims been peer-reviewed if he is so brillant? If his engineering claims had any merit he would submit them to respected journals and have them peer-reviewed. He hasn't because they are wrong. This isn't government controlled peer-reviewed stuff, so some of you truthers can't use that as an excuse. There are a number of respected independent journals that are world renowned he could submit his paper to, but yet he hasn't? Hmmmm. R.I.P. Truth movement.
i love americans,. its a real shame to see that they are willing to ignore the truth about what happened..facts are facts,. im an engineer and just seeing all the evidence points to something fishy or some kind of supernatural thing happened.
dont be a sucker and have them lie to you. its starting to look embarrassing now.
i held your country in high regards but things like this makes me see whats really going on over there. wake up . demand the truth use your common sense and see the logic
@AIVIBITION The Patriot act is the motive, now the goverment can listen on your phone calls, emails, text messages, mail, without you ever knowing or able to fight back, which is a huge invasion of privacy. They have done this for yeas but now its legal.
In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a profit of about $500 million.
you just have to love how americans think it was a terroist attack and the rest of the world knows it was a planed demolition that just shows how well the american gov't
lies to its people with its propaganda and fear mongering. there education system is nothing but american propaganda they dont learn anything about the world just what there gov;t wants them to learn its no wonder why they are so clueless!!!
@sumrandomkid1, That's a very stupid argument, considering the official cause of collapse as cited by NIST was steel weakening from office fires causing truss failure and a cascading collapse ensued.
The real question should be why the building on the opposite side of where the plane crashed suddenly gave way on the opposite side of the building from the damage?
@sumrandomkid1 The buildings were designed to withstand SEVERAL impacts from airliners. Watch the World Trade Center documentary. Stop making people do more research. Your defeating the purpose of disinformation. Change the subject.
@sumrandomkid1 ...he he he! you're impressive! i mean, your impressions lack common sense! your views of the workings of the world seem too influenced by hollywood films! "terrorism" has been sold out to the americans who bought the conclusion that those buildings collapsed the way they did due to the heat from the burning airplanes. please don't "lol" on this one. i promise you, you're making yourself really look or, sound, stupid. typical american: opinionated but, poorly educated.
@sumrandomkid1 Some people cant handel multiple variables! they are very easy too fool! Here is how!( person see's plane hit building) and then person see's building go down! person says how? Official says plane hit building and broke the building so building fell!! ( person says ok and thats it, another person says no thats not how it hapned! this confuses person1! he doesnt want to believe official lied! and he seen plane hit building fall and Official must be right!! THE END
@sumrandomkid1 take your jenga game! and pour gasolind on the top 3rd portion and leave the rest un effected!!! and place a weight on top for good measure!! the jenga tower wont collapse , at worst you'll end up with a rectangular cube completely burning! you can even knock a section out and as long as the lower section is intact it wont collapse!!
Steel melts at 3750 degrees. Open air fires cannot reach those temperatures. Metal had melted at base of towers ("pools of molten metal like lava"-according to several ground zero workers). Appendix C of FEMA report describes sulfur residue on WTC steel. Thermite used in demolition, when combined with sulfur (which lowers the melting point of iron) when combined with sulfur is called thermate which has faster results, which the military uses. Iron oxide and iron sulfide found on WTC steel.
FEMA found mysterious sulfidation and rapid oxydation on WTC7 steel. Evidence of severe high temperature corrosion attack with subsequent intragranular melting turning solid steel girders into swiss cheese. THIS WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN NIST REPORT. Jet fuel and office fires cannot produce that kind of damage. There were molten pools of liquid steel under the debris THREE WEEKS AFTER 9/11 as stated by eyewitness ground zero workers. It is quite obvious explosives were used.
@skidvicious71, i stumble upon this video by accident, i was shocked to see there is still person as stupid as u still exist in this world, u seems like ur an epic fail in everything you do. i seriously never saw such a stupid person as u, reply and prove u can get even stupider pls :))
@skidvicious71 .................the fact that you are on here everyday trying to debunk the 9/11 truth movement only proves that your a shill....because the sheep who really honestly believe in the 9/11 commission are so brainwashed that they just laugh at suggestions of an inside job and therefore dont spend hours of their time trying to defend the official story on youtube....now jog on and go collect ya pay packet..if we are so wrong what difference does it make to you?....
@UPYOURSBG No, it only proves that I'm in front of a computer for most of the day. Another monumental leap in logic. I've considered the claims of an inside job, but the science and logistics of it disprove every claim you nutbags say. There were structural engineers, demolitions experts, explosive experts, the NIST, etc. And all of them say it was the fires and the planes, But we have a tiny group of retarded truthers who do nothing more than scream 9/11, INSIDE JOB! Ya just gotta love it. LOL
@skidvicious71 They probably also think the tanker fire that caused a section of the MacArthur bridge to collapse in Oakland on August 29, 2007, was some kind of setup, as it clearly demonstrated that an open fuel-burning fire can, indeed, bring down a steel+concrete structure.
@JamesMorlan The funny thing is that there have been numerous buildings around the world that collapsed due to fire. But they choose to ignore facts and believe random bullshit posted on the net. fuckin morons.
@JamesMorlan Actually, they would just claim that the bridge was a hologram planted by the NWO. Typical deflection in the face of hard facts, which is what truthers are known for.
@JamesMorlan no building can go into a state of freefall with out help moron! not to mention the missing plane at the pentagon and shanksville, all evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.
one man with the proper clearance and prefabricated thermite devices could rig wtc 1, 2, and 7 by himself and do it in less than a year. to see a home made thermite device in action go to
watch?v=xYW-z7nrTZk
it pretty much tells you just how scientific nat geo really is.
@vengencefrom1979 No building fell at "freefall" speed, and if you happened to notice, the towers fell from the top down at the point of impact. How convenient that thermite devices could have been precisely rigged in advance to make this happen exactly at the impact point - not to mention have all the firing mechanisms survive the impact. Your 9/11 truth movement is hiding the evidence from you - there was plenty at the Pentagon and PA sites - you just choose to ignore/deny it.
@JamesMorlan, WTC endured at least 2.4 seconds of complete gravitational acceleration (more generically and incorrectly called "Free Fall speed")
Look into Kevin Ryan's research about who occupied the floors in the impact zones of the towers. Also note that these were the only floors that recieved special fire proofing upgrades. Maybe they were fire and plane-proofing the nanothermite cutter charges that their companies coincidentally had patents for...
@JamesMorlan wtc 7 - recorded at freefall speeds and pointed out to NIST by a high school teacher making them admit it. wtc 1 and 2 - freefall rates - slowed down a few seconds by a few floors, that would be 1 second per floor out of about a hundred. go tell your source to fuck off.
@vengencefrom1979 Whatever you say, sir. I suppose you're going to tell me the pilots were able to precisely pinpoint exactly what floors to crash the two planes into.
I'll pass along your sentiments to my source and keep you informed of their response. Although, perhaps I'll just have them contact you, directly. You know how second-hand information can get distorted in translation sometimes.
"There were structural engineers, demolitions experts, explosive experts, the NIST,"
( unspecified, but in reality a SMALL selected number, many in disagreement, MOST silent on the matter these days.. & "forgets" those1400 @ A&E9-11truth..cue follow-up lies of them ALL being"students" & Alice In Wonderland Logic that EVERY A&E-expert NOT actually a MEMBER of A&E9-11truth AGREES & supports "the official story", & would NEVER be just protecting their career..(some "play-dumb" required)
@artregal And how the fuck would you know adolf? Do you have a degree in mechanical engineering? Do you work with explosives? No, you come on to Youtube and jerk off to conspiracy vids like all the rest of the fuckin fags here.
@artregal And you are the typical conspiracy theorist. You belive in bullshit, then when asked for proof you resort to insults. Go fuck yourself you fuckin nutjob
@skidvicious71 you are pathetic. Even with scientific evidence from professionals in their field, you still believe official story. Why don't you take your own advice. You are the one who believes in bullshit. You wanna believe the official story which makes no sense according to the laws of physics, you go ahead. The rest of us are going to use our brains.
@msmelancholy1 The truthers and others like you(morons) have been debunked ad nauseum. Only an ignorant asshole would believe that somehow our own gov't was involved in 9/11. Congratulations, you're now a fucked up, non thinking fringe 9/11 truther.
@skidvicious71 George W- is that you? Wait, rumsfeld? cheney? who ever the hell you are-your time here has expired. Nobody believes your rhetoric anymore. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound do you? What debunking? Where is it???? If you don't have a job with gov already, you might want to apply cuz you fit right in with those lying murderers. The truth will come out and no matter what kind of useless crap you spew from your mouth, its not gonna change that.
@msmelancholy1 Blah, blah, blah, STFU already nancy boy. I'm sure you've seen several programs or vids completely debunking and destroying your conspiracy theory, yet choose to ignore everything they say. Thats how great conspiracy theories work, you have to choose to ignore logic, science and rational thought. Congratulations, you're now a blithering idiot.
