All you got to do to see that 911 was an inside job is look at the way bush acted he had no surprise, NO SHOCK at all he just sat there. If i was pres and someone came and told me we are under attack i would of been SHOCKED ! He just sat there, watch the vid and the way he acts and you can tell it's an inside job. TO FUCKIN OBVIOUS!!! THE FIRST REACTION SHOULD OF BEEN SOMETHING OTHER THAN SIT THERE LOOKING GUILTY.COMON PEOPLE GO ARREST THE REAL TERRORIST!!!!!
just search dimitri khalezov right now and hell answer your questions, the only way to make the towers fall at those speeds is to completely pulverize 60-70% of the steel in the towers, and the only way to pulverize steel is with nuclear technology
@Denierbud11 Hey, moron, YouTube search "9/11 tower squigs" then come back and talk. Thank you. You were just proven wrong. Anything else you'd like to say? I didn't think so.
the squibs occurred during the collapse, not prior to the collapse -- and the squibs were not throwing steel hundreds of feet -- at most,they were throwing glass
@Denierbud11 Look at the damn videos. It's right here on YouTube. And they were not mostly throwing glass. Again, if you saw the video, you would know.
compromised integrity of the core columns lead to redistribution of weight to the core. the floors supported the walls which supported the building. When they failed, the walls were left with a freestanding ring of walls over 5 floors tall. They could not support the weight and failed. I do think the original report was flawed, but I think they were on the right track. HOWEVER, their explanation of building 7 is f*cked up…
@anthonya241 so the elapsed fall time never concerned you? its simple math and not so simple physics; but pancaking would have added time no? if you can get your brain around building 7 why not the others? and imo w/out internal explosions buildings don't fall straight down into their own footprint; or if so please provide a link that shows ANY besides the towers....mmmmkay thanks.
was pulverized by the debris mass falling. The volume of air burst the windows. If the tower did indeed collapse in 12-15 seconds, that is longer than freefall. Notice how freefalling pieces of steel protected outwards hit the ground when the collapse was only 2/3rds down the building… NOT freefall speed of collapse. The reason why the collapse initiated was because the combination of the vertical downward blast from the fireball, the weight of the plane debris, and the
this would explain the debris popping out the windows, if the floors pancaked together, displacing the floors slightly ahead of the mountain of debris which was floors 79 - 110, the debris pile could now collapse the core, more pressure on a smaller area, enough to bend the beams out of the way and cave in the structure. After the first 6 or 7 seconds, there was more than enough smoke to hide the collapse slowing down. The reason why there was so much ash is because the drywall and concrete...
In my opinion, I think that the collapse slowed as it traveled progressively further down the building. There was so much weight above the impact that the initial collapse could have crushed the building in 12 seconds. Another think to remember is that the upper portion did not stay intact on the way down, it disintegrated sending a cascade of debris through the tower within the confines of the outer walls. In fact, the floors most likely began collapsing a good 2 to 3 seconds before the rest
And another Truther video with a poor grasp of physics.
Why is this not in Nature? Or Science? Or any other highly acclaimed peer-reviewed journal? Surely, if you're correct and the science matches up, you can gain international stardom and vast wealth overnight.
This is directed to the maker of this video. You "mention" conservation of momentum as the basis for your argument. However conservation of momentum only applies in the absence of a net force. So I must ask did you not take the gravitational force into account?
@anthonya241 Thats really not necessary. A plane cannot crash into the building anywhere and take out the "core resistance" Unless building spontaneosly began collapsing immediately or within seconds of plane collision. But even then, the collapse will not be symmetrical, would not occur as rapidly (As video showed) and wouldn't be complete. You could make a replica of WTC wood and still wouldn't cause such complete destruction by flying a plane into it.
For scientists and engineers who understand basic physics, conservation of momentum, energy absorption, and some other rather simple things - it's not necessary.
However, for people who are ignorant of anything more complicated than an apple falling from a tree - nothing less that a full scale replica will suffice. Even then, some people would still look for an excuse to discredit the experiment. (Wrong phase of the moon, pilots weren't Arabs, etc)
@anthonya241 The Empire state building DID NOT collapsed when it was hit by an airforce bomber.
youtube
.
/ZD69sP51u-s
.
small fires here and there just like WTC but it didnt collapsed .Engineers made WTC to resist two 747 planes crash. and naturally office fires too. The speed at which WTC collapse and its perfect fall on its own foot print shows there was something inside breaking very thick steel beams in a very timely way. and WTC7 falled in 6 secs without any plane hit
@anthonya241 ill help build it for free; but i can only fly prop jobs or id offer to pilot as well and jump out once autopilot was set; be one heck of a ride and view.
The NIST said, the heat from the fires sagged the trusses which bowed the columns inward CAUSING the collapse. The building didn't pancake CAUSING the collapse but evidence is strong the building pancaked AFTER the collapse was "inevitable".
@steveo1274 you cant have a controlled demolition that high up! If they were taken down by explosions it would have to be at the ground level! Oh wait a second I recall terroists tried to do that exact thing in 1993 and failed, proving my point that the demolition theory is absolute bull shit!
@pocomedy these terrorists didnt use nanothermite cutter charges that could melt through steel.
yet another dumbass debunker agumnt(like on nanotional geographic when they used a bag of thermite and couldnt melt through anything)..yet somehow this guy used a home made cutter charge to cut through steel../watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
@pocomedy Are you trying to say that the WTC towers were somehow impervious to demolitions by using the failed terrorist attack of 1993 as your proof? Dude ALL buildings can be brought down with demolitions! The 1993 bombing was not in the same class as a professional demolitions exercise! And top-down demolitions do exist and are carried out in the real world, theres videos of them on youtube. Believe what you want but try to think rationally before you come to your conclusions
*sigh* Think of of it like this in terms of how it fell: One floor at a time. Everyone seems to act like all of the floors simultaneously fell. No, one floor collapses another, then these two floors collapse the third. These 3 collapse the fourth, etc.
I'm in 9th grade pointing out something common sense. Either you people are younger than myself... or just stupid.
@TehGamersGarage "Simple logic says the earth is round." Do explain to this feeble mind of mine how "simple" this logic is that says the earth is round. I would appreciate an argument with premises and conclusion, preferably a "simple" one.
@TehGamersGarage Yes you are stupid, but you cab change that. The buildings exploded outward. The pile of ruble was about 30' tall, a pancake collapse would have left a pile closer to 200'. Bone fragments on surrounding buildings and of course Building 7.
@UNTC321 The exploded outward? Those weren't explosions, you asshat, that was air. Explosions are much larger and soooo much louder. Those "Explosions" as you oh, so ignorantly call them, are each floors compressed out pushing outward. It's like sitting down on a Whoopee-Cushion. The air inside pushes outward as the pressure from above collapses onto it.
You know, even if people go "The lower floors were built stronger than the upper floors", it doesn't mean that the lower floors were still containing that same strength.
Remember when the bottom of the towers were bombed years earlier? That weakened the lower floors, obviously. Besides, even if the lower floors still WERE as strong, they wouldn't be able to withstand added weight of an entire floor of debris for every floor that falls.
@TehGamersGarage so your saying the building can't support the weight of the floors that have been there since its construction. That statement is just brimming with brilliance. And with the added debris theory you came up within the buildings design for that to be possible each floor would need to be independently supported but thats now how buildings work each floor is supported by a core structure that runs through the entire building 15 floors can't crush 95 floors of structually sound steel
@rezistorXG *facepalm* Again, you forget about the weakened structure of the building regarding the bombings of years prior. With a weakened structure, all the weight of the 15 floors combine into one large weidhgt that troubled the weakened structure into collapsing, floor by floor.
Each floor adds to this weight, creating more of more force going downward into another floor, which then adds more weight, etc. etc.
Read my comment several times over if you have to. Makes more sense.
