Two questions, one, how do you plant explosives in a building with 50,000 employees and round the clock security?
Answer you can't.
Question two, how do you explain the squibs?
Well, what happens when you compress a balloon, it pops. What happens when you compress a hundred thousand cubic feet of air in seconds. The windows pop.
I have just about debunked everything The Truthers said except for the squibs and how the lobby was blown out and No I do Not believe jet fuel kerosene ran down the elevators and blew out the lobby.
Also, I think it's pathetic if your attempt to debunk this is merely, "why hasn't this been published in any scientific journal yet?" What's the matter? Can't think of any refutations yourself that you have to have others tell you what to believe?
There's this wonderful invention called "mute." The point I was making in the video is that NIST made no attempt to explain the squibs from Building 7, suggesting that they couldn't explain them. They gave a pathetic explanation for the squibs from the Towers, and nothing for WTC7. And how was that "merely" how I attempted to debunk it? Did the eight other minutes worth of points I brought up have no merit?
@diequas Propably because people who who wrote about it would be sacked regardless if it is true or not. This topic is a hot potato - touch it and the media will destroy you.
I like how these truther videos make all these scientific sounding claims with zero support and truthers just dutifully parrot these claims without bothering to do an ounce of independent verification. Yet mysteriously (sarcasm) they can't get their theories and explanations published in any real scientific journal anywhere in the world. I wonder why. And great rebuttal of the "according" explanation. Showing Osama Bin Laden with an according sure proves it wrong.
@Berkeley626 You wonder why people have trouble getting stuff published in journals and main stream media..? Controversial ideas often have a hard time being distributed in the press and by agencies which are depending on them being wrong - and not supported. No more complicated than that. The heliocentric ideas weren't greeted by those in power at that time (those were heavily ridiculed - AND banned), but today it's common sense. That's how it might work.
@Berkeley626 And...it seems like you may publish things that are completely ludicrous as long as your ideas support the official story in the sense that controlled demolition was NOT the case. Today Homeland Security (!) published this amazing story:
@Berkeley626 Stationary squib..? If you look carefully enough you will see that, yes, there is a defined dark-grey "cloud" appearing AT the window, but also a more subtle jet visibly shooting out far away from the wall.
So these are CD explosions going off only AFTER the collapses have already begun, making them the first causes in the history of the universe that happened AFTER their effects. And they are the quietest squibs in CD history as well. And has anyone heard of elevator shafts? Where's the air being compressed there going to be released? At the point of least resistance, which may be at the collapse wave or may be much lower.
@ketogenesis Right. The most distant squibs (south side of the South Tower) are more like 30 floors below the level of demolition than 10-20, which makes the pile driver theory completely implausible. Also this allgeged compressed air alone would have slowed down the fall considerably more than what was the case, and what is pulverizing (pulverized!) the concrete in mid air? No pile driver at least since there were no stacked floors left at the bottom of the ruins.
@Funkadelic2 What?! The compressed air would have slowed down the collapse more? Says who? Where's your math? Why would it slow anything down if it's being ejected out the sides of the building? I'm sick of truther amateurs talking out of their asses and making up unsupported scientific claims as they go along. And again, where do you think the compressed air in elevator shafts would go? It would be released at the point of least resistance, be that at the collapse wave or 20 floors lower.
@Berkeley626 ----> walls, and staircases, blowing out windows there at 100 mph. I've seen no more scientifically credible theories to support the idea of compressed air than what I've seen ones supporting the controlled demolition hypothesis. These jets can be seen shooting out right at (actually even before) onset of collapse, so it is very hard to imagine those ejections being compressed air.
What do you suggest constituted that "lid" that would supposedly have acted as a piston, forcing the air out windows 30-40 flrs down...? Pulverized (or at least crushed) floor slabs? I suggest most of that air would have found it's way out upwards rather than travelling through tens of stories of intact floor systems ---->
@Funkadelic2 What?! The compressed air would have slowed down the collapse more? Says who? Where's your math? Why would it slow anything down if it's being ejected out the sides of the building? I'm sick of truther amateurs talking out of their asses and making up unsupported scientific claims as they go along. And again, where do you think the compressed air in elevator shafts would go? It would be released at the point of least resistance, be that at the collapse wave or 20 floors lower.
@ketogenesis Moreover, if you look real carefully at the squibs that can be seen in the billowing dust clouds, you will notice that some of those are shooting out at a very high velocity (at speeds higher than the actual speed of the collapse itself).
I never said you said it was random. Its a fact that the "squibs" at the WTC's were random. CDs are not random. Explain. Also the fact that it sounds NOTHING like any CD that exists on youtube....and there are a ton on youtube.
debunking911(dot)com / overp(dot) htm This is a read on why the "squibs" were not explosions with witness testimony to help you understand the air pressure during collapse issue. Fireman who were on lower floors were picked up and thrown off their feet from the air pressure coming down the stairwells.
" Fireman who were on lower floors were picked up and thrown off their feet from the air pressure coming down the stairwells." Highly misleading. Explosives can also displace air very forcibly.