@dickydom9 And I'm a fuckin astronaut. LOL If you 've got a degree in engineering and yet still believe the "truthers", I've got news for ya buddy. You're a fuckin idiot.
@skidvicious71 'There were structural engineers, demolitions experts, explosive experts, the NIST, etc. And all of them say it was the fires and the planes,'
and there are 100's of mechanical and structural engineers, demolition experts, architects, physicists, military and government personnel and atleast 6 911 commissioners that disagree with them.
So i guess you can explain the complete collapses using evidence from NIST FEMA and ASCE..oh wait there is no explanation from them..oh well
@skidvicious71 Sorry to disappoint you but your way off and your pathetic. You not worth responding to anymore. You can't even prove your point with any type of adult conversation or one shred of evidence. Whether you like it or not, and i'm guessing you don't, but the truth movement is backed by scientific evidence and common sense. If you want to argue, bring some proof or don't bother opening your mouth because you make youself look very foolish.
@msmelancholy1 You liberal douchebags are such cry baby mother fuckers. You attack me in your first post, I respond in kind and then you try and take the high road. Fuck you, it isn't working. Your so called evidence has been debunked ad nauseum. The onus to prove what actually happened is on you dumbass. I'm not going to do your homework. Don't forget to stick your tongue up Osama's ass while you're jerking him off. I've been told by other truthers he likes that.
An MIT Physicist contends the towers did not collapse, but were brought down by explosives. Do you believe the official account or an MIT Physicist? Hmmmm....
@jizzmonger Yes, I saw the hole. I also saw a lady standing in this hole. Why wasn't this lady consumed by the searing heat. Look with your own eyes. Those buildings were "BLOWN UP"!
@CrazyRay7979 So the many accounts of explosives going off on 9/11 mean nothing? Reguardless of the thermite found within the dust around the WTC complex. And the physics that prove the buildings couldnt have fallen without a CD. What evidence do you have it was fire? Your theory of fire taking the towers down at free fall is beyond retarded. And to defend such a theory is beyond treasonous. Your theories have zero evidence that fire caused the towers to fall at free fall speed. PROVE YOUR IDEA!
There wasn't any thermite found...and funny since physics, engineering, architecture, and science proves the buildings DID "fall without a CD"...you'd know this if you didn't spend all your time on Truther websites and watching Truther videos that lie...
The towers didn't fall at free-fall speed, didn't fall at near-free-fall speed, and didn't fall anywhere near free-fall speed...the ability to count the seconds while watching the collapse is obviously not an ability you possess
The accounts of explosives don't mean anything other than things were exploding due to the attack/damage/debris/fire...the absent magnitude of the "explosions"' sound and force easily proves there were no explosiions of the always-used in controlled demolitions RDX/TNT...
It's so funny how you Truthers scream about thermite, when you don't even know what it is or how it works...and you always talk about "explosives" that you have absolutely no evidence for
@CrazyRay7979 words cannot describe how narrow minded and blinded to anything but what you WANT to believe. If you think that there were no bombs check out the video here on youtube of your beloved George W Bush doing a drastic u turn admitting that bombs were going off in the building. I understand that there are 2 sides to every story and the world has heard the American govenments several times, now try listening to ours, do yourself a favour watch a movie called The Ripple Effect
Jeff King got a bachelors' engineering degree from MIT...36 years ago, in biology and electronics...he was a student at MIT, he is not a professor or an MIT employee...and he's been a DOCTOR for 3 decades now...
...a.k.a. not "expert testimony"...and he's already had his "points" destroyed by people who ARE experts and who outnumber him greatly
@CrazyRay7979 Makes no difference as to what Jeff KIng is, if you had been paying attention and didn't have your head stuck up your ass you would have known the people he was referring to ARE experts in the relevent fields to do with building collapse and explosives, btw there was plenty of material strewn around that proved thermite was used in this demolition, its just that your another deplonker waving a silly patriotic flag.
TONS of plaster in those buildings. Couldn't that have been pulverized in the collapse, & have been a large component of the dust? The upper 32 floor block of #1 weighed about 73 million kg. Its potential energy was 221.8 billion joules. The pulverization pressures must have been unimaginable! That probably accounts for the pulverization of concrete, plaster, etc, the fineness of the dust. An equivalent amount of TNT energy would be 116.7 billion pounds! Can't install that much secretly!
The top quarter of each building weighed about 3-4 times the mass of four fully laden oil tankers, imagine hauling that mass over the building and dropping it suddenly....lots of dust
All of these theories are just that - theories, because we do not have enough evidence. As someone who is both and engineer and a physicist, I am not interested in getting involved in social science debates. What I can say, based on my experience, is that it is not natural for a tall slender building like the World Trade Center towers, to collapse completely vertically, as these buildings did.
@safetychoice Good to know there are still sane people in this world.
I hate how science gets used as a whipping boy in this issue, empirical observation insists that there is more to it than meets the eye. Science follows from empiricism, not rationalizations.
Jeff King is not an engineer at MIT. He got his degree from MIT in the early 70s, in electrical engineering; so he is talking about something which is not really his domain.
On Jun 5-2006 author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted for multiple events, but not 9/11!
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11. Tomb continued, Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11
It isn't about Party or Bush Bashing. Its about our Country!
You owe it to your country to look into both sides of the 9/11 debate. There are many well researched videos, unlike Loose change. Good places to start
911 Connect the Dots is a great 18 min video @ watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE
Zero (by a Nobel Prize Winner) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
WTC7 Freefall - No Longer Controversial. Scientifically Proven and Self Verifiable. @ watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ
Science and Physics - 911 truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
The 9/11 Commission NOW reveals that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The sources and details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.
Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.
"The FBI's counterterrorism division concluded that the evidence presented by the [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth] deserves FBI scrutiny. In a letter, Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach assessed that the group's analysis is "backed by thorough research and analysis."
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
and AE911Truth's Blueprint for Truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
and how does that explain the NYFD witness statement: 'you go down below and see molten steel, like in a foundry, running down the channel rails" or 1100 missing bodies, fires that would not die for over 3 months. The speed and symmetry, or wtc7's perfect implosion.
Fire heats and weakens steel, the fuel; burns up and the steel regains its full strength. It also conducts the heat quite well. Despite how unlikely it may seem on the surface we must deal with the facts.
and how does that explain the NYFD witness statement: 'you go down below and see molten steel, like in a foundry, running down the channel rails" or 1100 missing bodies, fires that would not die for over 3 months. The speed and symmetry, or wtc7's implosion?
Fire heats and weakens steel, the fuel; burns up and the steel regains its full strength. It also conducts the heat quite well. Despite how unlikely it may seem on the surface we must deal with the facts.
@blackjerryboymetal Not true, if that was the case every kerosene heater would fail as would a the burner on a gas cook stove. Your pots and pans would melt.
@blackjerryboymetal They used to spray asbestos on everything. It was put on the steel beams and other internal items to keep fire from spreading from wall to wall. The fact that they sprayed it on the beams doesn't change the scientific fact that jet fuel doesn't get hot enough to make steel beams melt or collapse.
first off i was born here in this country and to be more specific i was born in einstein hospital in bronx ny. and ny is in this country so no i am not an alian. and next what are you going to say that you work for the three stooges too. lmao
@blackjerryboymetal for your info i do have a girl friend, and yes i do have a hobby and its in local politics. and my claims are based on actuall research not some 911 commission that works for the govt. and yes i do have the evidence but to bad the govt has hid them like they did with vietnam and the kennedy assisination.
@blackjerryboymetal no you making your self look like a fool cause you dont know a god damn thing thats why you cant even answer my fucking questiions. and out side job well muhammad atta was paind by the cia and ias until the day of 911. did you know that? no. so give me a favore know your roll or shut your mouth
@blackjerryboymetal and as far as my question is conceren you cant even answer it cause you dont know the answeres to it. so stop talking the good talk and START walking the walk and answer my 3 questions.
@blackjerryboymetal for your info dumb ass my dad was an enginerr that help build tower 7 adn to tell you from a unbiased point what you said is garbage why cuase it was not 1/3 of the structor that was scoped out it was only 15 feet inwad and the whole building was built to with stacd that cause the build actual structor meaning each steel beam was built to hold 10 times its weight and thats coming from my dad who had been an enginerr since 1981 and help build tower 7.
@domamania o and burned for 7 hours from what no jet fual entered in it, so your saying that the fire from the paper and carpets burned down the structor. that bullshit because if that was the case then all building should be banned of have paper and deaks and carpets. you and the fuckin media is a joke. get your head out of your ass.
@blackjerryboymetal allright jack asss. thyey were 3 buildings and 2 airplanes. and no plane hit tower 7 so nothing could have knocked off the fireproffing from that building and yet it collapsed the same way the twin towers did. and the dutch bank building was damaged real bad and prob;y worse then towers 7 and it still remained.
