34 story building demolition in China (audio synced)

[abbottone]

I clearly saw 2 planes fly into this...this controlled explosion is fake

[kevin604bc]

There's enough evidence to show thermetic material was used in the wtc. Check out the new video's from ae911truth.

[blueshadow1996]

strange..I typed a response to katy1dog...never got posted..oh well..

[GawdMachine]

And you've STILL neglected to explain what other large steel reinforced concrete structures in history have been completely collapsed by fired.

(Name more buildings that have done the same thing in history or stfu)

Even though as you claim, you "knew" they were going to come down. Based upon WHAT previous precedences?

In short, you are full of it. Not just a little, but completely. Enjoy the sh%t sandwich you've decided to eat. It tastes like fascism, no?

[blueshadow1996]

Why I knew ? Because I am a man who works with steel,whta makes it weak and strong..A Gunsmith who knows why tmepering is needed and how to anneal steel to drill into a receiver.I have in depth knowledge of ballistics and in my younger years was part of a rapid reaction force that responds to terrorist attacks...Actually a man who can back up his mouth and am able to reach people who needed to be reached at that time...In short a terrorists nightmare..

[GawdMachine]

You are (possibly) a man who can't give more examples of other WTC7 type events happening EVER in history.

[blueshadow1996]

I can give you examples..Any building that has ever burnt without being extingushed will collapse..Now can you give me an example of a building that burns for 7 hours and does not collapse?

[GawdMachine]

You still have not given me any specific examples but I am glad to oblige your request with 2 such buildings I know of.

The Mandarin Hotel in Beijing, burned for 6 hours & was so ablaze you could not see the facade of the building.

watch?v=6hSPFL2Zlpg

The Windsor Tower in Madrid Spain burned for 23 hours.

watch?v=9gUzoUYJ2ec

Both of those buildings steel infrastructure were still intact. The Beijing hotel in totality.

Cheers

[blueshadow1996]

You cant see it?..The steel from the building in Spain collapsed ,except for the concrete core,which was not present in the WTC1 and 2 and 7..The Mandarin Hotel was built after 9/11/01 with the collapse in mind so new materials were used.. Not very good examples.Windsor Hotel shows how fire weakens steel to the point that it will collapse..Mandarin was built with better fire proofing materials..

[GawdMachine]

Not quite, you only watched the Madrid video until the top floors collapsed (shame on you for not following through to the end). Only the top 6 floors of the Madrid building collapsed, what was left was - & I quote, "the smoking steel skeleton."

After 23 hours no less.

Now please, name just ONE other steel reinforced concrete structure to completely collapse at free fall speed from limited fires after 7hrs.

If you do not name one & try to change the subject again, I am done with this debate.

[blueshadow1996]

Do you think it would matter? Did you watch and notice that they were fighting the fire and as far as they coulld reach with the fire hoses? The building was being reffited with proper insulation and it had a concrete core which remained standng..The WTC complex had steel columns on the exterior wall with floor trusses with a concrete floor,noting reinforced with concrete...Any building that is not extinguished will collapse.you have not mentioned one.

[GawdMachine]

Just as I thought (you jackass).

Good DAY sir.

[blueshadow1996]

Will you stop crying...you do this all the time you get rebutted...Grouch.

[GawdMachine]

I SAID, good DAY sir!

[blueshadow1996]

Tha Mandarin Hotel was extinguished by the fire fighters.

[paulymac]

someone needs to make a side by side video. Looks exactly the same as the twin towers.

[blueshadow1996]

with a blast that makes noise.

[loccysmif]

blueshadow1996, yeah, it's not like....the WTC towers made noise.

watch?v=3umJCmD7vos

Same tired old debunked debunker nonsense.

[blueshadow1996]

there were no blasts....no torn steel.or controlled demolition..no padding on the exterior wall to keep the debris from flying..

[loccysmif]

Steel was torn all over the place. Padding on the exterior wall? Are you freaking kidding me?

You're babbling. Start making sense please.

[blueshadow1996]

your babbling...there was no shredded steel..Also missing from here are the fires and plane crashes..I would ask that you make sense,but that would be impossible.

[loccysmif]

You would. And I will.

xrl. us/bfaog6

xrl. us/bfaoha

As for the plane crashes, according to NIST, all three skyscraper "collapses" were due to fire, and not damage. For WTC 1 & 2, NIST claims "widely dislodged" fireproofing. This claim is extremely dubious, as it based on one side shot gun tests of fireproofing in a box.

Anyways, it's "you're", not "your", and I have more important things to do then discuss debunkers of your "niveau".

[blueshadow1996]

The big differance is I work with steel and kow why fire weakens steel.