@TehGamersGarage Surely they reinforced the structure to its former load bearing capacity after the bombings or even strengthened them further to resist future attacks. I have no idea if they did this or not as i haven't yet researched it but it only seems logical to put in those kinds of safety measures. Also the rest of the building (the center, assuming the bottom remained weakened) should have provided resistance and stopped the building falling at such speed.
even if the towers did fall due to fire and impact damage (which I doubt) 911 was still an inside job. Just look at the Pentagon evidence, or lack thereof
Further the collapse itself was not near FF speed. It was a full 50% slower. If u watch, the outer columns and materials that are falling free of the structure (and indeed falling at FF) hit the ground a full 5 or 6 seconds after the inner core. In fact u can see at least 40-50 stories of inner core still standing when the outer columns hit.
@cyd. Google "verinage" and u will see that u r completely wrong. Ur grasp of the physical nature of collapses seems to rest on the thought that the bldg structure itself is one continuous piece of steel. It obviously is not and once the KE is strong enough to overcome the rivets holding together the connections, collapse cannot be stopped.
But seriously, verinage should put to bed ur concerns
Therefore, why would the government plant bombs and take the risk of many things going wrong and put into jeopardy all that was accomplished to that point? The buildings need not have to fall. Planting of bombs for a controlled demolition would have taken a large amount of people a long time all working quietly in secrecy. It would be near impossible that there wouldn’t be a leak given the potential high death rates on fellow citizens or that something wouldn’t be detected by others.
Do some people ever wonder why the buildings had to be brought down either by planes or explosives? For one thing, even if the towers didn’t fall, the terrorists still would have been successful in their attack the minute the planes crashed into the towers. If it was an inside job, for which there is no evidence, the drones or missiles or 767s hitting the towers would have also accomplished the mission of a false flag operation and dragged the country to war.
Keep in mind that the video is not even showing resistance of the building yet....You might say, "but gravity is a continuous driving force"...Well so is the force of resistance by the building opposing gravity. Here, only the effect of gravity alone is shown along with decreasing mass as the collapse explodes. Consider now, that the building is also pushing back up, opposing collapse, as it was IN REALITY, and wallah, you don't get collapse.
@cydoniaquest I think it very understandable that you do get collapse. Three components were involved in keeping the building up. Two of these were opposing gravity, as you say pushing back up. While one component, the floors, without which the other two could not stand on their own, were pushing down and holding it all together. Look at the outer walls. These were made up of panel sections of 3 steel columns welded together with 3 sheets of steel that were simply bolted to other panel sections.
@1Dougy85 You're forgetting the columns. THOSE are the structures that oppose the force of gravity and keep the buildings "up". It is a physical impossibility, to simultaneously and explosively tear down those columns with the same weight they always supported, while at or near free fall acceleration. As this vid clip shows, figuring only inertia alone without taking into account building resistance, or air resistance, it still takes 11 seconds for collapse.
@cydoniaquest I didn't forget the inner core. I first wanted to just talk about the outer walls to see if you agreed how understandably they could be demolished. The outer wall columns are also the structure that oppose the force of gravity and keep the buildings up. There are also the floors, the third component. I take it you agree on the destruction of the outer walls and how the falling rubble from above could easily knock those panel sections apart?
@cydoniaquest When the collapse started and the top of the towers fell the weight of the whole building top pushed down and inwards or outwards on the outer wall panel sections sheering the bolts that held them together. Likewise, the bolts of the panel sections that made up the falling building top sheered. Quickly, there was an ever growing mass of panel sections falling at an ever increasing velocity sheering bolts and knocking free the panel sections that made up the outer walls.
@azar. Not sure what the point is. And believe me, for me it's not about the govt. i retired from the FDNY a few years ago, I know many many many people who cleaned up the mess. Not one (and this includes steel workers/ demolition teams have ever found any evidence of CD. And the case of thermetic dust is not proof. Thermite leaves behind the same byproducts as paint primer
Oh yeah, and of verinage were used, the hydraulic lifts would have been left in the debris. No one reports ever finding such a device.
Not to mention the initial collapse begins right at the jet impact sites suggesting that if verinage were used, the lifts were at the exact floors struck by the jets. The idea that they survived the jets exploding into the bldgs and subsequent fires also should dismiss the theory as untenable
I think if the government had it to do over again they would make explosives and thermate part of the official story but blame it on Osama and the boys. "See, they hate our freedom so much just look what they did. The sneaky bastards put explosives..."
@yikes. Verinage requires massive hydraulic lifts attached to many columns and u 1st have to cut the columns by hand or disconnect the joist/columns junctions by hand. The work that requires alone makes it an unreasonable technique here, not to mention I would think someone inside the bldgs would notice gigantic lifts attached to bldg supports. Not a reasonable theory
The reason the officer was saying that was the FDNY determined collapse was imminent due to damage and fire. They created a collapse zone around the perimeter of #7. Unless u believe the FDNY, NYPD and city engineers are complicit in a demolition then ur observation about the officer is mis guided
I think the controlled demolition was operated from the building 7. We might find people coming out of building 7 who caused it, moments after twin towers were down. I saw a police officer asking people to move away from building 7 before it collapsed.
@qft. If u watch the video of 7, the east penthouse falls into the structure a full 5 seconds before any exterior wall is seen falling. The entire collapse took about 15 seconds. This is not in dispute. But ur point about a guy looking at siesmic data, I don't know who claimed that, but the entire site was watched closely by FDNY and none have ever claimed to hear detonations just prior to collapse. That's NONE. Explosions that were heard were hours before the collapse and likely were the cars
Do a google search for "seismic signal of wtc building 7", this is the STRONGEST evidence that the building fell just under 10 seconds. One researcher even claims that by analyzing the data even more closely he can detect explosives before the building fell.
Except the upper section wasn't seen crushing anything, it too was reduced to rubble, and it started falling to the side already the first 20 feet. The building was demolished progressively by highly advanced explosive containers placed near the core columns.
What most people are forgetting, is that the tops of the buildings weren't the only things collapsing. When the collapse reaches lower levels, its mass increases because it has gained the additional floors it has reached. And it is moving faster because it has been falling for longer so it accelerates. P=mv. p is momentum, m is mass, v is velocity. If both m and v increase (which i just showed they did) then p (momentum) will increase exponentially. Thats why the towers collapsed.
@killurtv. "gravity collapses slow down and eventually stop". Ur theory is totally disproven by verinage. Totally. So stop with the non sense. Not to mention there is no evidence anywhere suggesting CD.
Explosives are easy to trace and yet no traces of explosives were ever found.? Im not sure what ur getting at I think ur saying that the perps planted bombs that they hoped people wouldnt hear and see and had no plausible explanation for if they did?
"Im Mr. Newton, and I've something to say." "Im confused bcs u've tried to debunk the laws I have created." "First. When u watch the collapsing u can see it accelerates". "I've discovered that the acceleration is possible only when there's empty space below the falling object". "The other tip even tilted. That means the kinetic energy more or less moved away from the tower. Still the tower pulverized all the way down". "Now I go back to my grave and write new laws which work only in America".
All these ridiculous conspiracy theories, before you know it, people will be saying, "The towers never could have collapsed because THEY WERE NEVER THERE TO BEGIN WITH!!! THEY WERE AN ILLUSION MADE BY THE GOVERNMENT AND JFK'S ZOMBIE INVENTED THE PLAN!!! GAAAASSSSP!!!!" Terrorists crashed planes into the buildings, which destroyed them. I just can't understand why it is so impossible for people to get that.
Further. If bombs actually were involved don't u think the conspirators would just make that the theme ie- terrorists planted bombs.
In CD the explosions are directed at the columns and trusses and wouldn't blow anyone off their feet unless they were standing right next to a column or truss. The FF u r talking about we're standing near elevator shafts.
@Shamrock3939 No they wouldn't have said terrorists planted the bombs because that would be a lot easier to find out who did it. There would be security and a helluva a lot of rag heads that know very technical stuff for them to come down the way they did. explosives are easy to trace and so would some Muslims who knew the fine are of Controlled Demolitions. This way the perps die along with the opportunity to cross examine and prosecute.
@thrice. . There was an effort to have a FF for 9/11truth started by one member and he couldn't get any FDNY to join. Some FF joined but none that I know of were FDNY. Many members thought that bombs and secondary devices Were involved that day, soon after they realized that was not the case. (Including me btw)
There were rumors of bombs all day. In fact the empire state bldg was evacuated that evening due to an apparent bomb. Most people don't realize that
@Shamrock3939 Actually there are many NY firefighters and police that have gone on record to say that it was a controlled demo. There are quite a few fire fighters that reported being blown off of their feet by explosions during their rescue mission. Watch the trailer for "the ultimate con"
@punx. Tell me how the laws of physics were defied that day? The A&E guys put in their movie ( not in any science journal where peers can debate its merits like real scientist do). But u tell me where newton failed.