@blackjerryboymetal no its because of idiots like you who think that the govt never lies to you and and dont do their own researc h intsead of listning to the scripted media and believe everything what they tell you. remember biladen was never charged of the 911 attacks, do your own research and look at the FBI web site.
@blackjerryboymetal like i said i dont want to stoop down to your level any more either do your research and know what your talking about or shut up. end of story
@blackjerryboymetal yes i know that it does not explode. but all of the elements that are in super thermite were found at the wtc site. and like i said before do your research and then come back to me.
@blackjerryboymetal no what was found in the dust was rust which is one substance that in thermite, 2 magnisium which is also found in thermite and yes like you said pint substance which is in thermite. remember nanno thermite is mixed with paint to paint on the walls and when dried it becamoe highly explosive. do your home work first and get out of the 911 commissions ass then comb back and talk to me.
@blackjerryboymetal actually yes it it. anything that ignites is considerd an explosive. and yes they were fragments or thermite found in the ash of the twin towers.
@blackjerryboymetal musta been an accident. blackjerry meant to say that for 8 weeks afterward the ground were over 1000 degrees. The workers had to wear new steel toe boots often because they would melt over the shifts. The molten slag is also documented by nasa thermal flyovers, along with unviversal evidence of thermite of such advanced manufacturing only a few laboratories in the US could even be capable of producing it. Like Lawrence Labs...
the explosive that was usued to take down the towers was nanno thermite. and beofre anybody commenst againt me research nanno thermits what its made from and what it can do to steel.
what i really dont understand: why didnt the gov do a proper investigation. find the explosives and use that as reason to search for the "weapons of mass destruction"
hind sight 20/20
the 911 report is really the smoking gun and is what so clearly points a finger. at its authors.
buddy, its odd that some dudes would take over jetliners full of fuel and fly them into office towers. This guy is a dope. If you can be as dumb as him and get into MIT then they should have mailed me my pHd a long time ago. And for those who say nothing hot enough? Jet fuel has way way more btu power than gasoline. I would like him to tell me who did it, and with what? when did they find the time to insert all these explosives? was it the janitor? Madoff?
whether jet fuel has more BTUs than gasoline is irrelevant. The point is - does it melt steel? The answer is NO! Your comparison to gasoline just proves you're fucking retarded.
wot id like to know is if it was osama why did the construction expert osama not target the load bearing lower floors, that would have caused immediate collapse and pulling the towers over into other buildings. if it was osama he would have done his homework on the towers and targeted the lower floors to cause most death
I agree. Also, WTC 3,4,5 and 6 were pummeled with "mountains of burning debris" and were much more severly damaged than WTC 7. All four of these steel framed structures withstood the impacts and eventually had to be brought down by demolition. These buildings act as the rule rather than the exception.
Those vids just make me laugh. Again, all I hear are those same tired words: "footprint", "freefall", "never before seen", "steel framed building" etc..
Still no PROOF!! Show me a rescuer, policeman or firefighter carrying something suspicious. Just saying they did it through misunderstanding of physics in your teeny world isn't proof.
Some of your guys reckon the planes couldn't have made it into the buildings in the first place but you do. Argue that with them!
its there in the vids i pointed to- u c the debunk alienentity ? yeah theres ur proof
im not sayin that planes didnt hit the buildin however the destruction could not hav been primarily by no planes or jet fuel- as most of the fuel went bye bye right on impact- & the inside fires were not at all that hot
That's NOT proof. Most of the fuel splashed forward not back, and you only need to buckle metal to have it collapse under strain, not forgetting thermal expansion buckling the metal besides the impact.
Those vids prove nothing:
watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w
See how the steel was buckling? You can't deny this, EVER!
all u hav done was combined the bs pancake theory w/ a little bit of fire sagging. Both of these sound totally ludicrous & r debunked by numerous counts- jim hoffman already debunked the pancake
& not to mention the lack of 47 core steel collumns and the lack of any in tact stories disproves any such collapse. Hell the mandarin fire & windsor fire were far greater in magnitude than this measly black smoke small flame fire
even nist had to admit that the fires in wtc1,2 were small&limited
Your complaint of my points "sounding" ludicrous points to one thing - your inability to grasp maths and physics with the accuracy and resolve necessary to find fault in your own ludicrous arguments. It doesn't take much time or temp to bend a stressed beam, notably, it doesn't have to melt:
watch?v=CGsOkT__M7Y
In less than 4 mins at 2000F, exposed steel lost strength simply due to jet fuel.
WTC1 can be seen everywhere with a glowing ring of fire on an entire floor. That's hot.
It's been some 9 years now and all I keep hearing from the troofer camp is conjecture and bad science. rkowens4 has debunked just about every troofer argument with simple science and video. Others have tried to debunk him, but if they had been right, I would have shifted camps if the science made sense, but there's far too little science and just mindnumbing conjecture without evidence.
Prove to me how they demolished WTC1&2, with video and real evidence of CD.
u didnt even bother to watch the vids- so im not gonna bother talk to u. hardly worth the time- so go fuck urself, enjoy getting tortured @ guantomono & die cuz the world just dont need u
ur physics is still quite lacking- Freefall can not occur when there is resistance. Force transfer thru impact can NOT occur if theres no deceleration. Thus there was virtually little to no impact seen in north tower
if u bothered to analyze that vid of north tower ud know
or maybe the gulf of tonkin incident? or how about America's involvement in the war in Indonesia?
These events were all get secret- & highly classified works w/ heavy govt involvement. Look them up & c for urself how "LONG" it took the american public to learn of this stuff. America didnt even know about the nukes bein tested durin the manhattan project
so if u want a discussion, go look these up & com bak tell me wat they r about- else u ought to go kill urself or get tortured @ guantomono
I never implied there was absolute freefall - I know that freefall can't occur with resistance.
Force transfer will still occur on a floating tissue and a bowling ball falls into it - what deceleration?
I dare you to show me fire-rated detonators, timers, wiring and explosives.
One side of the twoofer camp cites explosives, the other side imagine thermite. You can't even agree. Others cite holographic planes!! You're all morons.
The very fact that u can not discern what is factual & still blindly hold to an 'official lie' is the greatest idiocy!
Thermitic evidence was found in the site- & it is evident that explosives were used else its IMPOSSIBLE for a building to com down INSTANTANEOUSLY & CONTINUOUSLY
theres virtually no impact between floors- in fact, if u ever examine any vid of either wtc1,2 or 7. You can easily measure impacts if they occur- they appear as a sudden deceleration NOT a continuous graph
so it really dont matter about kinetic energy or whatnot since thats not wats bringing the building down. Its totally misleading to talk about that when in fact theres som other major factor at play- neither gravity nor som weak ass fire. Note: fires r totally random, gradual & assymetric thus theres NO way in which it by itself could effect steel to cause an instantaneous & continuous collapse!
somethin instantaneous produces instantaneous results. But when the instantaneous event is carefully put in a series of instantaneous events, thats when it becomes continuous. And what we saw on 911 was obviously a very continuous & instantaneous devestation- especially on wtc7
hell if u even take a look @ the damage, the wtc1,2 buildings was being totally destroyed 20-30 stories BELOW the 'falling top' AND NO SIGNIFICANT DECELERATION IS NOTED DURING SUCH TIME!
also note: Do u think its IMPOSSIBLE to com up w/ half a dozen ways to 'fireproof' explosives? do u even know half the countless factors that go into makin an explosive?
Have u even heard of C4? U can toss it in a fire, put it in a furnace, jump on it, stomp on it, even throw it around or pee on it & it will NOT explode unless a certain electrical charge is passed thru it
this is just 1 tiny example of a 'fire proof' explosive. Your claim is quite funny in & of itself- just cuz ur very narrow
mind cant even com up w/ 1 way of fire-proofing explosives nor do u understand a quarter of the countless factors that go into makin explosives- u assume that NO explosives could be used as its impossible in ur little world to fire-proof them
Water puts out a fire- thus no fires must be able to withstand water. This is how ridiculous ur statement sounds
Note also: C4 is a pretty old & outdated explosive- while still used, there is somethin called science & technology which greatly advanced explosives thus expanding the number of possible "Fire proofed explosives"
hell when u play w/ energetic materials- u can both increase or decrease a reactions output. This is super advanced stuff- & thermite is a prime example of it. If u enhance the mixture of thermite, u can enhance its energy output greatly makin it almost like an explosive- a highly energetic yet silent explosive
So enhance the thermite/explosive. Prove to the world what they did. Tell us 'o great one.. ;)
You can't. You hope to be THE ONE to blow the whole 911 conspiracy wide open, but you don't know enough of anything, which is why you're a troofer. Keep wanking over your troofer dreams pal..