@citizenfor911truth1 "What I remember the most was the wind. It created almost like a hurricane-type force and actually pushed one of the firemen right by me." Hurricane type wind is not indicative of a quick and sudden explosion. It is much more indicative of a force that has a much longer measurement of time that a quick explosion would not produce.
@psynema The air will find the path of least resistance. If it happens to be 40 floors lower than thats where it is going. With the amount of air pressure being generated from the acre worth of air space on each floor, smashing on top of each other, it has to give out somewhere. The fact that some are 40 floors lower and then 20 floors lower and then back to 30 floors lower and then right below is a clear indication that it was not a controlled demolition. Why use that pattern for CD?
You seem to be missing the point. The isolated ejections appearing 40 stories below the demolition wave were most likely mistimed explosives set off to early. Also, although the Towers did contain a large amount of air, the Towers themselves were not air tight. And the idea of the floors compressing the air requires that the floors stay relatively intact. If they don't, the air pressure would be released upward. The floors were pulverized during the collapse.
@citizenfor911truth1 "most likely mistimed explosions"-ROFL. Yeah...thats the most likely explanation. The floors were not completely pulverized during the collapse and there are several pictures/videos explaining how the floors were smashed together. Say 10 floors smashed into a block 10ft tall. The idea that the air pressure would be pushed past the thick debris is ridiculous. The floors compacted together along with the thick debris was far too much for air to move around or though.
I've seen the photographs you're talking about. The chunks of concrete were clearly not an acre in size. They looked to be less than a 5th of acre. The floors were clearly being pulverized during the collapse, meaning there was nothing to compress the air. Also, even if the floors were producing the isolated ejections, then what was producing the ejections at the collapse front? Whatever was compressing the air couldn't have been compressing two locations at once.
@citizenfor911truth1 Ahhh yes....floors being pulverized.....all of those pulverized floors and all of that paper flying in air survives. Concrete=pulverized.....Paper= A-OK.....must have been some prototype "diamond paper".
You do know that much of the paper outside of the Towers was blown out of the buildings before they collapsed, right? The paper was blown out of the buildings when the planes impacted them.
@psynema You are clearly not getting it. There is no organization or pattern to the "squibs". They are completely random. Controlled demolitions are not completely random, as you have stated.
@MrBoredatwork You are clearly misconstruing my point in order to stall the argument. I never said random and I'm done with trolls. Just watch a CD video - CENTRAL COLUMN, then EXTERNAL columns. IE - LIKE THEY point out 34 seconds in.
Oh hi again, care to explain why the "explosions" are only seen after the building starts to fall and not before? Why blow up a building that is already falling? Heres a project for you. Find a single squib before either building falls. Find any explosions before it fell also. Every demolition of office/residential structures has explosions before it falls. There were none for WTC1/2/7. Good luck. I dont expect you to come back with any evidence but I shall wait.
Allow me to explain: The key objective in the demolitions of the Towers would have been to get the upper sections to start moving before the actual explosives were set off. Explosives couldn't be used to initiate the collapse, because that would have made it obvious it was a demolition. The explosives would have been set off after the tops started to move. Thermate was most likely used to accomplish this.
@citizenfor911truth1 AHHHHH THERMITE! Now we are getting to the meat and potatoes. Thermite is not an explosive. It doesn't explode. There are videos on youtube showing thermite reacting. How does that fit into you "people heard explosions theory"? Would you like to pursue thermite which doesnt make loud bangs or stick with the explosives theory? You cant have it both ways.
Thermite can be formulated as an explosive, but it doesn't explode as loud as a conventional explosive. But it's also possible that more than thermite was used.
@citizenfor911truth1So much speculation with so little supporting evidence. Why use 2 different things when only 1 should so it? Does a device exist that could cut an entire steel beam that is as thick as one in the WTC? What about this thermite you speak of? What about the possibility that the materials that were found in the dust samples were EXPECTED to be in there and should have been there due to multiple reasons. 9/11 myths dot com has a list with sources of where those chemicals came from
"Does a device exist that could cut an entire steel beam that is as thick as one in the WTC?" Actually, thermite NOT formulated as an explosive can cut through steel beams: watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
As an explosive, it could obviously do quite a bit more.
" What about the possibility that the materials that were found in the dust samples were EXPECTED to be in there and should have been there due to multiple reasons." I have already addressed this issue: watch?v=hcFOd16IHdE
As for your "project," here's two squibs that appear before the collapse: watch?v=Ne1FJBVkh4s
watch?v=oTuvo4b4E9Y
Here's explosions occuring before WTC7 collapsed: watch?v=ERhoNYj9_fg
Sorry I didn't live up to your expectations, but I do provide evidence when people ask me. Also, I notice that you didn't point out a single thing wrong in my video, where I show exactly why these ejections could not be caused by air pressure.
@citizenfor911truth1 Ohh..and the "squib" issue. The ejections tend to start slow and speed up throughout the collapse. Squibs work in the opposite direction. The most forceful point of the squib is at the initial blast and they slow down as time goes on. This was not observed in the ejections of the towers. The squibs only gained speed the entire time as the air pressure increased from above. Your failures of understanding explosives and their characteristics is shining through.