FF acceleration? That never happened
Molten steel? Sorry wrong again. No one ever claimed steel melted. It didn't have to.
By the way, not any 1st responder who was actually in my shares the views of ur 1500. That incl steel workers who worked the pile and not a single one reported finding any evidence of CD. Were any of ur 1500 experts there? The FDNY, NYPD, PAPD, city engineers, steel workers, military personel, FEMA, NIST, FBI , etc share the views of ur 1500. Get the picture
@punx. The A&e movement has 1500 "experts". Not one of which has been published in peer reviewed science journals concerning how the collapses defied physics. Not a single one
Dr bazant journal reviewed article is accepted by hundreds of universities, demolition companies, engineering firms, etc. it is literally ur 1500 "experts" vs the entire scientific community. 99.99 % vs. .01 %.
Oh well biggie u convinced me. I guess dr bazant doesn't know physics as well as the hundreds of universities world wide and demolition companies and engineering firms who likewise share his view. U can say all u want that physics were defied but unless u prove it, ur just a lot of hot air and no substance. U dont even try to explain how they defy physics. U just repeat what u hear on YouTube. Sad
@Shamrock3939 Dr. Bazant's crush-down, crush-up model is inconsistent with what happened in both towers: 40 stories of the lower core survived the collapses of the outer floors, and then themselves fell straight down. Dr. Bazant's piledriver model requires that the piledriver take down the cores at the same time that the outer floors go down. It thus does not explain why the cores collapsed, and neither does NIST. Dr. Bazant's centroid theory too is impossible.
Here is a list of universities suppurting the Bazant model: MIT, National Council of Structural Engineers, American Council of Engineering Co. Structural Engineering Inst. Northwestern Univ. University of Illinois National Academy of Engineering U. of Penn U. of Maryland Stanford U. Society of Fire Protection Engineers Worcester Polytechnic Inst. American Inst. of steel contruction inc SUNY Buffalo Univ. of Wisconsin GB there are hundreds more. And those supporting CD? (crickets chirping
@biggie, Dr. Bazant, one of Americas top structural engineers has published exactly the mathematical model. Its in peer reviewed engineering journals. Not one truther has EVER submitted a peer reviewed journal article refuting this. So this guy publishes and is universally accepted as a leading expert and he has proof physics were NOT defied.
You have rude and irelevent comments with no scientific backing. I guess you just got the wrong physics book.
At biggie, call me all the names you want. U cannot show me in any way how the laws of physics was defied. I've got nearly every universities physics and engineering departments supporting the none CD rationale for bldg collapse. I've got actual mathematics showing exactly how the bldgs collapsed. Uve got nothing but speculation and hyperbole. Aren't u just the least bit curious why no legitimate university and hardly any engineering firms share ur delusion? I guess they r idiots too
Dr bazant, one of America's top structural engineers has clearly demonstrated the mathematical model for the collapses. He did so in a peer reviewed journal and it's undeniable. @killurtmv. The fact that u say it couldn't happen is useless. Show me the peer reviewed truther model saying it couldn't happen? U can't so don't waste ur time. Instead of just saying things can't happen based on ur clearly limited knowlege of physics, read actual physics journals. U may become informed
@Shamrock3939 So NIST can't explain it, but Dr Bazant claims he can? That's nice. Now show an experiment, computer model with open source, or show a similar collapse. Let me know when that happens.
@Kill0Your0TV ur desperation is getting palpable. NIST has offered clear cut rationale for the towers collapse. U r playing a shell game with the facts. Where they offered little detail was in number 7. But either way, u avoiding the central question that no truther "expert" has ever been published in any peer reviewed journal is typical. Ur movement is losing and getting comical. Show me a bldg that gets hit by jets and maybe ill be able to show u similar collapses.
@Kill0Your0TV I find it hilarious that u dismiss NIST as an expert on anything and now u r using them for some meaningless point. And u lie that they have no explanation for tower 1 and 2 collapse. That fact alone dismisses u as relevent in any discussion, but we already knew that. U have nothing supporting ur beliefs except some youtube "experts" or A & E movement which has been summarily dismissed by scientist who expect more than hyperbole as a basis for argument.
@Shamrock3939 See the movie made by the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, "9/11 - Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out". In it licensed structural engineers, high-rise architects, and physicists tell you exactly what laws of physics are inconsistent with the official collapse theories, and exactly how they are inconsistent.
without extra Energy? A damn plane crashed into it filled with gasoline. the building had to be loaded with paper. can your program account for how much weight the frame could hold? lets add in a loss of support plus A FUCKING PLANE THAT WEIGHS A TON. Dont be stupid that building went down whatever you payed for that program was a waste of money because all it did was prove your dumb
@biggiedickson what did i say that wasn't true? is gas not explosive? do planes not way a ton? was the building not filled with paper? was said paper not flammable?
@sodaiznice A ton would not be much load for the building to take. Office floors are commonly designed for a live load of 40 pounds per square foot with a safety factor. Your 1-ton aircraft would only require 50 square feet, or a 7 foot by 7 foot floor space to hold it up. You're barking up the wrong tree.
@punxsutawneybarney my apologies "a ton" as in "a lot" a 747 passenger airline empty weighs about 600,000 pounds which is 272 tons but we can assume that the planes where not empty..on takeoff they weigh roughly 900,000 which converts to 408 tons...1 pound=.0004 tons I left out the decimals in the conversions but yo get the idea (I am using a metric ton)
i just dont see how 15 floors vs 95, fire burned, fuel fuelled, the momentum could take all 95. for tower one. How two steel structures could fall the same pattern with diff areas touched. And a third building magically falling the same exact way.. like 7, 8 hours later.
I don't know about you all but the first thing I said upon hearing of the collapses , and i remember hearing most other people saying it too, was "how in the hell did they just fall down, were there bombs")? Disregarding the actual collapses entirely, the huge amount of highly suspicious events surrounding that day (the list is a mile long) and the obvious corruption of the investigation should make it obvious to anyone that something is up.
All it takes is %20 of weak steel to crush past %80 more of a such rickety built structures. A few well placed gallons of Kerosene and a few hours is all it takes.
It just "JOINS the falling mass" and goes faster & faster & faster.
Completely ignoring my 6th grader physics text book mind you.
an object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a greater or equal opposite force. The Struts could not maintain their integrity when the above tonages came crashing down with enough force to pulverize concrete into dust. It's basic physics so I'm wondering why some people have such a hard time realizing it is totally possible for it to have occured by gravity collapse.
This video does not prove explosives were used. It could have been something else. Maybe the rivets were secretly removed from the core columns so they became just a delicately balanced stack of blocks. Maybe the French technique called "verinage" was used. See YT for verinage. Sorry, I don't have the French accent mark over the first "e"... Maybe many techniques were used. What this video shows is the official story cannot be true. That is all.
@Skeptic121 not sure how the rivets could be removed and your theory of "verinage" is interesting...a tech. which does not use explosives but drops one floor onto the next which then continues to the next...hmmmm...isn't that what could have ocurred here but with no floor demo...just the crash and the fire.
@TheHungrySnail You've said what that is true? You haven't proven that 15% can destroy 85%, have you? You have a link to anything that proves the official theory (whatever that is this month)?
I've read most government-approved drivel before. The evidence of a cover-up is so obvious and overwhelming that you'd have to be mentally retarded or a government shill to keep denying it.
@roquefortfiles Thanks for correcting me. Shame on those who do not see ur point. U r now my 2nd Idol. My 1st is Bill O'Reilly. So much Wisdom. Why people do not see that Saddam Hussein and his WMDs caused all of this? Why is it that people do not respect our soldiers who have killed over 1 Million terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, so that we can have Democracy Freedom? I shall spread the word and give you my heartfelt support for your Remarkable Patriotism. Long Live The Bush Family!