It's not up to me to come up with ways of fireproofing explosives, which is what I asked you to do seeing as you're the one touting explosives. So where's your proof then?
fireproofing explosives is not impossible just like coming up w/ a fire which burns thru water(ie Greek Fire). But by assuming that its impossible- u hav already blinded urself to the facts. Hell right off the top of my head- u could obviously FIRE COAT IT- duh! thats an obvious thing that could greatly fireproof an explosive or most materials for that matter
Also u must keep in mind somethin called flash point or the threshold ignition. This is the minimum energy to set the reaction off
Different materials & elements hav different thresholds. Thus som materials w/ a higher threshold won't react in a low burning fire simply due to energy difference. Unless u achieve the threshold point, u can NOT achieve the reaction/explosion! can't believe u dont even know this- its basic chem&physics
What does kinetic energy matter in the collapse of the wtc buildings when they are in continuous motion? The ONLY WAY TO TRANSFER KINETIC ENERGY IS THROUGH INSTANTANEOUS DECELERATION
if the top had impacted the bottom, we could easily trace this as a deceleration of the graph. However, the graph remained continuous & for wtc7, we c the continuity of freefall acceleration for 2+ seconds
In a continuous graph, the only forces which the fallin object can exert r STATIC &/or GRAVITATIONAL/linear acceleration.. It is linear acceleration which achieves a continuous graph- nothing else. & if gravity is the energy measured of motion, then the rest of the energy of the 'top'
is exerted as a static energy on the bottom. Keep in mind this is all a continuous graph- there is NO impact involved. there is NO deceleration involved
Thus it becomes obvious som external force must b applied to the structure to bring it down in such a continuous manner thru its own structure
A 300lb boxer throws a punch. Now we can calculate the amount of kinetic energy of that punch all day. BUT, unless that punch actually hits some target & decelerates, where's the impact of the punch? Unless the punch hits an object or there is a change of force, it will NOT impact. So the boxer can punch all day & unless he actually hits the target, measuring the kinetic energy of that punch is absolutely meaningless other than to obfuscate the fact
that its one hell of a sucky punch & a total waste of energy since there is no energy transfer other than thru air.
impact is practically synonymous w/ instantaneous deceleration- so unless u c instantaneous decleration, u cant c impact!
And in retort against ur criticism for takin 9 years. I'll say these 3 things:
1) Do u even f'ing know about the Manhattan Project? Or how about the good old Gulf of Tonkin incident? Or how about Americas involvement in the war of indonesia? Or maybe
Could dude be more boring...I agree with his analysis, but he is a snoozer.
TruthMyMamaToldMe 1 month ago
Listening to this makes me think it could be some sort of weapon we do not know about... pulverising material to less than 100 microns is damning evidence...
rdicko86 6 months ago
The implausibility of the official storyline is manifest too such a degree it's ridiculous and yet they blithely ignore the hardcore evidence regardless. WHAT ELSE ARE THEY GOING TO DO? THEY'VE BEEN CAUGHT. It's a tyrannical political regime totally divested of legitimacy. If 9/11 was staged, AND IT WAS, then you've declared an act of war against the body politic. Against the world.
wisdomtrek 6 months ago
come on really its not this complicating, simple history proves this was BS!! Do you know how many building have EVER callapsed? Yeah 3, wtc 1,2 and 7. For me I was sold after that, there is even one case when a b-52 bomber (consideribly larger than the 757) crashed into a building no callapse. Anyone that can think for themselves knows the gov story is such BS it stinks throught this nation. god save us all!
geovs20 6 months ago
Lol people trying to debunk this gut should post their education credentials. Those of you denouncing this guy probably can't spell some of his credentials without the use of a spell check program.
2riskis2live 7 months ago
Only Dimitri Khalezov's theory explains all the evidence seen that day, the dust clouds, the toasted cars, the sudden global collapse. NYC was nuked.
signalfire6 7 months ago
There are so many scientific aspects relating to the collapse of the towers, that simply can not be denied. The laws of physics and nature are what they are and do not just alter of their own accord, however, man can use opposing science to alter the physical and natural effects. Can any debunker please give evidence of how the towers fell at free fall speed, all three of them? Without first removing or severely weakening the floors below. Scientifically impossible.
sequins91 8 months ago
@sequins91 They can't give evidence. Chances are they haven't ever taken a physics class.
2riskis2live 7 months ago
@sequins91 Prof. Bazant has published 2 papers on that topic. If we want to proof anything we have to falsify them. Arguing on Youtube doesn´t further anything I fear. It´s just a war with words.
pcuimac 5 months ago
Explosives powerful enough to "eject" those huge pieces of steel would have been clearly recorded on tape for miles around, not just from a few eyewitnesses. When a 110 story building collapse while on fire it would be expected that everything in it would be pulverized.
TimothyRaymond1 9 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1
There's peobably no doubt that a 110 story building collapse would pulverize most of the contents. The question is how it collapsed.
Mrbobthejoe1 8 months ago
@Mrbobthejoe1 They collapsed because huge planes crashed into them. It couldn't be any more obvious.
TimothyRaymond1 8 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1
Somethings aren't ever that obvious. Even the government sponsored reports say fire was the main cause of the collapse. not the planes. Skyscrapers like the twin towers are built with redundancy so that weight can redistribute itself. One plane crash would not cause the collapse.
Mrbobthejoe1 8 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1 an 800tone plane brought down a 700,000tonne building? Compared to the buildings the planes were pretty small. And the official theory is that the fires left over from the explosion burned until the building fell into itself; Other than the explosion the planes have very little to do with the explanation of why the buildings fell; though i get that from reports from a few years ago so it could have changed by now, I dont know, I stopped researching it and went out for some air.
purplehatcult 7 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1 NIST concluded the core colums buckled because of office fires. Prof. Bazant calculated the impact of the upper 10 stories of the building destroyed the lower 92 because nearly 8 stories buckled. The planes just ignited the fires and weakend the building around the impact zone, but without office fires they would not have collapsed.
pcuimac 5 months ago
@pcuimac
You're a fucking imbecile. There was not enough energy in the upper 10 stories to demolish NINETY-TWO STORIES BELOW. Learn some fucking physics, retard.
fertilizerspike 5 months ago
@fertilizerspike What are fucking physics? The only kind of physics you know of course! The physics I learned at university are about laws of nature and mathematics. By just calling names and shouting you will convince nobody. Just the opposite.
pcuimac 5 months ago
@pcuimac
Apparently you learned nothing about physics at university or you'd know how ignorant you appear when you spout such rubbish.
fertilizerspike 5 months ago
@fertilizerspike Just to informe you: I also question the validity of this so called "collapse theories". But arrogant people who come bullying others damage the "truth" movement. We have to argue with facts and mathemaical models not with name calling. Be polite or keep your mouth shut. I just told what we have to disproof if we want to win the argument. If we can´t publish an article that destroys Bazants arguments then we have lost. So leave me alone.
pcuimac 5 months ago
@pcuimac
Eat my ass. Bazant is a fucking cretin and so are you.
fertilizerspike 5 months ago
Why hasn't Mr. King's claims been peer-reviewed if he is so brillant? If his engineering claims had any merit he would submit them to respected journals and have them peer-reviewed. He hasn't because they are wrong. This isn't government controlled peer-reviewed stuff, so some of you truthers can't use that as an excuse. There are a number of respected independent journals that are world renowned he could submit his paper to, but yet he hasn't? Hmmmm. R.I.P. Truth movement.
mikeyt34 9 months ago
i love americans,. its a real shame to see that they are willing to ignore the truth about what happened..facts are facts,. im an engineer and just seeing all the evidence points to something fishy or some kind of supernatural thing happened.
dont be a sucker and have them lie to you. its starting to look embarrassing now.
i held your country in high regards but things like this makes me see whats really going on over there. wake up . demand the truth use your common sense and see the logic
osbertpeters21 9 months ago
@AIVIBITION The Patriot act is the motive, now the goverment can listen on your phone calls, emails, text messages, mail, without you ever knowing or able to fight back, which is a huge invasion of privacy. They have done this for yeas but now its legal.
TheJosh1111111111111 10 months ago
In my opinion it was an insurance fraud, not conspiracy. Money is money. That is all. They were ready to get money from total collaps of the towers.
stan021 1 year ago
this clip was taken from a larger presentation involving many speakers. Is there a link to the whole event?
RisingScience 1 year ago
In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a profit of about $500 million.
sychophantt 1 year ago
you just have to love how americans think it was a terroist attack and the rest of the world knows it was a planed demolition that just shows how well the american gov't
lies to its people with its propaganda and fear mongering. there education system is nothing but american propaganda they dont learn anything about the world just what there gov;t wants them to learn its no wonder why they are so clueless!!!
snowboard138 1 year ago 2
5:38 lol?have they ever been hit by huge jet airplanes carrying thousands of gallons of jet fuel?
sumrandomkid1 1 year ago
@sumrandomkid1, That's a very stupid argument, considering the official cause of collapse as cited by NIST was steel weakening from office fires causing truss failure and a cascading collapse ensued.