"The most forceful point of the squib is at the initial blast and they slow down as time goes on." This is not strictly true. Squibs can have varying rates of speeds depending on how the gas is ejected from the explosive: watch?v=xan1fW6sda0
But regardless, physicist David Chandler has shown that several of the ejections do explode in that manner, starting out strong and then losing speed: watch?v=N_UeLXfI37s
David Chandler has also shown that several of the ejections came from the steel corner columns, meaning they were not compressed out of windows: watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg
Also, Dr. Crockett Grabbe has shown that the horizontal ejection rate of the squibs is disproportional to the vertical collapse rate: watch?v=fGTUl0Ev-zU
OK - who placed the hundreds (thousands maybe) of 'squibs' and when. Thats a lot of drilling, needs a big crew of people, lots of disturbance to the occupiers, lots of machinery and equipment and most importantly - lots of potential whistle blowers. How many people have we had coming forward claiming to be on that demo job? Sorry it doesn't hang together as a theory. CD theory is built on a faulty first premise i.e. that it would even be possible to achieve covertly. It can;t pass go I'm afraid.
The "who" "why" and "when" will be figured out when there's a new investigation. The science ultimately decides if the buildings were blown up. And the science clearly points that way.
@citizenfor911truth1 Science? Part of the CDT hypothesis has got to include how it was done and not just a few 'scientific'sounding bits about nanothermite and some physics. Explaining the 'how' is still part of the experiment as scientific experiments need to be replicable. But you knew that didn't you.
Sorry it doesn't work that way round, you go from the simple to the complex not the other way round.
You don't seem to understand how a real criminal investigation works. First, you have to determine what happened, then who did it and how. You can't do it the other way around. You have to determine that a crime actually took place before looking into who did it.
@citizenfor911truth1 oh it's criminal investigations now. I thought it was science? Thanks but I am out of here. Good luck proving 9/11 was an inside job.
the 'squibs' are caused by pancaking and your xplanations are ridiculous and contain a mass of assumptions. If they were demolitoin squibs they would not be needed once the building was collapsing. The charges in a controlled demoliton are detonated to cause the collpase so why would they be needed after it. It would be nice to live in such an interesting world but I am afraid there is only evidence of one conspiracy - the one by the terrorists.
makes you SICK!!! American goverment set up! Just for money....children lost there familys cause of this SICK setup! also look for videos were an american buissness plane was flying above!!! SETUP!!!
Those little puffs are nothing more than the air being pushed down the building because the building is collapsing as seen in the , if it was a detonation, it would have shown BEFORE the building collapsed, you see the tower collapsing, only 2 stories can push allot of air down, i live in a large flat and if somebody on the top floor closes a door i can feel the air pushing when i am downstairs..
Well, I don't know what kind of flat you live in, but this video shows a scientist explaining why the puffs are NOT from air pressure. watch?v=fGTUl0Ev-zU
Nothing more than air? 20 floors down?... Why multiple floors at the same time? You know nothing about controlled demo. Pulverized material is not "puffs of air"... Anybody in doubt of the truth can watch Blueprint for 9/11 from the intellectual group Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. You can actually see the explosions.
It's a controlled demolition, the truth is blatantly obvious when you look at the facts, from both sides, with a cool head and an objective, analytical mind.
I highly recommend: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Filled with smoke? I thought you said it was air in your video. The ejections coming from the building are not smoke. It's pulverized concrete and gypsum. But what is pulverizing it 20 to 40 stories below the demolition wave?
You repeated the same arguments that debunkers have continuosly used. I have shown these allegations to be false using scientific evidence. Again, what have you presented that refutes the evidence I have provided?
in the tower what you saw was smoke and dust being forced out the vents that were connected to the bathrooms, in buildings the bathrooms have vents for the plumbing and fans, in buildings as short as 3 stories those vents go out the sides of the building. for people that are so sure it was an inside job you are not so sure of where all your evidence is, why is that? you will never prove an inside job, but keep trying i'm having fun taunting you dummies....................tee hee hee.............
I have been thinking about the squibs a lot lately and the ones that are 10 - 40 stories below the destruction wave simply cannot be explained by a gravity driven collapse.
I have no idea who actually planted the explosives. But it is a proven fact that explosives were found. Go to journalof911studies(dot)com and read the Active thermitic material paper.
What kind of explosives, exactly? If you could find a chunk of C4, i would say you're onto something. But a lot of chemicals can be used in explosives. For instance, the OKC bombing was largely done with fertilizer.
The myth that there were explosions came from a firefighter who was under stress.
Memory is an interpretation of what happened, not a recording.
No, the kind of explosives that were found were extremly high tech explosives known as nanothermite. It is very powerful but it doesn't make as loud of an explosion as C4 or other explosives. That ofcourse would be the perfect thing to use if you wanted to demolish a building and blame it on fire. Again, this is all in the paper I mentioned above.