[loccysmif]

blueshadow1996, I work with logic, and I know how fire weakens logic.

[blueshadow1996]

..Think about the term Thermodynamics..heat and motion..now think about systems.what happens when fire is applied to steel ? Thermoexpansion occurs add gravity and a collapse is imminent.

[GawdMachine]

Yeah, sure. WTC7 which was over-engineered 7x beyond building codes, over a football field away from the Twin Towers & was NOT hit by a plane & came down, straight into it's footprint in less than 7 seconds from small fires.

You say WTC 1 & 2 "collapsed." Well, how did the debris (steel beams weighing tons) from 1 & 2 fly 150 yards to even strike WTC7? Do we have sideways gravity now?

Please show me ONE other example in history of the same thing occurring.

Just O N E !

But you cannot.

[blueshadow1996]

overed engineered?..There were fires that raged out of control on 10 floors,because there was no water pressure,because of a broken water main.The fire proofing was rated for 2 hours but it burnt for 7,all of the other buildings surrounding the the complex were damaged ,because the towers were quite tall..and since it was not a controlled demo the North towere tilted sideways.,as for the coulumns they broke at their weakest link where they were bolted on..Kinetic energy sent it flying,,

[GawdMachine]

Kinetic energy from? & Site your sources for 2 hrs fireproofing.

Can't name another building eh'? Didn't think you could.

& you won't.

As for the construction, perhaps you should read the article from the NY Times.

tinyurl . com / llyveb

And to collapse like it did, all 47 structural support columns would have to have failed at the exact same time to allow for the free fall, which NIST admits happened.

47 columns at once, from fires on 10 floors?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[blueshadow1996]

..You didnt read??? i was the one who warned them the towers were going to collapse and why..NIST was just verifying what I akreayd knew,they contacted me about 4 years ago where I told them why I tought it would fall..As for sleep..I only stopped having night terrors 3 years ago.. As for the fireproofing it is only rated for 2 hours..

[GawdMachine]

Again, site your sources.

AGAIN, Name me just ONE other instance of another WTC7 type event (large steel reinforced concrete structure completely collapsing at free fall speed) happening.

J U S T O N E !

Or quit wasting our time.

[blueshadow1996]

Wasting your time???.I am commenting...

[GawdMachine]

Once again,.. Name ONE other instance of another WTC7 type event (large steel reinforced concrete structure completely collapsing at free fall speed) happening.

J U S T O N E !

Otherwise your argument hold no weight.

Cheers!

[GawdMachine]

What's the matter blue? Can't name another steel reinforced concrete building completely collapsed by small fires like WTC7?

After all, THEY consulted YOU because you "knew" they were going to collapse, so you MUST have had many previous experiences with such a thing.

"Consulted?!?" BAH! Who is this? Jerome Hauer? HE is on the list of suspects.

Name me just one damned building, JUST ONE! If you were so sure they would collapse, you surely must know of @ LEAST 10 others.

[GawdMachine]

Oh & please show me when & where these fires in WTC 7 were "raging." WTC 7 had 'small' isolated fires.

A "raging" fire would be like the Mandarin Oriental Hotel where you can't even see the structure past the fire.

watch?v=mzXX_UgDhgo

watch?v=-dVh9KR7R1U

watch?v=m78ispE1xao

& the Mandarin Oriental hotel was STILL STANDING!

I guess Allah must have helped them 19 evildoers, because so much in the "official conspiracy theory" you are parroting doesn't fit common sense or logic.

[GawdMachine]

Office fires do not burn at the temperature of a steel foundry.

Neither does jet fuel (which was burnt off in the initial impact).

& we are to believe the buildings collapsed at free fall speed 'through' the path of most resistance because of fire?

Think about common sense.

[blueshadow1996]

The term path of least and most resistance is a term used in physics,but it refers to the flow of electrons.That is why resistors and caps are use.

Once the fires weakend the steel the colllapse began and each floor that was designed to  hold the weight of the floor on top was impacted like a shotgun slug,blowing out the floor underneath,but each time it increased and the residual energy did the damage..

[katey1dog]

The path of least resistance describes the physical or metaphorical pathway that provides the least resistance to forward motion by a given object or entity, among a set of alternative paths. The concept is often used to describe why an object or entity takes a given path.

[blueshadow1996]

Definately its not a metaphoric pathway.The term can apply to some people taking the easy path..It has nothing to do with this collapse as you could see the kinetic energy smashing out each floor..The Mass always increased as it snapped each floor truss..

[katey1dog]

The Mass always increased as it snapped each floor truss..

Mass does not increase during a collapse.