The real question should be why the building on the opposite side of where the plane crashed suddenly gave way on the opposite side of the building from the damage?
WarCrime911 1 year ago 12
@sumrandomkid1 The buildings were designed to withstand SEVERAL impacts from airliners. Watch the World Trade Center documentary. Stop making people do more research. Your defeating the purpose of disinformation. Change the subject.
Daddyo930 10 months ago
@sumrandomkid1 The towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts from jet liners.
40joel 8 months ago
@40joel
and the CTV Building was designed to withstand earthquakes
Degenerator1 5 months ago
@sumrandomkid1 ...he he he! you're impressive! i mean, your impressions lack common sense! your views of the workings of the world seem too influenced by hollywood films! "terrorism" has been sold out to the americans who bought the conclusion that those buildings collapsed the way they did due to the heat from the burning airplanes. please don't "lol" on this one. i promise you, you're making yourself really look or, sound, stupid. typical american: opinionated but, poorly educated.
67Mannheim 5 months ago
@sumrandomkid1 Some people cant handel multiple variables! they are very easy too fool! Here is how!( person see's plane hit building) and then person see's building go down! person says how? Official says plane hit building and broke the building so building fell!! ( person says ok and thats it, another person says no thats not how it hapned! this confuses person1! he doesnt want to believe official lied! and he seen plane hit building fall and Official must be right!! THE END
kevin21122 3 weeks ago
@sumrandomkid1 take your jenga game! and pour gasolind on the top 3rd portion and leave the rest un effected!!! and place a weight on top for good measure!! the jenga tower wont collapse , at worst you'll end up with a rectangular cube completely burning! you can even knock a section out and as long as the lower section is intact it wont collapse!!
kevin21122 3 weeks ago
Steel melts at 3750 degrees. Open air fires cannot reach those temperatures. Metal had melted at base of towers ("pools of molten metal like lava"-according to several ground zero workers). Appendix C of FEMA report describes sulfur residue on WTC steel. Thermite used in demolition, when combined with sulfur (which lowers the melting point of iron) when combined with sulfur is called thermate which has faster results, which the military uses. Iron oxide and iron sulfide found on WTC steel.
msmelancholy1 1 year ago
FEMA found mysterious sulfidation and rapid oxydation on WTC7 steel. Evidence of severe high temperature corrosion attack with subsequent intragranular melting turning solid steel girders into swiss cheese. THIS WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN NIST REPORT. Jet fuel and office fires cannot produce that kind of damage. There were molten pools of liquid steel under the debris THREE WEEKS AFTER 9/11 as stated by eyewitness ground zero workers. It is quite obvious explosives were used.
msmelancholy1 1 year ago
@skidvicious71, i stumble upon this video by accident, i was shocked to see there is still person as stupid as u still exist in this world, u seems like ur an epic fail in everything you do. i seriously never saw such a stupid person as u, reply and prove u can get even stupider pls :))
allenwongsingyung1 1 year ago
If this is true, what hope do the american people have?
jao7975 1 year ago
This guy might have a degree from MIT, but he's still a fucking idiot.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 .................the fact that you are on here everyday trying to debunk the 9/11 truth movement only proves that your a shill....because the sheep who really honestly believe in the 9/11 commission are so brainwashed that they just laugh at suggestions of an inside job and therefore dont spend hours of their time trying to defend the official story on youtube....now jog on and go collect ya pay packet..if we are so wrong what difference does it make to you?....
UPYOURSBG 1 year ago 14
@UPYOURSBG No, it only proves that I'm in front of a computer for most of the day. Another monumental leap in logic. I've considered the claims of an inside job, but the science and logistics of it disprove every claim you nutbags say. There were structural engineers, demolitions experts, explosive experts, the NIST, etc. And all of them say it was the fires and the planes, But we have a tiny group of retarded truthers who do nothing more than scream 9/11, INSIDE JOB! Ya just gotta love it. LOL
skidvicious71 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@skidvicious71 .................So you didn't answer the question......" What difference does it make to you what we think " ?.
UPYOURSBG 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 They probably also think the tanker fire that caused a section of the MacArthur bridge to collapse in Oakland on August 29, 2007, was some kind of setup, as it clearly demonstrated that an open fuel-burning fire can, indeed, bring down a steel+concrete structure.
JamesMorlan 1 year ago
@JamesMorlan The funny thing is that there have been numerous buildings around the world that collapsed due to fire. But they choose to ignore facts and believe random bullshit posted on the net. fuckin morons.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@JamesMorlan Actually, they would just claim that the bridge was a hologram planted by the NWO. Typical deflection in the face of hard facts, which is what truthers are known for.
MrSkunkwork100 1 year ago
@JamesMorlan no building can go into a state of freefall with out help moron! not to mention the missing plane at the pentagon and shanksville, all evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.
one man with the proper clearance and prefabricated thermite devices could rig wtc 1, 2, and 7 by himself and do it in less than a year. to see a home made thermite device in action go to
watch?v=xYW-z7nrTZk
it pretty much tells you just how scientific nat geo really is.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
@vengencefrom1979 No building fell at "freefall" speed, and if you happened to notice, the towers fell from the top down at the point of impact. How convenient that thermite devices could have been precisely rigged in advance to make this happen exactly at the impact point - not to mention have all the firing mechanisms survive the impact. Your 9/11 truth movement is hiding the evidence from you - there was plenty at the Pentagon and PA sites - you just choose to ignore/deny it.
JamesMorlan 1 year ago
@JamesMorlan, WTC endured at least 2.4 seconds of complete gravitational acceleration (more generically and incorrectly called "Free Fall speed")
Look into Kevin Ryan's research about who occupied the floors in the impact zones of the towers. Also note that these were the only floors that recieved special fire proofing upgrades. Maybe they were fire and plane-proofing the nanothermite cutter charges that their companies coincidentally had patents for...
WarCrime911 1 year ago
@JamesMorlan wtc 7 - recorded at freefall speeds and pointed out to NIST by a high school teacher making them admit it. wtc 1 and 2 - freefall rates - slowed down a few seconds by a few floors, that would be 1 second per floor out of about a hundred. go tell your source to fuck off.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
@vengencefrom1979 Whatever you say, sir. I suppose you're going to tell me the pilots were able to precisely pinpoint exactly what floors to crash the two planes into.
I'll pass along your sentiments to my source and keep you informed of their response. Although, perhaps I'll just have them contact you, directly. You know how second-hand information can get distorted in translation sometimes.
JamesMorlan 1 year ago
@skidmarks71
"I've considered the claims of an inside job", (no need to actually refute any U KNOW them ALL & HAVE debunked them ALL)
"but the science and logistics ." (vague use of'jargon' & 'minutia' ) it disprove every claim (again unspecified)
"you nutbags say". (quick, petty direct insult, hoping neutral reader doesn't notice but opponent does, & becomes angry)
...
homerbear46 7 months ago
...
"There were structural engineers, demolitions experts, explosive experts, the NIST,"
( unspecified, but in reality a SMALL selected number, many in disagreement, MOST silent on the matter these days.. & "forgets" those1400 @ A&E9-11truth..cue follow-up lies of them ALL being"students" & Alice In Wonderland Logic that EVERY A&E-expert NOT actually a MEMBER of A&E9-11truth AGREES & supports "the official story", & would NEVER be just protecting their career..(some "play-dumb" required)
...
homerbear46 7 months ago
..DisinfoRules BREACHES on 5,8,10,15,16,1718 19..in ONE comment.LMFaO.
THAT PROVES you're a SHILL.
..It takes THREE comments JUST to explain to people the BULLSHIT you can squeeze into ONE...
