The flooring plate underneth bent under the heat from the fire. It bent so much that the outter collums of the building snapped breaking the collums. when most of these collums were gone, the tower came down. It didnt happen by pancaking. If it was by pancaking, most of the tower wouldve been left stnading, both outside and inside. Like the bombing in OKc that was pancaking, not collapsing.
@ShadowCloudo98 That's just the Official Government Conspiracy Theory. The actual evidence and the laws of Physics contradicts that. That's why the government has never addressed how WTC7 fell at freefall speed which is impossible without explosives. That's why thermate residue was found in the dust. Disprove anything I just said.
The difference at 9/11was the wasn't a huge giant man pushing down on the structure. If wtc collapsed due to the pancake theory in the 9 seconds we have to amuse the remaining structure had zero resistance on the damaged section. As if it was falling through air. This works out at 10 floors a second and frankly in my opinion is impossible with out the use of explosives or a thermate device cutting the steel in to neat 30ft sections that we saw at 9/11
@giptonsilly Neither tower achieved free fall, several experiments show a 12-16 second collapse in both cases, the neat cuts were from the fact that the towers were built in 30 ft sections welded together. You see now?
@xxcurnuxx Bollocks read the NIST report 9.2 seconds, even those bastards couldn't fake that evidence. I wish you people would read the facts before you come on here with your made up lies. We don't believe your bollocks anymore, at last people are waking up to the fact that this was a Zionist / government inside job. Think about it how could a part of the building weighing less than the undamaged part crush the rest at the point of most resistance ??? It's a no brainer. what about building 7
@giptonsilly I've read the NIST report, trust me they got it wrong, also other video of a true demolition proves that terminal velocity is never achieved ever by collapsing buildings, this is because gravity doesn't care about what causes the building to collapse, it will just pull the building down as fast a possible, and your statements in your previous comment prove what now, nothing, just you calling me stupid, you randomly brought up building 7 too, and even why?
@xxcurnuxx A downward acceleration of the falling upper block implies a downward force, which requires that the upward resistive force was less than the weight of the block. Therefore the downward force exerted by the falling block must also have been less than its weight. Since the lower section of the building was designed to support several times the weight of the upper block, the reduced force exerted by the falling block was insufficient to crush the lower section of the building.
@giptonsilly True, but incorrect for this case, The falling top sections only had to push against one floor at a time as the structure collapsed. Your turning a whole building with floors and walls and individual components , into a single ridged box.
@xxcurnuxx That's assuming the whole floor collapsed at the same time, but steel does not react like that, one end can be hot while the other cold. The whole floor was not on fire at the same time and one side was never on fire. If we assume the whole floor magically collapsed the falling block could not have acted as a "pile driver." The downward acceleration of the upper block can be understood as a consequence of, not the cause of, the disintegration of the lower section of the building.
@giptonsilly I never assumed that the whole floors collapsed at the same time, I find that the complete opposite is true. The visible lean of both tower's top sections prove that the whole floors were not destroyed at all at once. The lean of the top sections turn them into giant wedges, the area of a lower floor farthest from the pivot point of the tower was impacted first, then destroyed in a radial fashion as the rest of the top section descended.
@xxcurnuxx Then why didn't it just snap off and fall to one side ? is this a pile driver crushing a building at the point of most resistance which is ridiculous. Watch David Chandler's brilliant-The North Tower exploding /watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc&feature here you see nothing of a pile driver but multiple floors exploding from the top down hurling steel girders hundreds of feet sideways, something that couldn't happen with out explosives.
@giptonsilly Let me educate you a little bit, to vertical forces, the floor trusses were flat up the weakest points. The falling top sections wedge shape generated huge forces and enormous pressures on the floor trusses, causing them to fail. With no lateral support, the wedge shape launched the outer columns sideways. If there were explosives, why weren't thousands killed by flying glass and small pieces of metal?
@xxcurnuxx Obviously you've never researched this enough to learn that there were people killed by glass and injured by metal. One of them was decapitated in the lobby after making it all the way down. You've failed to explain, as did the government, how WTC7 collapsed at freefall speed which they admitted, when no plane hit it, and 1 and 2 in 10 seconds which Physicists demonstrated over and over is impossible without explosives. Unless you believe Superman magically fired a death ray at it.
If THOR had come with his mighty hammer on 9/11 than your experiment might be more appropriate.
How about building 7? The third building that was imploded that day. 5.4 second collapse....nothing but a demolition to even the most simple mans eyes.
Architects, Engineers, Controllled Demolition Experts, and others all agree.
notice how he had to push it to the ground, thats how the real WTC would have come down if pushed down by the hand of god, but your lego model WTC could never crush itself to its foundations, niether could the real WTC.