Now, the aircraft (a 767) entering the building itself increased the existing mass of the it by around 412,000 pounds (the MTOW). With that said, 3/4 of that was jet fuel, which burned immediately creating a massive office fire. The plane itself minus fuel is 190,000 pounds. WIKI.

It must also be understood that the buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a 707.

[blueshadow1996]

Each time a floor truss snapped,the mass did increase exerting more pressure on the next truss.blueshadow1996 It was not designed to withstand the flames caused by a 767 full of fuel which knocked off the fireproofing..The atomic structure of steel was rearranged where the carbon could not do its job and deformation was reached causing it to break..

[katey1dog]

Mass does not increase when one floor comes into contact with another floor. Mass remains constant.

It was not designed to withstand the flames caused by a 767 full of fuel

The dimensions of the 707 and the 767 are really not that different. 333,600 lb MTOW of the 707-320B.

Jet fuel ignites at 410*F. Hardened steel, the type found on ALL American high rise buildings, smelts at 2,500*F. Not nearly enough heat to weaken several hundred tons of steel structure.

[katey1dog]

Since the mass of the structure remains constant, gravity becomes the only measurable force seen as the Towers fell. Gravity does not have mass.

The gravitron, that is the conductive particle of gravity, has no mass. (Yahoo answers.)

Mass remains constant. When the aircraft entered both buildings, it dramatically increased mass. However, the fire burned everything in its path; the plane, people, carpet, cabinets, paper, computers, printers, etc.

Fire does not destroy matter.

[katey1dog]

Fire renders matter to gas. That gas, as smoke, was mass escaping into the atmosphere. That mass being tons upon tons of burned material exiting the building dramatically reducing its mass.

Decrease the mass of the building and of course it weighs less. Especially in the affected areas.

The fires, were also being starved when there was no more fuel to burn. Which was seen also in the form of black smoke. As the fires died, the steel would eventually harden.

[blueshadow1996]

The weight of the building was still there,but the heat weakend the steel through thermo expansion..It could not support the weight and it snapped at the welds..The fires were still there and you could see the flame as the towers collapsed and it never really cooled.but if it did ,the steel would have been annealed and would require tempering to restore its strength...WTC7 burnt for 7 hrs its fire proofing was rated for 2 ,so it was goint to fall since it could not be put down.

[katey1dog]

The weight of the building was still there.

Yes, it remains constant, thank you.

but the heat weakend the steel through thermo expansion.

Heat snapped at trusses and welds made of hardened steel designed to withstand high temperatures and the collision of an airliner.

The fires were still there and you could see the flame as the towers collapsed and it never really cooled

It began to cool once the fires died down. That is what happens in a fire. Fire moves where there is fuel.

[GawdMachine]

There was water being sprayed on the debris for 3 months after the attack because the heat under the rubble was too much for rescue workers. The sustained temperatures are from what exactly?

Are we to believe that office furniture & long spent jet fuel (mostly burned upon the initial explosions) were responsible for this?

Quite a stretch of the imagination katey.

[blueshadow1996]

So if you knew all of this why did you not speak up on that day,or were you only 10 years old?

[blueshadow1996]

Each floor that snapped increased the pressure as the momentum increased..To anneal a piece of steel ,is a process that needs to take place,which is heating till redhot and slowly cooling off the steel..This makes it softer for engraving or drilling for working the steel..Tempering requires heating and then cooling rapidlly..Any gunsmith,blacksmith,welder or armourer can confirm this..What happened on that day was a terrorist plot that never achieved its objective.

[katey1dog]

Each floor that snapped increased the pressure as the momentum increased.

Well, that would almost explain freefall, thank you.

You have also not mentioned how jet fuel heated the core to the point of structural failure. Fire does not generate it's own heat. To increase a fires temperature, to that of a blast furnace, oxygen is used.

As stated earlier, jet fuel ignited quickly and was spent quickly. Though it did start a massive office fire, it did not reach that temperature.

[katey1dog]

That totally destroys Newton's Third Law which states basically states, "To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."

Resistance to the collapsing floors would have occured drastically reducing speed. That was not seen that day. In fact, it has been recorded that the buildings accelerated before touchdown.

All of that was filmed by dozens of cameras and seen on millions of televisions.

[HansVerbeek]

Another Silverstein building ??

[katey1dog]

An explosive/imlosive structual collapse of a steel and concrete high-rise building.

Not unlike what was seen on September 11, 2001.

[katey1dog]

*explosive/IMPLOSIVE

[StevenM818]

Wow top-down demolition, just like the Twin Towers.

[AiresQX4]

Look familiar debunkers?