..Ya just gotta hate these cunts =D
homerbear46 7 months ago
@skidvicious71 Provide evidence please, your argument must be based on facts as your follow up post seems educated.
ganyawee 1 year ago
@ganyawee No thanks, It's up to the nutbags of this world to prove what happened. And so far they've failed miserably.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 the fucking idiot are you...sorry but that true..
artregal 1 year ago
@artregal And how the fuck would you know adolf? Do you have a degree in mechanical engineering? Do you work with explosives? No, you come on to Youtube and jerk off to conspiracy vids like all the rest of the fuckin fags here.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 I am sorry,but you are a blind stupid and tiny creep,if you believe in this official story...
artregal 1 year ago
@artregal And you are the typical conspiracy theorist. You belive in bullshit, then when asked for proof you resort to insults. Go fuck yourself you fuckin nutjob
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 you are pathetic. Even with scientific evidence from professionals in their field, you still believe official story. Why don't you take your own advice. You are the one who believes in bullshit. You wanna believe the official story which makes no sense according to the laws of physics, you go ahead. The rest of us are going to use our brains.
msmelancholy1 1 year ago
@msmelancholy1 The truthers and others like you(morons) have been debunked ad nauseum. Only an ignorant asshole would believe that somehow our own gov't was involved in 9/11. Congratulations, you're now a fucked up, non thinking fringe 9/11 truther.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 George W- is that you? Wait, rumsfeld? cheney? who ever the hell you are-your time here has expired. Nobody believes your rhetoric anymore. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound do you? What debunking? Where is it???? If you don't have a job with gov already, you might want to apply cuz you fit right in with those lying murderers. The truth will come out and no matter what kind of useless crap you spew from your mouth, its not gonna change that.
msmelancholy1 1 year ago
@msmelancholy1 Blah, blah, blah, STFU already nancy boy. I'm sure you've seen several programs or vids completely debunking and destroying your conspiracy theory, yet choose to ignore everything they say. Thats how great conspiracy theories work, you have to choose to ignore logic, science and rational thought. Congratulations, you're now a blithering idiot.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 shill boy go home.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
@vengencefrom1979 Ummm, I am home....stupid ass
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@artregal
u fail....go troll some more real scientists.....
idiot
AceofDlamonds 1 year ago
@AceofDlamonds ..I know what kind of brainwashed pig you are..go back in your hole of shit and eat it...
artregal 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 Ive got a degree in mechanical engineering though, so fire away einstein !
dickydom9 1 year ago
@dickydom9 And I'm a fuckin astronaut. LOL If you 've got a degree in engineering and yet still believe the "truthers", I've got news for ya buddy. You're a fuckin idiot.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 'There were structural engineers, demolitions experts, explosive experts, the NIST, etc. And all of them say it was the fires and the planes,'
and there are 100's of mechanical and structural engineers, demolition experts, architects, physicists, military and government personnel and atleast 6 911 commissioners that disagree with them.
So i guess you can explain the complete collapses using evidence from NIST FEMA and ASCE..oh wait there is no explanation from them..oh well
lexicon008 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 Go back to watching tv. You obviously aren't to be taken seriously.
msmelancholy1 1 year ago
@msmelancholy1 Go back to jerking off in your moms basement little boy
skidvicious71 1 year ago
@skidvicious71 Sorry to disappoint you but your way off and your pathetic. You not worth responding to anymore. You can't even prove your point with any type of adult conversation or one shred of evidence. Whether you like it or not, and i'm guessing you don't, but the truth movement is backed by scientific evidence and common sense. If you want to argue, bring some proof or don't bother opening your mouth because you make youself look very foolish.
msmelancholy1 1 year ago
@msmelancholy1 You liberal douchebags are such cry baby mother fuckers. You attack me in your first post, I respond in kind and then you try and take the high road. Fuck you, it isn't working. Your so called evidence has been debunked ad nauseum. The onus to prove what actually happened is on you dumbass. I'm not going to do your homework. Don't forget to stick your tongue up Osama's ass while you're jerking him off. I've been told by other truthers he likes that.
skidvicious71 1 year ago
An MIT Physicist contends the towers did not collapse, but were brought down by explosives. Do you believe the official account or an MIT Physicist? Hmmmm....
thnksmarter 1 year ago
"Limited amount of oxygen available"
Geez dumbshit, did you see the hole the plane made in the building?
jizzmonger 1 year ago
@jizzmonger Yes, I saw the hole. I also saw a lady standing in this hole. Why wasn't this lady consumed by the searing heat. Look with your own eyes. Those buildings were "BLOWN UP"!
onedollarwill 1 year ago
@onedollarwill Maybe the area in which she was standing wasn't on fire?
What year did you drop out of school?
jizzmonger 1 year ago
To bad there is absolutely ZERO evidence of explosives and/or controlled demolition...
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 So the many accounts of explosives going off on 9/11 mean nothing? Reguardless of the thermite found within the dust around the WTC complex. And the physics that prove the buildings couldnt have fallen without a CD. What evidence do you have it was fire? Your theory of fire taking the towers down at free fall is beyond retarded. And to defend such a theory is beyond treasonous. Your theories have zero evidence that fire caused the towers to fall at free fall speed. PROVE YOUR IDEA!
darion65 1 year ago
@darion65
There wasn't any thermite found...and funny since physics, engineering, architecture, and science proves the buildings DID "fall without a CD"...you'd know this if you didn't spend all your time on Truther websites and watching Truther videos that lie...
The towers didn't fall at free-fall speed, didn't fall at near-free-fall speed, and didn't fall anywhere near free-fall speed...the ability to count the seconds while watching the collapse is obviously not an ability you possess
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@darion65
The accounts of explosives don't mean anything other than things were exploding due to the attack/damage/debris/fire...the absent magnitude of the "explosions"' sound and force easily proves there were no explosiions of the always-used in controlled demolitions RDX/TNT...
It's so funny how you Truthers scream about thermite, when you don't even know what it is or how it works...and you always talk about "explosives" that you have absolutely no evidence for
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 words cannot describe how narrow minded and blinded to anything but what you WANT to believe. If you think that there were no bombs check out the video here on youtube of your beloved George W Bush doing a drastic u turn admitting that bombs were going off in the building. I understand that there are 2 sides to every story and the world has heard the American govenments several times, now try listening to ours, do yourself a favour watch a movie called The Ripple Effect
JodyNate 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979
This is evidence for a CD. It's an expert testimony. Lets see if we can find more.
TheWizzooo 1 year ago
@TheWizzooo
Jeff King got a bachelors' engineering degree from MIT...36 years ago, in biology and electronics...he was a student at MIT, he is not a professor or an MIT employee...and he's been a DOCTOR for 3 decades now...
...a.k.a. not "expert testimony"...and he's already had his "points" destroyed by people who ARE experts and who outnumber him greatly
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CrazyRay7979 Makes no difference as to what Jeff KIng is, if you had been paying attention and didn't have your head stuck up your ass you would have known the people he was referring to ARE experts in the relevent fields to do with building collapse and explosives, btw there was plenty of material strewn around that proved thermite was used in this demolition, its just that your another deplonker waving a silly patriotic flag.
MindCrazedBanjo 1 year ago
@TheWizzooo Dont feed the troll. If he made a comment just ignore him and leave it be.
darion65 1 year ago
TONS of plaster in those buildings. Couldn't that have been pulverized in the collapse, & have been a large component of the dust? The upper 32 floor block of #1 weighed about 73 million kg. Its potential energy was 221.8 billion joules. The pulverization pressures must have been unimaginable! That probably accounts for the pulverization of concrete, plaster, etc, the fineness of the dust. An equivalent amount of TNT energy would be 116.7 billion pounds! Can't install that much secretly!
filthyphillyboy 1 year ago
@filthyphillyboy
The top quarter of each building weighed about 3-4 times the mass of four fully laden oil tankers, imagine hauling that mass over the building and dropping it suddenly....lots of dust
donnyab 1 year ago
All of these theories are just that - theories, because we do not have enough evidence. As someone who is both and engineer and a physicist, I am not interested in getting involved in social science debates. What I can say, based on my experience, is that it is not natural for a tall slender building like the World Trade Center towers, to collapse completely vertically, as these buildings did.
safetychoice 1 year ago
@safetychoice Good to know there are still sane people in this world.
I hate how science gets used as a whipping boy in this issue, empirical observation insists that there is more to it than meets the eye. Science follows from empiricism, not rationalizations.
DarkwingScooter 1 year ago
Jeff King is not an engineer at MIT. He got his degree from MIT in the early 70s, in electrical engineering; so he is talking about something which is not really his domain.
hunchbacked 1 year ago
That's a lot of suppositions which don't convince me at all.
hunchbacked 1 year ago
FBI Admits No Evidence on Bin Laden
On Jun 5-2006 author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted for multiple events, but not 9/11!
Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Ladens Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11. Tomb continued, Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
It isn't about Party or Bush Bashing. Its about our Country!
You owe it to your country to look into both sides of the 9/11 debate. There are many well researched videos, unlike Loose change. Good places to start
911 Connect the Dots is a great 18 min video @ watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE
Zero (by a Nobel Prize Winner) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
WTC7 Freefall - No Longer Controversial. Scientifically Proven and Self Verifiable. @ watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ
Science and Physics - 911 truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
@Bi0hazardx
How can you stand having an evil criminal government ruling you?
Do you realize what it would imply if the government had really planned these evil attacks?
Do you really enjoy having a government still worse than Hitler's one?
hunchbacked 1 year ago
9/11 conspiracies.........LOL
AceofDlamonds 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AceofDlamonds
The 9/11 Commission NOW reveals that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The sources and details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.
Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
"The FBI's counterterrorism division concluded that the evidence presented by the [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth] deserves FBI scrutiny. In a letter, Deputy Director Michael J. Heimbach assessed that the group's analysis is "backed by thorough research and analysis."