First of all, they found multiple chips of nanothemite in four samples of dust that came from four seperate and very distanced locations. Isn't it likely that all the WTC dust had these chips in them?Second, regular thermite is rust and aluminum, but nanothermite is high tech and highly weaponized. There are only a handful of scientists that have developed it.Third, it does make sense to crash planes into the buildings as an excuse for their collapse if you wanted to blame it on damage and fire.
You should produce the police reports from 9/10 showing people planting tons of this neothermite necessary to bring down America's two largest buildings. None exist. Cutting thru walls would draw attention in a busy office building.
I have not yet seen a video showing the towers were collapsing from the middle or from the lower floors--the towers collapsed from the impact zone, then pancaked downward. This contradicts the "squibs"--they went off but they didn't damage the building, did they?
and what were the bomb sniffing dogs doing at the world trade center for 2 weeks as ordered by Marvin Bush (like loose change claims) they also claim Marvin Bush was in on the attacks, so why would he send bomb sniffing dogs to the place where he sent people to plant bombs? i just don't get retarded logic, the truthers have nothing and are grasping at straws. explain that or admit defeat.
For fuck sake, 2009 and you make a video about squibs? -_-
Yawn.. the videos you use as comparisons don't resemble WTC collapse at all. If it weren't for you over dubbing the demolitions with music, you'd also HEAR the VERY LOUD sounds of detonations well above the sound of the building collapse. You don't hear anything like that with the WTC collapse.
The collapse is also top-down at the point where the structure was weakened. The "squibs" occur AFTER the start of the collapse and not before.
Two questions, one, how do you plant explosives in a building with 50,000 employees and round the clock security?
Answer you can't.
Question two, how do you explain the squibs?
Well, what happens when you compress a balloon, it pops. What happens when you compress a hundred thousand cubic feet of air in seconds. The windows pop.
rrtodd95 1 week ago
I have just about debunked everything The Truthers said except for the squibs and how the lobby was blown out and No I do Not believe jet fuel kerosene ran down the elevators and blew out the lobby.
ortafunk 1 month ago
song blows
profitoverpeople 2 months ago
the name of the song is Gucci Mane Trap House...not J stew...lol
KingDavid478 4 months ago
interesting vid but the music makes it hard to concentrate....
dazz1ful 4 months ago
Please use a less annoying music for this.
Also, I think it's pathetic if your attempt to debunk this is merely, "why hasn't this been published in any scientific journal yet?" What's the matter? Can't think of any refutations yourself that you have to have others tell you what to believe?
diequas 4 months ago
@diequas
There's this wonderful invention called "mute." The point I was making in the video is that NIST made no attempt to explain the squibs from Building 7, suggesting that they couldn't explain them. They gave a pathetic explanation for the squibs from the Towers, and nothing for WTC7. And how was that "merely" how I attempted to debunk it? Did the eight other minutes worth of points I brought up have no merit?
citizenfor911truth1 4 months ago
@citizenfor911truth1
I thought it was obvious. First paragraph is directed at video, but second paragraph is for those who attempts to debunk this video the lazy way.
diequas 4 months ago
@diequas
Oh sorry. I get so many trolls on my videos I sometimes can't tell whose a supporter and whose a hater. Sorry about that.
citizenfor911truth1 4 months ago
@diequas Please be less annoying.
AINT2COMMON 3 weeks ago
@diequas Propably because people who who wrote about it would be sacked regardless if it is true or not. This topic is a hot potato - touch it and the media will destroy you.
jazordon 3 weeks ago
I like how these truther videos make all these scientific sounding claims with zero support and truthers just dutifully parrot these claims without bothering to do an ounce of independent verification. Yet mysteriously (sarcasm) they can't get their theories and explanations published in any real scientific journal anywhere in the world. I wonder why. And great rebuttal of the "according" explanation. Showing Osama Bin Laden with an according sure proves it wrong.
Berkeley626 5 months ago
@Berkeley626 You wonder why people have trouble getting stuff published in journals and main stream media..? Controversial ideas often have a hard time being distributed in the press and by agencies which are depending on them being wrong - and not supported. No more complicated than that. The heliocentric ideas weren't greeted by those in power at that time (those were heavily ridiculed - AND banned), but today it's common sense. That's how it might work.
Funkadelic2 5 months ago
@Berkeley626 And...it seems like you may publish things that are completely ludicrous as long as your ideas support the official story in the sense that controlled demolition was NOT the case. Today Homeland Security (!) published this amazing story:
homelandsecuritynewswire . com/why-twin-towers-collapsed-new-theory
(full story: sintef.no/home/Press-Room/Research-News/New-theory-explains-collapse-of-Twin-Towers/)
I've yet to hear from ONE single person buying this. At all.
Funkadelic2 5 months ago
Look at what they cite as a "squib" at the 56 second mark. That supposed explosion is stationary. Since when are explosions stationary?
Berkeley626 5 months ago
@Berkeley626 Stationary squib..? If you look carefully enough you will see that, yes, there is a defined dark-grey "cloud" appearing AT the window, but also a more subtle jet visibly shooting out far away from the wall.