What about the structural damage caused by the buildings being hit by the planes? It doesn't look like this reconstruction took that into account. When the planes hit it weakened the entire building structure not just the portion at the top. Reconfigure your tests to include that and I will guarantee you will have vastly different results. The hits were registered on the richter scales. So don't even try to say they had no effect on the whole building.
@drifter01z This simulation assumes the beams offered NO SUPPORT once hit by falling debris from above. How to visualize it: assume the WTC columns were INFINITELY brittle. Once even touched by falling debris, each floor's columns shattered into dust. Of course this is a wrong assumption: that's the whole point. With this ridiculous assumption, the simulation looks EXACTLY like what happened. That means explosives or thermate or something removed the steel columns during collapse.
@Skeptic121 No it doesn't. If the beams offered no support the visulization would have shown a complete collapse. And it wasn't necessarily the columns that gave away. If you watch the actual footage of the WTC building you will see the core columns jutting upward as the remains collapsed past them. It was the rivet system that gave away once the above floors collapsed from above, not the collumns. There was a core column spire that was still standing for a short while after the buiding fell.
@drifter01z Did you happen to see the list of parameters on the left? Did you notice "Core Resistance" and "Perim Resistance"? Did you happen to see the values of 0% for each? How do you interpret those numbers? All but the last simulation showed complete collapse. The last simulation assumes some of the falling mass fell over the side after each floor collapse. I mentioned possible tampering with the rivets in my earlier comments.
@Skeptic121 Let's also add in what wasn't taken into account by this video and which is totally relevant, so you will understand and perhaps get it through your head. When the above floors came down onto the immediate floor below and it gave away, that floor didn't just disappear like in the vid. It added its mass to collapse as well. The following floor did the same and so forth and so on till they reached the bottom. Not one floor would have withstood to total weight as it kept getting larger
@drifter01z Look at the list of parameters on the left. In the middle; find the one called "Cap/Tower" which starts at 15% and increases to 100% during the first simulation. "Cap/Tower" is the mass of the falling floors divided by the mass of the entire tower (times 100). Each time a floor is hit by the falling mass, that floor JOINS the falling mass. The LAST simulation assumes SOME of the falling mass goes over the side and fails to hit the lower floors.
@drifter01z How is it that the South tower's, (I think it was), upper block started toppling out to the side & was going to fall over the side of the building. Then, in a split second, it changed its mind and plunged straight down through the centre of most resistance, (actually, I think the top did mostly fall to the side but, incredibly, the tower still started collapsing and continued down to the ground). That should have been totally impossible as there was no huge mass to destroy the tower.
@TheHungrySnail Prove that 15% cannot destroy 85%? Sure. There is no experiment that can show it is possible. Why don't you provide an experiment that can show that it IS possible?
1,600 means nothing... Yea, and your credentials are what?
And show just one video or link proving their scientific findings/theories/conclusions wrong.
Computers get faster and software gets better. Prediction: no reputable group will ever publish a simulation of the towers collapsing all the way to the ground. They would have to assume the steel turned to linguini. Many reputable groups will RUN the simulation, and show the towers COULD NOT collapse all the way to the ground. They will not publish their work. No one enjoys being vilified.
steven jones, who all you conspiracy theorists idiots look up to, ADMITTED that he was wrong and ignored all the evidence. not only that he admitted he carried on peddling BS conspiracy theories so as not to disappoint you morons who believe them. LOL!
ItWasTyped. com under 'conspiracy theories' to realise why all this stuff is nonsense
Pas besoin d'aller chercher loin,le deuxième avion à frapper les twins tower,on voit clairement que ce n'est pas un avion normal de passager avec des ublo(genre de pettite fenêtre) sur les côté de l'avion,sur le 2 avion on ne vois pas de ublo,donc ce n'est pas un avion qui a été pirater par des sois disant terroriste dal qu'aide mes un coup de poker de bush et ses copain pour pouvoir aller en afguanistan et préparer la chute de sadam avait vous tout oublier moi pas et jamais.
1) Girl who had issue with people being able to fly plane so easily, after a flight lesson, learned how relatively easy it is to do.
2) Guy with issue with C.D; after talking to someone about C.D, learns it wasn't C.D
3) Guy who liked the Thermite idea, after doing an ex with Thermite, sees its B.S—the hundreds of pounds or more you'd need for every beam, the time it would take to put it in, the vast people needed, hrs and so on.
@Kill0Your0TV The guy who built this structure, sat at a desk and worked out the load distributions for it, engineered it... has said. "there is no way one floor is going to hold the weight of 14 or more stories landing on it. Not possible. It would collapse instantly and to the foundation" (Les Robertson SE WTC)
What people need to understand here is that the columns hold the vertical loads in the building. The floors do not. They have a load limit of about 1500 tons.
@roquefortfiles You have a link to that? Because I have Lee Robertson saying that he saw a "river of molten steel" at the B1 level of the WTC debris pile. It's in my Favorites. The WTC was designed to withstand almost anything (including jet crashes).
@Kill0Your0TV The WTC was designed to withstand almost anything (including jet crashes).
LOL!! No it wasn't!! It was designed to take the impact of the largest jet of the time. The 707. But that was a consideration that the jet would be on landing approach (IE moving slow). In addition the fuel load was never factored in because they couldn't model it back in 1968.
The scenario of Sept 11th was far and above its design limitations.
Would you like a link to Les Roberston saying this?
@Kill0Your0TV "river of molten steel" at the B1 level.
So what!!. Big deal.
The buildings collapsed in to the parking levels. Filled with cars. No chemical (Thermite etc) reacts for weeks at a time. So shelve that. What does burn for weeks at a time?? Try car gas tanks, car tires, elevator greases. All covered in thousands of tons of debris. When it gets uncovered fresh oxygen is introduced. It flares up even more.
@roquefortfiles "So what!!. Big deal." This quote really shows how you are so blindly passive to scientific facts. It is impossible for normal to elevated fires due to jet fuel to reach temperatures hot enough to cause molten steel as seen dripping from the towers. Molten steel does not feed off oxygen, there is some common sense. If you argue it is molten aluminum, you are sadly wrong. Here is something for nonsensical mind to figure out. If these temperatures where hot enough initially to
@roquefortfiles collapse columns, how were there survivors noticed at the plane's impact are. Would these temperatures of over 1800 C not set them on fire....? Because scientifically to make these columns collapse that is the temperature it would have to over exceed.
@joshbarber89 There's a thing called communication. I have no idea what you are talking about. If you want to spend your time posting cryptic half messages that's your problem. If you want me to reply to something. Then direct me to it. Or post it.
This has been flagged as spam show
All you got to do to see that 911 was an inside job is look at the way bush acted he had no surprise, NO SHOCK at all he just sat there. If i was pres and someone came and told me we are under attack i would of been SHOCKED ! He just sat there, watch the vid and the way he acts and you can tell it's an inside job. TO FUCKIN OBVIOUS!!! THE FIRST REACTION SHOULD OF BEEN SOMETHING OTHER THAN SIT THERE LOOKING GUILTY.COMON PEOPLE GO ARREST THE REAL TERRORIST!!!!!
dan32749 1 day ago
I am sure the A&E's are willing to take that project on for free to prove a point also @anthonya241 .
The people of the world just need to invest the money for materials, rather then spending it on fema camps and the war on "terror".
That just may be our reinvestigation because there is no way they will allow it to be reinvestigated with an international team.
11kungfu11 1 week ago
Video made by morons for other morons to make them feel clever.
psorff 1 week ago
This video is very unconvincing
princenoah21 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Israel did 911.
TakeOurWorldBack (dot) com
YouTube video: 911 Missing Links
Zion Crime Factory (dot) com
And the Truth will set the World free!
Sockpuppet2012 2 weeks ago
just search dimitri khalezov right now and hell answer your questions, the only way to make the towers fall at those speeds is to completely pulverize 60-70% of the steel in the towers, and the only way to pulverize steel is with nuclear technology
poznanski666 2 weeks ago
ok how did a plane crash cause chunks of steel and pulverized concrete to be ejected from the building many 100's of feet shortly b4 the collapse.