Please watch - Zero (A Nobel Prize Winner's 9/11 Documentary) @ watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA
and AE911Truth's Blueprint for Truth @ watch?v=b74naeawdCs
=
Bi0hazardx 1 year ago
mit physics vs 9/11 conspiracy... MIT PHYSICS FLAWLESS VICTORY!!!
canihave2bucks 1 year ago 2
@blackjerryboymetal
and how does that explain the NYFD witness statement: 'you go down below and see molten steel, like in a foundry, running down the channel rails" or 1100 missing bodies, fires that would not die for over 3 months. The speed and symmetry, or wtc7's perfect implosion.
Fire heats and weakens steel, the fuel; burns up and the steel regains its full strength. It also conducts the heat quite well. Despite how unlikely it may seem on the surface we must deal with the facts.
zoskiaist 1 year ago 2
@blackjerryboymetal
and how does that explain the NYFD witness statement: 'you go down below and see molten steel, like in a foundry, running down the channel rails" or 1100 missing bodies, fires that would not die for over 3 months. The speed and symmetry, or wtc7's implosion?
Fire heats and weakens steel, the fuel; burns up and the steel regains its full strength. It also conducts the heat quite well. Despite how unlikely it may seem on the surface we must deal with the facts.
zoskiaist 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal yeah steel warps at a temperature slightly higher than that which burns paper....
Jamato84 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal Not true, if that was the case every kerosene heater would fail as would a the burner on a gas cook stove. Your pots and pans would melt.
mcndahouse 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal They used to spray asbestos on everything. It was put on the steel beams and other internal items to keep fire from spreading from wall to wall. The fact that they sprayed it on the beams doesn't change the scientific fact that jet fuel doesn't get hot enough to make steel beams melt or collapse.
mcndahouse 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal and two i am from itailian background. to anwer to what you said about me being a rahimi
domamania 1 year ago
first off i was born here in this country and to be more specific i was born in einstein hospital in bronx ny. and ny is in this country so no i am not an alian. and next what are you going to say that you work for the three stooges too. lmao
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal for your info i do have a girl friend, and yes i do have a hobby and its in local politics. and my claims are based on actuall research not some 911 commission that works for the govt. and yes i do have the evidence but to bad the govt has hid them like they did with vietnam and the kennedy assisination.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal no you making your self look like a fool cause you dont know a god damn thing thats why you cant even answer my fucking questiions. and out side job well muhammad atta was paind by the cia and ias until the day of 911. did you know that? no. so give me a favore know your roll or shut your mouth
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal duurrrrrr i know he is in his fifties, i am his son jackass. and yes i can write. just like you said goBT, LMAO
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal and as far as my question is conceren you cant even answer it cause you dont know the answeres to it. so stop talking the good talk and START walking the walk and answer my 3 questions.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal for your info dumb ass my dad was an enginerr that help build tower 7 adn to tell you from a unbiased point what you said is garbage why cuase it was not 1/3 of the structor that was scoped out it was only 15 feet inwad and the whole building was built to with stacd that cause the build actual structor meaning each steel beam was built to hold 10 times its weight and thats coming from my dad who had been an enginerr since 1981 and help build tower 7.
domamania 1 year ago
@domamania o and burned for 7 hours from what no jet fual entered in it, so your saying that the fire from the paper and carpets burned down the structor. that bullshit because if that was the case then all building should be banned of have paper and deaks and carpets. you and the fuckin media is a joke. get your head out of your ass.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal i did answer your question.. now its time to answer my questions bitch.
domamania 1 year ago
blackjerryboymetal now i want to ask you something smart ass. do you even know what jet fuel is made from?
do you know the the of smoke and the heat of fire that makes the color of smoke?
so answer that smart ass.
domamania 1 year ago
@domamania and one more thing.
what color was the smoke in the first 5 minutes of the incident and what color was it 10 minutes later and why was it?
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal allright jack asss. thyey were 3 buildings and 2 airplanes. and no plane hit tower 7 so nothing could have knocked off the fireproffing from that building and yet it collapsed the same way the twin towers did. and the dutch bank building was damaged real bad and prob;y worse then towers 7 and it still remained.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal debunked by the sam gorup of ppl that lied about iraq and vietnam. nice talkign you you mr gulable.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal no its because of idiots like you who think that the govt never lies to you and and dont do their own researc h intsead of listning to the scripted media and believe everything what they tell you. remember biladen was never charged of the 911 attacks, do your own research and look at the FBI web site.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal like i said i dont want to stoop down to your level any more either do your research and know what your talking about or shut up. end of story
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal yes i know that it does not explode. but all of the elements that are in super thermite were found at the wtc site. and like i said before do your research and then come back to me.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal no what was found in the dust was rust which is one substance that in thermite, 2 magnisium which is also found in thermite and yes like you said pint substance which is in thermite. remember nanno thermite is mixed with paint to paint on the walls and when dried it becamoe highly explosive. do your home work first and get out of the 911 commissions ass then comb back and talk to me.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal actually yes it it. anything that ignites is considerd an explosive. and yes they were fragments or thermite found in the ash of the twin towers.
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal musta been an accident. blackjerry meant to say that for 8 weeks afterward the ground were over 1000 degrees. The workers had to wear new steel toe boots often because they would melt over the shifts. The molten slag is also documented by nasa thermal flyovers, along with unviversal evidence of thermite of such advanced manufacturing only a few laboratories in the US could even be capable of producing it. Like Lawrence Labs...
flamebreakk 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal is it would do your research. and by the way i will not call you dummy cause i will not stoop to your level. have a great day
domamania 1 year ago
@blackjerryboymetal says who the 911 commission. and two i am not a dummy.
domamania 1 year ago
the explosive that was usued to take down the towers was nanno thermite. and beofre anybody commenst againt me research nanno thermits what its made from and what it can do to steel.
domamania 1 year ago
what i really dont understand: why didnt the gov do a proper investigation. find the explosives and use that as reason to search for the "weapons of mass destruction"
hind sight 20/20
the 911 report is really the smoking gun and is what so clearly points a finger. at its authors.
paydayping 1 year ago
"its odd to say the least" hahahaha
buddy, its odd that some dudes would take over jetliners full of fuel and fly them into office towers. This guy is a dope. If you can be as dumb as him and get into MIT then they should have mailed me my pHd a long time ago. And for those who say nothing hot enough? Jet fuel has way way more btu power than gasoline. I would like him to tell me who did it, and with what? when did they find the time to insert all these explosives? was it the janitor? Madoff?
cfqpa 2 years ago
whether jet fuel has more BTUs than gasoline is irrelevant. The point is - does it melt steel? The answer is NO! Your comparison to gasoline just proves you're fucking retarded.
Jamato84 2 years ago
So you think it was the Janitor eh Gibrone? You are a janitor is that what your trying to say?
cfqpa 2 years ago
wot id like to know is if it was osama why did the construction expert osama not target the load bearing lower floors, that would have caused immediate collapse and pulling the towers over into other buildings. if it was osama he would have done his homework on the towers and targeted the lower floors to cause most death
magnusalexa 2 years ago
@mcndahouse.
I agree. Also, WTC 3,4,5 and 6 were pummeled with "mountains of burning debris" and were much more severly damaged than WTC 7. All four of these steel framed structures withstood the impacts and eventually had to be brought down by demolition. These buildings act as the rule rather than the exception.
1JackTorS 2 years ago
Geez..
After 9 years of utter bullshit about 911, I wonder why you lot haven't tried to "prove" the London tube train bombings a government conspiracy too.
Is that just too hard, or too self-evident it was Islamic goat-fuckers that think they'll receive 32 virgins, although not specified human female.
But wait.. Do I hear murmurs from the peanut gallery? Something about Islamic goat-fuckers hired by London's elite for some diversionary tactic..?
Idiots!
MrOllyK 2 years ago
imbrd..
Those vids just make me laugh. Again, all I hear are those same tired words: "footprint", "freefall", "never before seen", "steel framed building" etc..
Still no PROOF!! Show me a rescuer, policeman or firefighter carrying something suspicious. Just saying they did it through misunderstanding of physics in your teeny world isn't proof.
Some of your guys reckon the planes couldn't have made it into the buildings in the first place but you do. Argue that with them!
MrOllyK 2 years ago
its there in the vids i pointed to- u c the debunk alienentity ? yeah theres ur proof
im not sayin that planes didnt hit the buildin however the destruction could not hav been primarily by no planes or jet fuel- as most of the fuel went bye bye right on impact- & the inside fires were not at all that hot
imbrd 2 years ago
imbrd..
That's NOT proof. Most of the fuel splashed forward not back, and you only need to buckle metal to have it collapse under strain, not forgetting thermal expansion buckling the metal besides the impact.
Those vids prove nothing:
watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w
See how the steel was buckling? You can't deny this, EVER!
MrOllyK 2 years ago
all u hav done was combined the bs pancake theory w/ a little bit of fire sagging. Both of these sound totally ludicrous & r debunked by numerous counts- jim hoffman already debunked the pancake
& not to mention the lack of 47 core steel collumns and the lack of any in tact stories disproves any such collapse. Hell the mandarin fire & windsor fire were far greater in magnitude than this measly black smoke small flame fire
even nist had to admit that the fires in wtc1,2 were small&limited
imbrd 2 years ago
imbrd..