Funkadelic2 5 months ago
So these are CD explosions going off only AFTER the collapses have already begun, making them the first causes in the history of the universe that happened AFTER their effects. And they are the quietest squibs in CD history as well. And has anyone heard of elevator shafts? Where's the air being compressed there going to be released? At the point of least resistance, which may be at the collapse wave or may be much lower.
Berkeley626 5 months ago
Man, people are so clueless, those buildings are not normal collapse.
Normal collapse dont fall faster than law of gravity lmfao.
The floors literally EXPLODED, hence the mushroom of debris.
echizenn808 5 months ago
May all the evil mfer's involved in this horrific mass murder rot in hell!
Geostrategic1 6 months ago
This music makes me feel like I should be "up in da club, yo."
TwitterBug26 9 months ago
lmao why the fuck is there a trap instrumental on this video
ldobbie 10 months ago
at about 0:43 seconds in, the whole "pancake" theory goes right out the window when you see squibs about 100 feet below the collapse-line.
ketogenesis 11 months ago
@ketogenesis Right. The most distant squibs (south side of the South Tower) are more like 30 floors below the level of demolition than 10-20, which makes the pile driver theory completely implausible. Also this allgeged compressed air alone would have slowed down the fall considerably more than what was the case, and what is pulverizing (pulverized!) the concrete in mid air? No pile driver at least since there were no stacked floors left at the bottom of the ruins.
Funkadelic2 10 months ago
@Funkadelic2 What?! The compressed air would have slowed down the collapse more? Says who? Where's your math? Why would it slow anything down if it's being ejected out the sides of the building? I'm sick of truther amateurs talking out of their asses and making up unsupported scientific claims as they go along. And again, where do you think the compressed air in elevator shafts would go? It would be released at the point of least resistance, be that at the collapse wave or 20 floors lower.
Berkeley626 5 months ago
@Berkeley626 ----> walls, and staircases, blowing out windows there at 100 mph. I've seen no more scientifically credible theories to support the idea of compressed air than what I've seen ones supporting the controlled demolition hypothesis. These jets can be seen shooting out right at (actually even before) onset of collapse, so it is very hard to imagine those ejections being compressed air.
Funkadelic2 5 months ago
Comment removed
Funkadelic2 5 months ago
What do you suggest constituted that "lid" that would supposedly have acted as a piston, forcing the air out windows 30-40 flrs down...? Pulverized (or at least crushed) floor slabs? I suggest most of that air would have found it's way out upwards rather than travelling through tens of stories of intact floor systems ---->
Funkadelic2 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Funkadelic2 What?! The compressed air would have slowed down the collapse more? Says who? Where's your math? Why would it slow anything down if it's being ejected out the sides of the building? I'm sick of truther amateurs talking out of their asses and making up unsupported scientific claims as they go along. And again, where do you think the compressed air in elevator shafts would go? It would be released at the point of least resistance, be that at the collapse wave or 20 floors lower.
Berkeley626 5 months ago
@ketogenesis Moreover, if you look real carefully at the squibs that can be seen in the billowing dust clouds, you will notice that some of those are shooting out at a very high velocity (at speeds higher than the actual speed of the collapse itself).
Funkadelic2 10 months ago
They don't look like squibs at all. Not in any way. Very different shape.
IwanttoliveinParis 11 months ago
I never said you said it was random. Its a fact that the "squibs" at the WTC's were random. CDs are not random. Explain. Also the fact that it sounds NOTHING like any CD that exists on youtube....and there are a ton on youtube.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
I explain the "sounds" of explosions issue in this video: watch?v=EseUt2LUan4 minute 11:00
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
debunking911(dot)com / overp(dot) htm This is a read on why the "squibs" were not explosions with witness testimony to help you understand the air pressure during collapse issue. Fireman who were on lower floors were picked up and thrown off their feet from the air pressure coming down the stairwells.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
" Fireman who were on lower floors were picked up and thrown off their feet from the air pressure coming down the stairwells." Highly misleading. Explosives can also displace air very forcibly.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 "What I remember the most was the wind. It created almost like a hurricane-type force and actually pushed one of the firemen right by me." Hurricane type wind is not indicative of a quick and sudden explosion. It is much more indicative of a force that has a much longer measurement of time that a quick explosion would not produce.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork Which doesn't explain why the air would be 40 floors below the collapse
psynema 1 year ago
@psynema It was he weakest point of exit for the trapped air. Done.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork that makes do damn sense - so 40 floors below impact would be weaker?
psynema 1 year ago
@psynema The air will find the path of least resistance. If it happens to be 40 floors lower than thats where it is going. With the amount of air pressure being generated from the acre worth of air space on each floor, smashing on top of each other, it has to give out somewhere. The fact that some are 40 floors lower and then 20 floors lower and then back to 30 floors lower and then right below is a clear indication that it was not a controlled demolition. Why use that pattern for CD?