TheMrfrawg 3 weeks ago
@TheMrfrawg
there were no chunks of steel ejected before the collapse
good lord what a lie
Denierbud11 2 weeks ago
@Denierbud11 Hey, moron, YouTube search "9/11 tower squigs" then come back and talk. Thank you. You were just proven wrong. Anything else you'd like to say? I didn't think so.
Thjeca 2 weeks ago
@Thjeca
the squibs occurred during the collapse, not prior to the collapse -- and the squibs were not throwing steel hundreds of feet -- at most,they were throwing glass
want to try again?
Denierbud11 2 weeks ago
@Denierbud11 Look at the damn videos. It's right here on YouTube. And they were not mostly throwing glass. Again, if you saw the video, you would know.
Thjeca 2 weeks ago
@Thjeca
the squibs occurred during the collapse
Denierbud11 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheMrfrawg
Wow.
"How did a plane crash cause chunks of steel and pulverized concrete to be ejected from the building many 100's of feet shortly b4 the collapse."
Absolutely pathetic. It's because of dumbasses like you that the 9/11 lunatic fringe is ridiculed.
gz798t6 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Israel did 911.
TakeOurWorldBack (dot) com
YouTube video: 911 Missing Links
Zion Crime Factory (dot) com
And the Truth will set the World free!
Sockpuppet2012 3 weeks ago
proof?? bwahahaha. It looks like an Atari video game from 1980...
upupandawaayyyyyyyy 3 weeks ago
compromised integrity of the core columns lead to redistribution of weight to the core. the floors supported the walls which supported the building. When they failed, the walls were left with a freestanding ring of walls over 5 floors tall. They could not support the weight and failed. I do think the original report was flawed, but I think they were on the right track. HOWEVER, their explanation of building 7 is f*cked up…
that's my opinion of what happened...
anthonya241 3 weeks ago
@anthonya241 so the elapsed fall time never concerned you? its simple math and not so simple physics; but pancaking would have added time no? if you can get your brain around building 7 why not the others? and imo w/out internal explosions buildings don't fall straight down into their own footprint; or if so please provide a link that shows ANY besides the towers....mmmmkay thanks.
TheMrfrawg 2 weeks ago
was pulverized by the debris mass falling. The volume of air burst the windows. If the tower did indeed collapse in 12-15 seconds, that is longer than freefall. Notice how freefalling pieces of steel protected outwards hit the ground when the collapse was only 2/3rds down the building… NOT freefall speed of collapse. The reason why the collapse initiated was because the combination of the vertical downward blast from the fireball, the weight of the plane debris, and the
anthonya241 3 weeks ago
this would explain the debris popping out the windows, if the floors pancaked together, displacing the floors slightly ahead of the mountain of debris which was floors 79 - 110, the debris pile could now collapse the core, more pressure on a smaller area, enough to bend the beams out of the way and cave in the structure. After the first 6 or 7 seconds, there was more than enough smoke to hide the collapse slowing down. The reason why there was so much ash is because the drywall and concrete...
anthonya241 3 weeks ago
In my opinion, I think that the collapse slowed as it traveled progressively further down the building. There was so much weight above the impact that the initial collapse could have crushed the building in 12 seconds. Another think to remember is that the upper portion did not stay intact on the way down, it disintegrated sending a cascade of debris through the tower within the confines of the outer walls. In fact, the floors most likely began collapsing a good 2 to 3 seconds before the rest
anthonya241 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Israel did 911.
TakeOurWorldBack (dot) com
YouTube video: 911 Missing Links
Zion Crime Factory (dot) com
And the Truth will set the World free!
Sockpuppet2012 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK
/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o
9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3; Low-Res.
/watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ
9/11 - Missing Links ( full movie )
/watch?v=GD_vwzjdTi4
Why The Military Knows Israel Did 9/11
/watch?v=kVKGRB3cygg
Sockpuppet2012 4 weeks ago
And another Truther video with a poor grasp of physics.
Why is this not in Nature? Or Science? Or any other highly acclaimed peer-reviewed journal? Surely, if you're correct and the science matches up, you can gain international stardom and vast wealth overnight.
You wanna know why that doesn't happen?
Because you're WRONG. Your physics are WRONG.
WindmillStalker 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Israel did 911.
TakeOurWorldBack (dot) com
YouTube video: 911 Missing Links
And the Truth will set the World free!
Sockpuppet2012 4 weeks ago
This is directed to the maker of this video. You "mention" conservation of momentum as the basis for your argument. However conservation of momentum only applies in the absence of a net force. So I must ask did you not take the gravitational force into account?
Physman2011 1 month ago 6
@pocomedy how the hell did your F'd up logic prove anything about demolition theory.
Who says you can't have demolition that high up? Its explosives. Explosives will do what they fucking do!!
You familiar with the terms "Derp, derp?"
TheSmittel 1 month ago
@anthonya241 Thats really not necessary. A plane cannot crash into the building anywhere and take out the "core resistance" Unless building spontaneosly began collapsing immediately or within seconds of plane collision. But even then, the collapse will not be symmetrical, would not occur as rapidly (As video showed) and wouldn't be complete. You could make a replica of WTC wood and still wouldn't cause such complete destruction by flying a plane into it.
TheSmittel 1 month ago
I swear the only way to resolve the collapse is to build a full size replica and fly a plane into it...
anthonya241 1 month ago 31
@anthonya241
For scientists and engineers who understand basic physics, conservation of momentum, energy absorption, and some other rather simple things - it's not necessary.
However, for people who are ignorant of anything more complicated than an apple falling from a tree - nothing less that a full scale replica will suffice. Even then, some people would still look for an excuse to discredit the experiment. (Wrong phase of the moon, pilots weren't Arabs, etc)
KDanagger 1 month ago
@anthonya241 Or to send everyone to college physics courses.
For anyone with "some knowledge" it is sooooo obvious ...
MrPierrePhilippe 1 month ago
@anthonya241
Actually they already did this.... When a plane flew into the tower on 9/11/2001
macstecko 3 weeks ago
@anthonya241 The Empire state building DID NOT collapsed when it was hit by an airforce bomber.
youtube
.
/ZD69sP51u-s
.
small fires here and there just like WTC but it didnt collapsed .Engineers made WTC to resist two 747 planes crash. and naturally office fires too. The speed at which WTC collapse and its perfect fall on its own foot print shows there was something inside breaking very thick steel beams in a very timely way. and WTC7 falled in 6 secs without any plane hit
Vann7 3 weeks ago
@Vann7 Empire State building used an entirely differen't construction method. Please do some research because if you did you wouldn't mention it
Spindry96 3 weeks ago
@anthonya241
I agree, will settle all arguments once and for all.
legend4rygun 3 weeks ago
@anthonya241 ill help build it for free; but i can only fly prop jobs or id offer to pilot as well and jump out once autopilot was set; be one heck of a ride and view.
TheMrfrawg 3 weeks ago
@anthonya241 Yeah but then they'll say that's staged as well!
mackat4ck 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Israel did 911.
TakeOurWorldBack (dot) com
YouTube video: 911 Missing Links
And the Truth will set the World free!
Sockpuppet2012 1 month ago in playlist 911 Comments
This has been flagged as spam show
NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK
/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o
9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3; Low-Res.
/watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ
9/11 - Missing Links ( full movie )
/watch?v=GD_vwzjdTi4
Why The Military Knows Israel Did 9/11
/watch?v=kVKGRB3cygg
Sockpuppet2012 1 month ago in playlist 911 Comments
The NIST said, the heat from the fires sagged the trusses which bowed the columns inward CAUSING the collapse. The building didn't pancake CAUSING the collapse but evidence is strong the building pancaked AFTER the collapse was "inevitable".
steveo1274 1 month ago
@steveo1274 you cant have a controlled demolition that high up! If they were taken down by explosions it would have to be at the ground level! Oh wait a second I recall terroists tried to do that exact thing in 1993 and failed, proving my point that the demolition theory is absolute bull shit!
pocomedy 1 month ago
@pocomedy these terrorists didnt use nanothermite cutter charges that could melt through steel.
yet another dumbass debunker agumnt(like on nanotional geographic when they used a bag of thermite and couldnt melt through anything)..yet somehow this guy used a home made cutter charge to cut through steel../watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
LandlessPeasantFuck 4 weeks ago
@pocomedy Are you trying to say that the WTC towers were somehow impervious to demolitions by using the failed terrorist attack of 1993 as your proof? Dude ALL buildings can be brought down with demolitions! The 1993 bombing was not in the same class as a professional demolitions exercise! And top-down demolitions do exist and are carried out in the real world, theres videos of them on youtube. Believe what you want but try to think rationally before you come to your conclusions
CokeSupply 3 weeks ago
@CokeSupply the 1993 FBI bomb that went off wasnt placed close enough to the pillar which is the official reason why it failed.