Your complaint of my points "sounding" ludicrous points to one thing - your inability to grasp maths and physics with the accuracy and resolve necessary to find fault in your own ludicrous arguments. It doesn't take much time or temp to bend a stressed beam, notably, it doesn't have to melt:
watch?v=CGsOkT__M7Y
In less than 4 mins at 2000F, exposed steel lost strength simply due to jet fuel.
WTC1 can be seen everywhere with a glowing ring of fire on an entire floor. That's hot.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
imbrd..
It's been some 9 years now and all I keep hearing from the troofer camp is conjecture and bad science. rkowens4 has debunked just about every troofer argument with simple science and video. Others have tried to debunk him, but if they had been right, I would have shifted camps if the science made sense, but there's far too little science and just mindnumbing conjecture without evidence.
Prove to me how they demolished WTC1&2, with video and real evidence of CD.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
imbrd..
And make it quick on that evidence, I don't want to have to wait another 9 years. Besides, I have some Global Warming alarmists to destroy.. ;)
MrOllyK 2 years ago
u didnt even bother to watch the vids- so im not gonna bother talk to u. hardly worth the time- so go fuck urself, enjoy getting tortured @ guantomono & die cuz the world just dont need u
ur physics is still quite lacking- Freefall can not occur when there is resistance. Force transfer thru impact can NOT occur if theres no deceleration. Thus there was virtually little to no impact seen in north tower
if u bothered to analyze that vid of north tower ud know
Do u kno of manhattan project?
imbrd 2 years ago
or maybe the gulf of tonkin incident? or how about America's involvement in the war in Indonesia?
These events were all get secret- & highly classified works w/ heavy govt involvement. Look them up & c for urself how "LONG" it took the american public to learn of this stuff. America didnt even know about the nukes bein tested durin the manhattan project
so if u want a discussion, go look these up & com bak tell me wat they r about- else u ought to go kill urself or get tortured @ guantomono
imbrd 2 years ago
imbrd..
Gulf of Tonkin? Manhattan Project? Just because you raise questions on completely unrelated topics doesn't make 911 a conspiracy.
Don't just say "..there are many ways to make explosives fireproof and silenced".
Prove it. Show me the technology. I asked the question, the burden of proof is on you. You effectively silence an explosion you remove its force.
You twoofers have had 9 years and endless conjecture, but all I get is bad science, no proof and side-stepping. Losers!
MrOllyK 2 years ago
imbrd..
I never implied there was absolute freefall - I know that freefall can't occur with resistance.
Force transfer will still occur on a floating tissue and a bowling ball falls into it - what deceleration?
I dare you to show me fire-rated detonators, timers, wiring and explosives.
One side of the twoofer camp cites explosives, the other side imagine thermite. You can't even agree. Others cite holographic planes!! You're all morons.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
The very fact that u can not discern what is factual & still blindly hold to an 'official lie' is the greatest idiocy!
Thermitic evidence was found in the site- & it is evident that explosives were used else its IMPOSSIBLE for a building to com down INSTANTANEOUSLY & CONTINUOUSLY
theres virtually no impact between floors- in fact, if u ever examine any vid of either wtc1,2 or 7. You can easily measure impacts if they occur- they appear as a sudden deceleration NOT a continuous graph
imbrd 2 years ago
so it really dont matter about kinetic energy or whatnot since thats not wats bringing the building down. Its totally misleading to talk about that when in fact theres som other major factor at play- neither gravity nor som weak ass fire. Note: fires r totally random, gradual & assymetric thus theres NO way in which it by itself could effect steel to cause an instantaneous & continuous collapse!
somethin gradual produces gradual partial results.
imbrd 2 years ago
somethin instantaneous produces instantaneous results. But when the instantaneous event is carefully put in a series of instantaneous events, thats when it becomes continuous. And what we saw on 911 was obviously a very continuous & instantaneous devestation- especially on wtc7
hell if u even take a look @ the damage, the wtc1,2 buildings was being totally destroyed 20-30 stories BELOW the 'falling top' AND NO SIGNIFICANT DECELERATION IS NOTED DURING SUCH TIME!
imbrd 2 years ago
also note: Do u think its IMPOSSIBLE to com up w/ half a dozen ways to 'fireproof' explosives? do u even know half the countless factors that go into makin an explosive?
Have u even heard of C4? U can toss it in a fire, put it in a furnace, jump on it, stomp on it, even throw it around or pee on it & it will NOT explode unless a certain electrical charge is passed thru it
this is just 1 tiny example of a 'fire proof' explosive. Your claim is quite funny in & of itself- just cuz ur very narrow
imbrd 2 years ago
mind cant even com up w/ 1 way of fire-proofing explosives nor do u understand a quarter of the countless factors that go into makin explosives- u assume that NO explosives could be used as its impossible in ur little world to fire-proof them
imbrd 2 years ago
Well i'll turn that question totally around:
Water puts out a fire- thus no fires must be able to withstand water. This is how ridiculous ur statement sounds
Note also: C4 is a pretty old & outdated explosive- while still used, there is somethin called science & technology which greatly advanced explosives thus expanding the number of possible "Fire proofed explosives"
imbrd 2 years ago
imbrd..
"Water puts out a fire- thus no fires must be able to withstand water. This is how ridiculous ur statement sounds"
You're just babbling shit now to try spin the argument your way, which can't fight itself out of a wet paper bag..
Still waiting for your proof of fireproof explosives..
MrOllyK 2 years ago
hell when u play w/ energetic materials- u can both increase or decrease a reactions output. This is super advanced stuff- & thermite is a prime example of it. If u enhance the mixture of thermite, u can enhance its energy output greatly makin it almost like an explosive- a highly energetic yet silent explosive
imbrd 2 years ago
imbrd..
So enhance the thermite/explosive. Prove to the world what they did. Tell us 'o great one.. ;)
You can't. You hope to be THE ONE to blow the whole 911 conspiracy wide open, but you don't know enough of anything, which is why you're a troofer. Keep wanking over your troofer dreams pal..
MrOllyK 2 years ago
imbrd..
It's not up to me to come up with ways of fireproofing explosives, which is what I asked you to do seeing as you're the one touting explosives. So where's your proof then?
MrOllyK 2 years ago
fireproofing explosives is not impossible just like coming up w/ a fire which burns thru water(ie Greek Fire). But by assuming that its impossible- u hav already blinded urself to the facts. Hell right off the top of my head- u could obviously FIRE COAT IT- duh! thats an obvious thing that could greatly fireproof an explosive or most materials for that matter
Also u must keep in mind somethin called flash point or the threshold ignition. This is the minimum energy to set the reaction off
imbrd 2 years ago
Different materials & elements hav different thresholds. Thus som materials w/ a higher threshold won't react in a low burning fire simply due to energy difference. Unless u achieve the threshold point, u can NOT achieve the reaction/explosion! can't believe u dont even know this- its basic chem&physics
What does kinetic energy matter in the collapse of the wtc buildings when they are in continuous motion? The ONLY WAY TO TRANSFER KINETIC ENERGY IS THROUGH INSTANTANEOUS DECELERATION
imbrd 2 years ago
if the top had impacted the bottom, we could easily trace this as a deceleration of the graph. However, the graph remained continuous & for wtc7, we c the continuity of freefall acceleration for 2+ seconds
In a continuous graph, the only forces which the fallin object can exert r STATIC &/or GRAVITATIONAL/linear acceleration.. It is linear acceleration which achieves a continuous graph- nothing else. & if gravity is the energy measured of motion, then the rest of the energy of the 'top'
imbrd 2 years ago
is exerted as a static energy on the bottom. Keep in mind this is all a continuous graph- there is NO impact involved. there is NO deceleration involved
Thus it becomes obvious som external force must b applied to the structure to bring it down in such a continuous manner thru its own structure
imbrd 2 years ago
Here i'll use an analogy:
A 300lb boxer throws a punch. Now we can calculate the amount of kinetic energy of that punch all day. BUT, unless that punch actually hits some target & decelerates, where's the impact of the punch? Unless the punch hits an object or there is a change of force, it will NOT impact. So the boxer can punch all day & unless he actually hits the target, measuring the kinetic energy of that punch is absolutely meaningless other than to obfuscate the fact
imbrd 2 years ago
that its one hell of a sucky punch & a total waste of energy since there is no energy transfer other than thru air.
impact is practically synonymous w/ instantaneous deceleration- so unless u c instantaneous decleration, u cant c impact!
And in retort against ur criticism for takin 9 years. I'll say these 3 things:
1) Do u even f'ing know about the Manhattan Project? Or how about the good old Gulf of Tonkin incident? Or how about Americas involvement in the war of indonesia? Or maybe
imbrd 2 years ago