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
You seem to be missing the point. The isolated ejections appearing 40 stories below the demolition wave were most likely mistimed explosives set off to early. Also, although the Towers did contain a large amount of air, the Towers themselves were not air tight. And the idea of the floors compressing the air requires that the floors stay relatively intact. If they don't, the air pressure would be released upward. The floors were pulverized during the collapse.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 "most likely mistimed explosions"-ROFL. Yeah...thats the most likely explanation. The floors were not completely pulverized during the collapse and there are several pictures/videos explaining how the floors were smashed together. Say 10 floors smashed into a block 10ft tall. The idea that the air pressure would be pushed past the thick debris is ridiculous. The floors compacted together along with the thick debris was far too much for air to move around or though.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
I've seen the photographs you're talking about. The chunks of concrete were clearly not an acre in size. They looked to be less than a 5th of acre. The floors were clearly being pulverized during the collapse, meaning there was nothing to compress the air. Also, even if the floors were producing the isolated ejections, then what was producing the ejections at the collapse front? Whatever was compressing the air couldn't have been compressing two locations at once.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 Ahhh yes....floors being pulverized.....all of those pulverized floors and all of that paper flying in air survives. Concrete=pulverized.....Paper= A-OK.....must have been some prototype "diamond paper".
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
You do know that much of the paper outside of the Towers was blown out of the buildings before they collapsed, right? The paper was blown out of the buildings when the planes impacted them.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork GOING THROUGH 40 fucking floors is NOT LEAST RESISTANCE. What are you smoking.
Controlled Demolition blows out the CENTRAL COLUMN first, top down or bottom up, THEN THEY BLOW OTHER COLUMNS, SO THAT'S WHY.
psynema 1 year ago
@psynema You are clearly not getting it. There is no organization or pattern to the "squibs". They are completely random. Controlled demolitions are not completely random, as you have stated.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork You are clearly misconstruing my point in order to stall the argument. I never said random and I'm done with trolls. Just watch a CD video - CENTRAL COLUMN, then EXTERNAL columns. IE - LIKE THEY point out 34 seconds in.
psynema 1 year ago
Oh hi again, care to explain why the "explosions" are only seen after the building starts to fall and not before? Why blow up a building that is already falling? Heres a project for you. Find a single squib before either building falls. Find any explosions before it fell also. Every demolition of office/residential structures has explosions before it falls. There were none for WTC1/2/7. Good luck. I dont expect you to come back with any evidence but I shall wait.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
Allow me to explain: The key objective in the demolitions of the Towers would have been to get the upper sections to start moving before the actual explosives were set off. Explosives couldn't be used to initiate the collapse, because that would have made it obvious it was a demolition. The explosives would have been set off after the tops started to move. Thermate was most likely used to accomplish this.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 AHHHHH THERMITE! Now we are getting to the meat and potatoes. Thermite is not an explosive. It doesn't explode. There are videos on youtube showing thermite reacting. How does that fit into you "people heard explosions theory"? Would you like to pursue thermite which doesnt make loud bangs or stick with the explosives theory? You cant have it both ways.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
Thermite can be formulated as an explosive, but it doesn't explode as loud as a conventional explosive. But it's also possible that more than thermite was used.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1So much speculation with so little supporting evidence. Why use 2 different things when only 1 should so it? Does a device exist that could cut an entire steel beam that is as thick as one in the WTC? What about this thermite you speak of? What about the possibility that the materials that were found in the dust samples were EXPECTED to be in there and should have been there due to multiple reasons. 9/11 myths dot com has a list with sources of where those chemicals came from
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
"Does a device exist that could cut an entire steel beam that is as thick as one in the WTC?" Actually, thermite NOT formulated as an explosive can cut through steel beams: watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
As an explosive, it could obviously do quite a bit more.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
" What about the possibility that the materials that were found in the dust samples were EXPECTED to be in there and should have been there due to multiple reasons." I have already addressed this issue: watch?v=hcFOd16IHdE
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
As for your "project," here's two squibs that appear before the collapse: watch?v=Ne1FJBVkh4s
watch?v=oTuvo4b4E9Y
Here's explosions occuring before WTC7 collapsed: watch?v=ERhoNYj9_fg
Sorry I didn't live up to your expectations, but I do provide evidence when people ask me. Also, I notice that you didn't point out a single thing wrong in my video, where I show exactly why these ejections could not be caused by air pressure.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 Ohh..and the "squib" issue. The ejections tend to start slow and speed up throughout the collapse. Squibs work in the opposite direction. The most forceful point of the squib is at the initial blast and they slow down as time goes on. This was not observed in the ejections of the towers. The squibs only gained speed the entire time as the air pressure increased from above. Your failures of understanding explosives and their characteristics is shining through.