FnkDctr 3 weeks ago
@FnkDctr Yeah that too lol ;)
CokeSupply 3 weeks ago
*sigh* Think of of it like this in terms of how it fell: One floor at a time. Everyone seems to act like all of the floors simultaneously fell. No, one floor collapses another, then these two floors collapse the third. These 3 collapse the fourth, etc.
I'm in 9th grade pointing out something common sense. Either you people are younger than myself... or just stupid.
TehGamersGarage 1 month ago
@TehGamersGarage The pancake theory was rejected.
stealspell 1 month ago
@stealspell By you? Yes By simple logic? Nope.
TehGamersGarage 1 month ago
@TehGamersGarage By simple logic, the earth is flat. By science, it's spherical. Try again.
stealspell 1 month ago
@stealspell Simple logic says the earth is round. Hence the reason no one has fallen off of it.
Try again.
TehGamersGarage 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TehGamersGarage "Simple logic says the earth is round." Do explain to this feeble mind of mine how "simple" this logic is that says the earth is round. I would appreciate an argument with premises and conclusion, preferably a "simple" one.
stealspell 1 month ago
@TehGamersGarage Yes you are stupid, but you cab change that. The buildings exploded outward. The pile of ruble was about 30' tall, a pancake collapse would have left a pile closer to 200'. Bone fragments on surrounding buildings and of course Building 7.
UNTC321 1 month ago
@UNTC321 The exploded outward? Those weren't explosions, you asshat, that was air. Explosions are much larger and soooo much louder. Those "Explosions" as you oh, so ignorantly call them, are each floors compressed out pushing outward. It's like sitting down on a Whoopee-Cushion. The air inside pushes outward as the pressure from above collapses onto it.
*sigh* Why are you so stupid?
TehGamersGarage 1 month ago
becuase a plane flew into it?
xLehotsky88x 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Israel did 911.
TakeOurWorldBack (dot) com
YouTube video: 911 Missing Links
And the Truth will set the World free!
Sockpuppet2012 1 month ago in playlist 911 Comments
This has been flagged as spam show
NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT - 9/11 PENTAGON ATTACK
/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o
9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3; Low-Res.
/watch?v=lw-jzCfa4eQ
9/11 - Missing Links ( full movie )
/watch?v=GD_vwzjdTi4
Why The Military Knows Israel Did 9/11
/watch?v=kVKGRB3cygg
Sockpuppet2012 1 month ago in playlist 911 Comments
You know, even if people go "The lower floors were built stronger than the upper floors", it doesn't mean that the lower floors were still containing that same strength.
Remember when the bottom of the towers were bombed years earlier? That weakened the lower floors, obviously. Besides, even if the lower floors still WERE as strong, they wouldn't be able to withstand added weight of an entire floor of debris for every floor that falls.
TehGamersGarage 1 month ago
@TehGamersGarage so your saying the building can't support the weight of the floors that have been there since its construction. That statement is just brimming with brilliance. And with the added debris theory you came up within the buildings design for that to be possible each floor would need to be independently supported but thats now how buildings work each floor is supported by a core structure that runs through the entire building 15 floors can't crush 95 floors of structually sound steel
rezistorXG 1 month ago
@rezistorXG *facepalm* Again, you forget about the weakened structure of the building regarding the bombings of years prior. With a weakened structure, all the weight of the 15 floors combine into one large weidhgt that troubled the weakened structure into collapsing, floor by floor.
Each floor adds to this weight, creating more of more force going downward into another floor, which then adds more weight, etc. etc.
Read my comment several times over if you have to. Makes more sense.
TehGamersGarage 1 month ago
@TehGamersGarage Surely they reinforced the structure to its former load bearing capacity after the bombings or even strengthened them further to resist future attacks. I have no idea if they did this or not as i haven't yet researched it but it only seems logical to put in those kinds of safety measures. Also the rest of the building (the center, assuming the bottom remained weakened) should have provided resistance and stopped the building falling at such speed.
XmadmanREBornX 1 month ago
@TehGamersGarage And Building 7 had the same weakened structure, yet fell the same as the Tower 1 and 2 ?
OutlawMCC 1 month ago
the towers were blown up whats the big deal anyway??everybody knows that now...who dont believe it,r stupid...
HANNIBAL30ro 1 month ago
even if the towers did fall due to fire and impact damage (which I doubt) 911 was still an inside job. Just look at the Pentagon evidence, or lack thereof
MarshallLore 1 month ago
Further the collapse itself was not near FF speed. It was a full 50% slower. If u watch, the outer columns and materials that are falling free of the structure (and indeed falling at FF) hit the ground a full 5 or 6 seconds after the inner core. In fact u can see at least 40-50 stories of inner core still standing when the outer columns hit.
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
@Shamrock3939
So building 7 vineraged too, right?
saculnaMnomaR 1 month ago
@cyd. Google "verinage" and u will see that u r completely wrong. Ur grasp of the physical nature of collapses seems to rest on the thought that the bldg structure itself is one continuous piece of steel. It obviously is not and once the KE is strong enough to overcome the rivets holding together the connections, collapse cannot be stopped.
But seriously, verinage should put to bed ur concerns
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
Therefore, why would the government plant bombs and take the risk of many things going wrong and put into jeopardy all that was accomplished to that point? The buildings need not have to fall. Planting of bombs for a controlled demolition would have taken a large amount of people a long time all working quietly in secrecy. It would be near impossible that there wouldn’t be a leak given the potential high death rates on fellow citizens or that something wouldn’t be detected by others.
1Dougy85 1 month ago
Do some people ever wonder why the buildings had to be brought down either by planes or explosives? For one thing, even if the towers didn’t fall, the terrorists still would have been successful in their attack the minute the planes crashed into the towers. If it was an inside job, for which there is no evidence, the drones or missiles or 767s hitting the towers would have also accomplished the mission of a false flag operation and dragged the country to war.
1Dougy85 1 month ago
Keep in mind that the video is not even showing resistance of the building yet....You might say, "but gravity is a continuous driving force"...Well so is the force of resistance by the building opposing gravity. Here, only the effect of gravity alone is shown along with decreasing mass as the collapse explodes. Consider now, that the building is also pushing back up, opposing collapse, as it was IN REALITY, and wallah, you don't get collapse.
cydoniaquest 1 month ago
@cydoniaquest I think it very understandable that you do get collapse. Three components were involved in keeping the building up. Two of these were opposing gravity, as you say pushing back up. While one component, the floors, without which the other two could not stand on their own, were pushing down and holding it all together. Look at the outer walls. These were made up of panel sections of 3 steel columns welded together with 3 sheets of steel that were simply bolted to other panel sections.
1Dougy85 1 month ago
@1Dougy85 You're forgetting the columns. THOSE are the structures that oppose the force of gravity and keep the buildings "up". It is a physical impossibility, to simultaneously and explosively tear down those columns with the same weight they always supported, while at or near free fall acceleration. As this vid clip shows, figuring only inertia alone without taking into account building resistance, or air resistance, it still takes 11 seconds for collapse.
cydoniaquest 1 month ago
@cydoniaquest I didn't forget the inner core. I first wanted to just talk about the outer walls to see if you agreed how understandably they could be demolished. The outer wall columns are also the structure that oppose the force of gravity and keep the buildings up. There are also the floors, the third component. I take it you agree on the destruction of the outer walls and how the falling rubble from above could easily knock those panel sections apart?
1Dougy85 1 month ago
@cydoniaquest When the collapse started and the top of the towers fell the weight of the whole building top pushed down and inwards or outwards on the outer wall panel sections sheering the bolts that held them together. Likewise, the bolts of the panel sections that made up the falling building top sheered. Quickly, there was an ever growing mass of panel sections falling at an ever increasing velocity sheering bolts and knocking free the panel sections that made up the outer walls.