@COMMANDERPLOP yeah, he should've put in a small fire, and seen if it collapsed into dust in 6.5 seconds - directly into it's footprint, and visit: abz2000 dot com / news dot aspx
@PivotMasterGer well dont say sry to me. (tell the truth it didnt affect me at all, plus it adds charecter to his life. great exuse for stuff too"my dad died so i cant do homework". but yea, pretty sad..... but its all good between october-august)
when i was watching it, i able to feel the pain, that the people who where in the wtc felt, when it collapsed. this was the most emotional moment of my live
Cool how did u make it
Fortijake15 2 months ago
did you ever rebuild it?
themariobros45 7 months ago
@themariobros45 yeah
PivotMasterGer 7 months ago
@PivotMasterGer well thats good I mean you must have taken a long time building it
themariobros45 7 months ago
@themariobros45 3 hours^^
PivotMasterGer 7 months ago
The flooring plate underneth bent under the heat from the fire. It bent so much that the outter collums of the building snapped breaking the collums. when most of these collums were gone, the tower came down. It didnt happen by pancaking. If it was by pancaking, most of the tower wouldve been left stnading, both outside and inside. Like the bombing in OKc that was pancaking, not collapsing.
ShadowCloudo98 8 months ago
@ShadowCloudo98 That's just the Official Government Conspiracy Theory. The actual evidence and the laws of Physics contradicts that. That's why the government has never addressed how WTC7 fell at freefall speed which is impossible without explosives. That's why thermate residue was found in the dust. Disprove anything I just said.
2012newrevolution 1 month ago
HOW LONG DID IT TAKE TO BUILD THE TOWER?
aarvelo 1 year ago
@aarvelo a few hours
PivotMasterGer 1 year ago
I MADE BOTH TOWERS OF THE W.T.C TODAY. HOW COOL IS THAT?
aarvelo 1 year ago
BUT HOW DID THE DUST APPEAR? ALSO WHY IS IT CALLED PANCAKE COLLAPSE?
aarvelo 1 year ago
but how??????!!!!??????!!!
aarvelo 1 year ago
@aarvelo the dust is placed on each of the tower's floors
PivotMasterGer 1 year ago
WHERE DID THE DUST COME FROM?
aarvelo 1 year ago
@aarvelo from the inside of the tower
PivotMasterGer 1 year ago
@PivotMasterGer Do you realize that you recreated a dust plume shooting out of a of windows below the collapse.
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
Comment removed
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
The difference at 9/11was the wasn't a huge giant man pushing down on the structure. If wtc collapsed due to the pancake theory in the 9 seconds we have to amuse the remaining structure had zero resistance on the damaged section. As if it was falling through air. This works out at 10 floors a second and frankly in my opinion is impossible with out the use of explosives or a thermate device cutting the steel in to neat 30ft sections that we saw at 9/11
giptonsilly 1 year ago
@giptonsilly Neither tower achieved free fall, several experiments show a 12-16 second collapse in both cases, the neat cuts were from the fact that the towers were built in 30 ft sections welded together. You see now?
xxcurnuxx 1 year ago
@xxcurnuxx Bollocks read the NIST report 9.2 seconds, even those bastards couldn't fake that evidence. I wish you people would read the facts before you come on here with your made up lies. We don't believe your bollocks anymore, at last people are waking up to the fact that this was a Zionist / government inside job. Think about it how could a part of the building weighing less than the undamaged part crush the rest at the point of most resistance ??? It's a no brainer. what about building 7
giptonsilly 1 year ago
@giptonsilly I've read the NIST report, trust me they got it wrong, also other video of a true demolition proves that terminal velocity is never achieved ever by collapsing buildings, this is because gravity doesn't care about what causes the building to collapse, it will just pull the building down as fast a possible, and your statements in your previous comment prove what now, nothing, just you calling me stupid, you randomly brought up building 7 too, and even why?
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
@xxcurnuxx A downward acceleration of the falling upper block implies a downward force, which requires that the upward resistive force was less than the weight of the block. Therefore the downward force exerted by the falling block must also have been less than its weight. Since the lower section of the building was designed to support several times the weight of the upper block, the reduced force exerted by the falling block was insufficient to crush the lower section of the building.
giptonsilly 9 months ago
@giptonsilly True, but incorrect for this case, The falling top sections only had to push against one floor at a time as the structure collapsed. Your turning a whole building with floors and walls and individual components , into a single ridged box.