MrBoredatwork 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
"The most forceful point of the squib is at the initial blast and they slow down as time goes on." This is not strictly true. Squibs can have varying rates of speeds depending on how the gas is ejected from the explosive: watch?v=xan1fW6sda0
But regardless, physicist David Chandler has shown that several of the ejections do explode in that manner, starting out strong and then losing speed: watch?v=N_UeLXfI37s
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@MrBoredatwork
David Chandler has also shown that several of the ejections came from the steel corner columns, meaning they were not compressed out of windows: watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg
Also, Dr. Crockett Grabbe has shown that the horizontal ejection rate of the squibs is disproportional to the vertical collapse rate: watch?v=fGTUl0Ev-zU
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
OK - who placed the hundreds (thousands maybe) of 'squibs' and when. Thats a lot of drilling, needs a big crew of people, lots of disturbance to the occupiers, lots of machinery and equipment and most importantly - lots of potential whistle blowers. How many people have we had coming forward claiming to be on that demo job? Sorry it doesn't hang together as a theory. CD theory is built on a faulty first premise i.e. that it would even be possible to achieve covertly. It can;t pass go I'm afraid.
NonLocalYokel 1 year ago
@NonLocalYokel
The "who" "why" and "when" will be figured out when there's a new investigation. The science ultimately decides if the buildings were blown up. And the science clearly points that way.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 Science? Part of the CDT hypothesis has got to include how it was done and not just a few 'scientific'sounding bits about nanothermite and some physics. Explaining the 'how' is still part of the experiment as scientific experiments need to be replicable. But you knew that didn't you.
Sorry it doesn't work that way round, you go from the simple to the complex not the other way round.
NonLocalYokel 1 year ago
@NonLocalYokel
You don't seem to understand how a real criminal investigation works. First, you have to determine what happened, then who did it and how. You can't do it the other way around. You have to determine that a crime actually took place before looking into who did it.
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@citizenfor911truth1 oh it's criminal investigations now. I thought it was science? Thanks but I am out of here. Good luck proving 9/11 was an inside job.
NonLocalYokel 1 year ago
The biggest dust jets come always out the mechanical floor louvers (41st-42nd/75th-76th) and escalator levels (43rd and 77th floors).
TheMKMonarch 1 year ago
the 'squibs' are caused by pancaking and your xplanations are ridiculous and contain a mass of assumptions. If they were demolitoin squibs they would not be needed once the building was collapsing. The charges in a controlled demoliton are detonated to cause the collpase so why would they be needed after it. It would be nice to live in such an interesting world but I am afraid there is only evidence of one conspiracy - the one by the terrorists.
NonLocalYokel 1 year ago
@NonLocalYokel
Lol, uhm, possibly to allow the further progress of the collapse?
TheMKMonarch 1 year ago
Has any one noticed that this video is 9 minutes and 11 seconds long?? 9:11? 9-11? This is freaky,osama bin laden made this video i think
dreamtunnel 1 year ago
makes you SICK!!! American goverment set up! Just for money....children lost there familys cause of this SICK setup! also look for videos were an american buissness plane was flying above!!! SETUP!!!
Lucysugarplum 1 year ago
nice viedo
and yeah its all fucking conspiracy
government is brain washing us -.-
i'm 15 and i know that
nice job man
kuguar13 1 year ago
Those little puffs are nothing more than the air being pushed down the building because the building is collapsing as seen in the , if it was a detonation, it would have shown BEFORE the building collapsed, you see the tower collapsing, only 2 stories can push allot of air down, i live in a large flat and if somebody on the top floor closes a door i can feel the air pushing when i am downstairs..
NecramoniumKISSvideo 1 year ago
@NecramoniumKISSvideo
Well, I don't know what kind of flat you live in, but this video shows a scientist explaining why the puffs are NOT from air pressure. watch?v=fGTUl0Ev-zU
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
Nothing more than air? 20 floors down?... Why multiple floors at the same time? You know nothing about controlled demo. Pulverized material is not "puffs of air"... Anybody in doubt of the truth can watch Blueprint for 9/11 from the intellectual group Architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. You can actually see the explosions.
RetroRonnie777 1 year ago
It's a controlled demolition, the truth is blatantly obvious when you look at the facts, from both sides, with a cool head and an objective, analytical mind.
I highly recommend: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
AIexKidd 1 year ago 2
@jawsfreak97 LOL! Stop clinging to these ridiculous theories. The official story is a lie and more and more people are learning the truth.
AIexKidd 1 year ago 2
@jawsfreak97
.....What? Care to explain how?
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
@jawsfreak97
Just so you know this for future reference, the 25% scooped out claim has been officially proven to be false:
911debunkers(dot)blogspot(dot)com(slash)2010(slash)03(slash)25-scooped-out-i-think-not(dot)html
citizenfor911truth1 1 year ago
"this structural damage did not initiate the collapse... Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires"
-NIST Questions and Answers about the WTC 7 Investigation
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
@jawsfreak97
Filled with smoke? I thought you said it was air in your video. The ejections coming from the building are not smoke. It's pulverized concrete and gypsum. But what is pulverizing it 20 to 40 stories below the demolition wave?
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
@jawsfreak97
You repeated the same arguments that debunkers have continuosly used. I have shown these allegations to be false using scientific evidence. Again, what have you presented that refutes the evidence I have provided?