1Dougy85 1 month ago
@azar. Not sure what the point is. And believe me, for me it's not about the govt. i retired from the FDNY a few years ago, I know many many many people who cleaned up the mess. Not one (and this includes steel workers/ demolition teams have ever found any evidence of CD. And the case of thermetic dust is not proof. Thermite leaves behind the same byproducts as paint primer
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
Oh yeah, and of verinage were used, the hydraulic lifts would have been left in the debris. No one reports ever finding such a device.
Not to mention the initial collapse begins right at the jet impact sites suggesting that if verinage were used, the lifts were at the exact floors struck by the jets. The idea that they survived the jets exploding into the bldgs and subsequent fires also should dismiss the theory as untenable
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
I think if the government had it to do over again they would make explosives and thermate part of the official story but blame it on Osama and the boys. "See, they hate our freedom so much just look what they did. The sneaky bastards put explosives..."
Skeptic121 1 month ago
@yikes. Verinage requires massive hydraulic lifts attached to many columns and u 1st have to cut the columns by hand or disconnect the joist/columns junctions by hand. The work that requires alone makes it an unreasonable technique here, not to mention I would think someone inside the bldgs would notice gigantic lifts attached to bldg supports. Not a reasonable theory
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
The reason the officer was saying that was the FDNY determined collapse was imminent due to damage and fire. They created a collapse zone around the perimeter of #7. Unless u believe the FDNY, NYPD and city engineers are complicit in a demolition then ur observation about the officer is mis guided
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think the controlled demolition was operated from the building 7. We might find people coming out of building 7 who caused it, moments after twin towers were down. I saw a police officer asking people to move away from building 7 before it collapsed.
anilsadaram 1 month ago
@qft. If u watch the video of 7, the east penthouse falls into the structure a full 5 seconds before any exterior wall is seen falling. The entire collapse took about 15 seconds. This is not in dispute. But ur point about a guy looking at siesmic data, I don't know who claimed that, but the entire site was watched closely by FDNY and none have ever claimed to hear detonations just prior to collapse. That's NONE. Explosions that were heard were hours before the collapse and likely were the cars
Shamrock3939 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Do a google search for "seismic signal of wtc building 7", this is the STRONGEST evidence that the building fell just under 10 seconds. One researcher even claims that by analyzing the data even more closely he can detect explosives before the building fell.
QFT2 1 month ago
Except the upper section wasn't seen crushing anything, it too was reduced to rubble, and it started falling to the side already the first 20 feet. The building was demolished progressively by highly advanced explosive containers placed near the core columns.
Xendrius 1 month ago
Yeah you had extra energy. About 2 tons of highly explosive Plane fuel!
KaBar41 2 months ago
What most people are forgetting, is that the tops of the buildings weren't the only things collapsing. When the collapse reaches lower levels, its mass increases because it has gained the additional floors it has reached. And it is moving faster because it has been falling for longer so it accelerates. P=mv. p is momentum, m is mass, v is velocity. If both m and v increase (which i just showed they did) then p (momentum) will increase exponentially. Thats why the towers collapsed.
vivalaryan54 2 months ago
@vivalaryan54 oh boy...truthers did you follow that.......afraid you lost them
yikesoyikes1 1 month ago
@yikesoyikes1 yeah thats because 9/11 truthers are a bunch of idiots who cannot understand simple physics
vivalaryan54 1 month ago
@killurtv. "gravity collapses slow down and eventually stop". Ur theory is totally disproven by verinage. Totally. So stop with the non sense. Not to mention there is no evidence anywhere suggesting CD.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
Explosives are easy to trace and yet no traces of explosives were ever found.? Im not sure what ur getting at I think ur saying that the perps planted bombs that they hoped people wouldnt hear and see and had no plausible explanation for if they did?
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Im Mr. Newton, and I've something to say." "Im confused bcs u've tried to debunk the laws I have created." "First. When u watch the collapsing u can see it accelerates". "I've discovered that the acceleration is possible only when there's empty space below the falling object". "The other tip even tilted. That means the kinetic energy more or less moved away from the tower. Still the tower pulverized all the way down". "Now I go back to my grave and write new laws which work only in America".
Scumbot404 2 months ago
All these ridiculous conspiracy theories, before you know it, people will be saying, "The towers never could have collapsed because THEY WERE NEVER THERE TO BEGIN WITH!!! THEY WERE AN ILLUSION MADE BY THE GOVERNMENT AND JFK'S ZOMBIE INVENTED THE PLAN!!! GAAAASSSSP!!!!" Terrorists crashed planes into the buildings, which destroyed them. I just can't understand why it is so impossible for people to get that.
FunkyGranny9 2 months ago
Further. If bombs actually were involved don't u think the conspirators would just make that the theme ie- terrorists planted bombs.
In CD the explosions are directed at the columns and trusses and wouldn't blow anyone off their feet unless they were standing right next to a column or truss. The FF u r talking about we're standing near elevator shafts.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 No they wouldn't have said terrorists planted the bombs because that would be a lot easier to find out who did it. There would be security and a helluva a lot of rag heads that know very technical stuff for them to come down the way they did. explosives are easy to trace and so would some Muslims who knew the fine are of Controlled Demolitions. This way the perps die along with the opportunity to cross examine and prosecute.
Ultramediacorp 2 months ago
@thrice. . There was an effort to have a FF for 9/11truth started by one member and he couldn't get any FDNY to join. Some FF joined but none that I know of were FDNY. Many members thought that bombs and secondary devices Were involved that day, soon after they realized that was not the case. (Including me btw)
There were rumors of bombs all day. In fact the empire state bldg was evacuated that evening due to an apparent bomb. Most people don't realize that
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
I missed typed. The post earlier should read that NONE of those agancies involved in NYC support the CD theory. And why would they?
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 Actually there are many NY firefighters and police that have gone on record to say that it was a controlled demo. There are quite a few fire fighters that reported being blown off of their feet by explosions during their rescue mission. Watch the trailer for "the ultimate con"
thricefelt 2 months ago
@punx. Tell me how the laws of physics were defied that day? The A&E guys put in their movie ( not in any science journal where peers can debate its merits like real scientist do). But u tell me where newton failed.
FF acceleration? That never happened
Molten steel? Sorry wrong again. No one ever claimed steel melted. It didn't have to.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
By the way, not any 1st responder who was actually in my shares the views of ur 1500. That incl steel workers who worked the pile and not a single one reported finding any evidence of CD. Were any of ur 1500 experts there? The FDNY, NYPD, PAPD, city engineers, steel workers, military personel, FEMA, NIST, FBI , etc share the views of ur 1500. Get the picture
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@punx. The A&e movement has 1500 "experts". Not one of which has been published in peer reviewed science journals concerning how the collapses defied physics. Not a single one
Dr bazant journal reviewed article is accepted by hundreds of universities, demolition companies, engineering firms, etc. it is literally ur 1500 "experts" vs the entire scientific community. 99.99 % vs. .01 %.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
Bull shit
maskaryan 2 months ago
How The Twin Towers Collapsed
Copy and paste this title into the search bar and watch the video.
How much weight would there be if 4" of concrete covered EACH floor??
South tower collapsed first because it was struck lower than the north Tower.
dh190852 2 months ago
Oh well biggie u convinced me. I guess dr bazant doesn't know physics as well as the hundreds of universities world wide and demolition companies and engineering firms who likewise share his view. U can say all u want that physics were defied but unless u prove it, ur just a lot of hot air and no substance. U dont even try to explain how they defy physics. U just repeat what u hear on YouTube. Sad
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 Dr. Bazant's crush-down, crush-up model is inconsistent with what happened in both towers: 40 stories of the lower core survived the collapses of the outer floors, and then themselves fell straight down. Dr. Bazant's piledriver model requires that the piledriver take down the cores at the same time that the outer floors go down. It thus does not explain why the cores collapsed, and neither does NIST. Dr. Bazant's centroid theory too is impossible.
punxsutawneybarney 2 months ago
@biggie. WRONG.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 Sorry, no.
biggiedickson 2 months ago
The 9-11 commission report goes against known physics.
biggiedickson 2 months ago
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 good work!
yikesoyikes1 1 month ago
@biggie, Dr. Bazant, one of Americas top structural engineers has published exactly the mathematical model. Its in peer reviewed engineering journals. Not one truther has EVER submitted a peer reviewed journal article refuting this. So this guy publishes and is universally accepted as a leading expert and he has proof physics were NOT defied.