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
@xxcurnuxx That's assuming the whole floor collapsed at the same time, but steel does not react like that, one end can be hot while the other cold. The whole floor was not on fire at the same time and one side was never on fire. If we assume the whole floor magically collapsed the falling block could not have acted as a "pile driver." The downward acceleration of the upper block can be understood as a consequence of, not the cause of, the disintegration of the lower section of the building.
giptonsilly 9 months ago
@giptonsilly I never assumed that the whole floors collapsed at the same time, I find that the complete opposite is true. The visible lean of both tower's top sections prove that the whole floors were not destroyed at all at once. The lean of the top sections turn them into giant wedges, the area of a lower floor farthest from the pivot point of the tower was impacted first, then destroyed in a radial fashion as the rest of the top section descended.
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
@xxcurnuxx Then why didn't it just snap off and fall to one side ? is this a pile driver crushing a building at the point of most resistance which is ridiculous. Watch David Chandler's brilliant-The North Tower exploding /watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc&feature here you see nothing of a pile driver but multiple floors exploding from the top down hurling steel girders hundreds of feet sideways, something that couldn't happen with out explosives.
giptonsilly 9 months ago
@giptonsilly Let me educate you a little bit, to vertical forces, the floor trusses were flat up the weakest points. The falling top sections wedge shape generated huge forces and enormous pressures on the floor trusses, causing them to fail. With no lateral support, the wedge shape launched the outer columns sideways. If there were explosives, why weren't thousands killed by flying glass and small pieces of metal?
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
@xxcurnuxx Obviously you've never researched this enough to learn that there were people killed by glass and injured by metal. One of them was decapitated in the lobby after making it all the way down. You've failed to explain, as did the government, how WTC7 collapsed at freefall speed which they admitted, when no plane hit it, and 1 and 2 in 10 seconds which Physicists demonstrated over and over is impossible without explosives. Unless you believe Superman magically fired a death ray at it.
2012newrevolution 1 month ago
@giptonsilly Also, David Chandler's video brings nothing new.
xxcurnuxx 9 months ago
asi seria si aparecieran el el dia de la independencia
MrSantikpo 1 year ago
If THOR had come with his mighty hammer on 9/11 than your experiment might be more appropriate.
How about building 7? The third building that was imploded that day. 5.4 second collapse....nothing but a demolition to even the most simple mans eyes.
Architects, Engineers, Controllled Demolition Experts, and others all agree.
Controlled Demolitions were used on 9/11.
NorCalTruth 1 year ago
Science!
SexyMelon 1 year ago
notice how he had to push it to the ground, thats how the real WTC would have come down if pushed down by the hand of god, but your lego model WTC could never crush itself to its foundations, niether could the real WTC.
COMMANDERPLOP 2 years ago
@COMMANDERPLOP yeah, he should've put in a small fire, and seen if it collapsed into dust in 6.5 seconds - directly into it's footprint, and visit: abz2000 dot com / news dot aspx
peace,
abz
abz2000123 1 year ago
@abz2000123 The strength to weight ratio is way off, and plastic has much different properties.
xxcurnuxx 1 year ago
I wish the wtc didnt explode. because my friends real dad died in the crash. he never met his real dad. :(
ThePeteAwesome 2 years ago
That must have been very hard for him. I'm sorry.
PivotMasterGer 2 years ago
@PivotMasterGer well dont say sry to me. (tell the truth it didnt affect me at all, plus it adds charecter to his life. great exuse for stuff too"my dad died so i cant do homework". but yea, pretty sad..... but its all good between october-august)
ThePeteAwesome 1 year ago
@ThePeteAwesome But by the way why did it take you 10 months to comment on my answer?^^
PivotMasterGer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PivotMasterGer i have better things to do
ThePeteAwesome 1 year ago
@PivotMasterGer goood job i loved your work 4-star****
marmiusic 1 year ago
@marmiusic Thanks
PivotMasterGer 1 year ago
Comment removed
BlazingAngels220099 2 years ago
slow motion is pretty fast!
BlazingAngels220099 2 years ago
lol at the reverse slow mo,it looks like hes using magic to pick it up again :D LOL
RedLego391 2 years ago
This collapse was complete with dust. Nice one.
Maymona13 2 years ago 3
when you revers it it has a happy ending. so what if we revers the titanic and the heroshima atom bomb! wait the japs had that coming.
tocool474 2 years ago
how did you get the smoke in there
drakefisher1 2 years ago
I put dust in the floors.
PivotMasterGer 2 years ago
when i was watching it, i able to feel the pain, that the people who where in the wtc felt, when it collapsed. this was the most emotional moment of my live
PfandsammlerWolle 2 years ago
very cool :)
Saito22Ger 2 years ago 10