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
@jawsfreak97
Yes, and everything I put in this video explained why your video is wrong. Care to try and refute anything here?
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
in the tower what you saw was smoke and dust being forced out the vents that were connected to the bathrooms, in buildings the bathrooms have vents for the plumbing and fans, in buildings as short as 3 stories those vents go out the sides of the building. for people that are so sure it was an inside job you are not so sure of where all your evidence is, why is that? you will never prove an inside job, but keep trying i'm having fun taunting you dummies....................tee hee hee.............
loosechangeexposed 2 years ago
Pigs like this are usually on the payroll..you see them everywhere.
ove7sn 2 years ago
This was really well done.
I have been thinking about the squibs a lot lately and the ones that are 10 - 40 stories below the destruction wave simply cannot be explained by a gravity driven collapse.
TonyLambregts 2 years ago
It's a thousand foot tall building, and your evidence of a controlled demolition is about 7 puffs of smokes that you need to magnify?
JRS1982 2 years ago
Actually, it's more like thousands of puffs. These are just isolated ones. Please watch these videos.
watch?v=atSd7mxgsGY
watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
They must be very small, huh? Death by a thousand cuts, I guess.
So the planes that crashed into the skyscrapers really had nothing to do with their collapse?
JRS1982 2 years ago
No, not really. They certainly had nothing to do with the collapse of Building 7.
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
So did the terrorists coordinate with the people who planted the explosives, or was it just a coincidence?
Building 7 was destroyed by debris.
JRS1982 2 years ago
who planted the explosives?
JRS1982 2 years ago
I have no idea who actually planted the explosives. But it is a proven fact that explosives were found. Go to journalof911studies(dot)com and read the Active thermitic material paper.
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
What kind of explosives, exactly? If you could find a chunk of C4, i would say you're onto something. But a lot of chemicals can be used in explosives. For instance, the OKC bombing was largely done with fertilizer.
The myth that there were explosions came from a firefighter who was under stress.
Memory is an interpretation of what happened, not a recording.
JRS1982 2 years ago
No, the kind of explosives that were found were extremly high tech explosives known as nanothermite. It is very powerful but it doesn't make as loud of an explosion as C4 or other explosives. That ofcourse would be the perfect thing to use if you wanted to demolish a building and blame it on fire. Again, this is all in the paper I mentioned above.
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
They found residue of nanothermite--how much? Something like three chips. (Nanothermite is just rust and alunimum.)
Terrorists crashed two commuter jets into buildings as a distraction to take the building down with explosives? That doesn't make sense, does it?
JRS1982 2 years ago
First of all, they found multiple chips of nanothemite in four samples of dust that came from four seperate and very distanced locations. Isn't it likely that all the WTC dust had these chips in them?Second, regular thermite is rust and aluminum, but nanothermite is high tech and highly weaponized. There are only a handful of scientists that have developed it.Third, it does make sense to crash planes into the buildings as an excuse for their collapse if you wanted to blame it on damage and fire.
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
You should produce the police reports from 9/10 showing people planting tons of this neothermite necessary to bring down America's two largest buildings. None exist. Cutting thru walls would draw attention in a busy office building.
I have not yet seen a video showing the towers were collapsing from the middle or from the lower floors--the towers collapsed from the impact zone, then pancaked downward. This contradicts the "squibs"--they went off but they didn't damage the building, did they?
JRS1982 2 years ago
and what were the bomb sniffing dogs doing at the world trade center for 2 weeks as ordered by Marvin Bush (like loose change claims) they also claim Marvin Bush was in on the attacks, so why would he send bomb sniffing dogs to the place where he sent people to plant bombs? i just don't get retarded logic, the truthers have nothing and are grasping at straws. explain that or admit defeat.
loosechangeexposed 2 years ago
For fuck sake, 2009 and you make a video about squibs? -_-
Yawn.. the videos you use as comparisons don't resemble WTC collapse at all. If it weren't for you over dubbing the demolitions with music, you'd also HEAR the VERY LOUD sounds of detonations well above the sound of the building collapse. You don't hear anything like that with the WTC collapse.
The collapse is also top-down at the point where the structure was weakened. The "squibs" occur AFTER the start of the collapse and not before.
ScottishAtheist 2 years ago
I recommend you watch this so you can see why explosions are not heard. (Infact, you can hear explosions.)
watch?v=RAk3u4i_zkg
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago
Good job, thanks for the vid !
PincezMoiJeReve 2 years ago
Comment removed
PincezMoiJeReve 2 years ago
Hilarious that the self-appointed 'debunkers' argue that things inside the towers were falling faster than freefall to cause the squibs.
Truly they will say *anything* in their desperation to deny the obvious.
proudfootz 2 years ago 2
You are doing a great job with these vids! I was going to make one like this awhile back, but opted for a blog post instead...
Google search...
Un-debunking the WTC Demolition Squibs
911debunkerschannel 2 years ago
Thanks. I was going to send you this vid yesterday but youtube was doing site mateninence so I couldn't.
citizenfor911truth1 2 years ago