You have rude and irelevent comments with no scientific backing. I guess you just got the wrong physics book.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
At biggie, call me all the names you want. U cannot show me in any way how the laws of physics was defied. I've got nearly every universities physics and engineering departments supporting the none CD rationale for bldg collapse. I've got actual mathematics showing exactly how the bldgs collapsed. Uve got nothing but speculation and hyperbole. Aren't u just the least bit curious why no legitimate university and hardly any engineering firms share ur delusion? I guess they r idiots too
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
Dr bazant, one of America's top structural engineers has clearly demonstrated the mathematical model for the collapses. He did so in a peer reviewed journal and it's undeniable. @killurtmv. The fact that u say it couldn't happen is useless. Show me the peer reviewed truther model saying it couldn't happen? U can't so don't waste ur time. Instead of just saying things can't happen based on ur clearly limited knowlege of physics, read actual physics journals. U may become informed
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 So NIST can't explain it, but Dr Bazant claims he can? That's nice. Now show an experiment, computer model with open source, or show a similar collapse. Let me know when that happens.
Kill0Your0TV 2 months ago
@Kill0Your0TV ur desperation is getting palpable. NIST has offered clear cut rationale for the towers collapse. U r playing a shell game with the facts. Where they offered little detail was in number 7. But either way, u avoiding the central question that no truther "expert" has ever been published in any peer reviewed journal is typical. Ur movement is losing and getting comical. Show me a bldg that gets hit by jets and maybe ill be able to show u similar collapses.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Kill0Your0TV I find it hilarious that u dismiss NIST as an expert on anything and now u r using them for some meaningless point. And u lie that they have no explanation for tower 1 and 2 collapse. That fact alone dismisses u as relevent in any discussion, but we already knew that. U have nothing supporting ur beliefs except some youtube "experts" or A & E movement which has been summarily dismissed by scientist who expect more than hyperbole as a basis for argument.
Shamrock3939 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 You're an idiot.
biggiedickson 2 months ago
@Shamrock3939 See the movie made by the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, "9/11 - Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out". In it licensed structural engineers, high-rise architects, and physicists tell you exactly what laws of physics are inconsistent with the official collapse theories, and exactly how they are inconsistent.
punxsutawneybarney 2 months ago
without extra Energy? A damn plane crashed into it filled with gasoline. the building had to be loaded with paper. can your program account for how much weight the frame could hold? lets add in a loss of support plus A FUCKING PLANE THAT WEIGHS A TON. Dont be stupid that building went down whatever you payed for that program was a waste of money because all it did was prove your dumb
sodaiznice 2 months ago
@sodaiznice Wow, you should seriously consider reading a physics book.
biggiedickson 2 months ago
@biggiedickson what did i say that wasn't true? is gas not explosive? do planes not way a ton? was the building not filled with paper? was said paper not flammable?
sodaiznice 2 months ago
@sodaiznice A ton would not be much load for the building to take. Office floors are commonly designed for a live load of 40 pounds per square foot with a safety factor. Your 1-ton aircraft would only require 50 square feet, or a 7 foot by 7 foot floor space to hold it up. You're barking up the wrong tree.
punxsutawneybarney 2 months ago
@punxsutawneybarney my apologies "a ton" as in "a lot" a 747 passenger airline empty weighs about 600,000 pounds which is 272 tons but we can assume that the planes where not empty..on takeoff they weigh roughly 900,000 which converts to 408 tons...1 pound=.0004 tons I left out the decimals in the conversions but yo get the idea (I am using a metric ton)
sodaiznice 2 months ago
i just dont see how 15 floors vs 95, fire burned, fuel fuelled, the momentum could take all 95. for tower one. How two steel structures could fall the same pattern with diff areas touched. And a third building magically falling the same exact way.. like 7, 8 hours later.
smeganrocks87 3 months ago 2
I don't know about you all but the first thing I said upon hearing of the collapses , and i remember hearing most other people saying it too, was "how in the hell did they just fall down, were there bombs")? Disregarding the actual collapses entirely, the huge amount of highly suspicious events surrounding that day (the list is a mile long) and the obvious corruption of the investigation should make it obvious to anyone that something is up.
KurtG85 3 months ago 4
@Kill0Your0TV
All it takes is %20 of weak steel to crush past %80 more of a such rickety built structures. A few well placed gallons of Kerosene and a few hours is all it takes.
It just "JOINS the falling mass" and goes faster & faster & faster.
Completely ignoring my 6th grader physics text book mind you.
(LOL)
GnosticNinja 3 months ago
an object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a greater or equal opposite force. The Struts could not maintain their integrity when the above tonages came crashing down with enough force to pulverize concrete into dust. It's basic physics so I'm wondering why some people have such a hard time realizing it is totally possible for it to have occured by gravity collapse.
drifter01z 3 months ago
This video does not prove explosives were used. It could have been something else. Maybe the rivets were secretly removed from the core columns so they became just a delicately balanced stack of blocks. Maybe the French technique called "verinage" was used. See YT for verinage. Sorry, I don't have the French accent mark over the first "e"... Maybe many techniques were used. What this video shows is the official story cannot be true. That is all.
Skeptic121 3 months ago
@Skeptic121 not sure how the rivets could be removed and your theory of "verinage" is interesting...a tech. which does not use explosives but drops one floor onto the next which then continues to the next...hmmmm...isn't that what could have ocurred here but with no floor demo...just the crash and the fire.
yikesoyikes1 1 month ago
@TheHungrySnail You've said what that is true? You haven't proven that 15% can destroy 85%, have you? You have a link to anything that proves the official theory (whatever that is this month)?
I've read most government-approved drivel before. The evidence of a cover-up is so obvious and overwhelming that you'd have to be mentally retarded or a government shill to keep denying it.
Kill0Your0TV 3 months ago
@roquefortfiles Thanks for correcting me. Shame on those who do not see ur point. U r now my 2nd Idol. My 1st is Bill O'Reilly. So much Wisdom. Why people do not see that Saddam Hussein and his WMDs caused all of this? Why is it that people do not respect our soldiers who have killed over 1 Million terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, so that we can have Democracy Freedom? I shall spread the word and give you my heartfelt support for your Remarkable Patriotism. Long Live The Bush Family!
VolodiaTheElder 3 months ago
ok when all that happend alot of people told me they fell bc the gas from the plane heated the still up and made it soft
andrewprestonshaffer 3 months ago
What about the structural damage caused by the buildings being hit by the planes? It doesn't look like this reconstruction took that into account. When the planes hit it weakened the entire building structure not just the portion at the top. Reconfigure your tests to include that and I will guarantee you will have vastly different results. The hits were registered on the richter scales. So don't even try to say they had no effect on the whole building.
drifter01z 3 months ago
@drifter01z This simulation assumes the beams offered NO SUPPORT once hit by falling debris from above. How to visualize it: assume the WTC columns were INFINITELY brittle. Once even touched by falling debris, each floor's columns shattered into dust. Of course this is a wrong assumption: that's the whole point. With this ridiculous assumption, the simulation looks EXACTLY like what happened. That means explosives or thermate or something removed the steel columns during collapse.
Skeptic121 3 months ago
@Skeptic121 No it doesn't. If the beams offered no support the visulization would have shown a complete collapse. And it wasn't necessarily the columns that gave away. If you watch the actual footage of the WTC building you will see the core columns jutting upward as the remains collapsed past them. It was the rivet system that gave away once the above floors collapsed from above, not the collumns. There was a core column spire that was still standing for a short while after the buiding fell.
drifter01z 3 months ago
@drifter01z Did you happen to see the list of parameters on the left? Did you notice "Core Resistance" and "Perim Resistance"? Did you happen to see the values of 0% for each? How do you interpret those numbers? All but the last simulation showed complete collapse. The last simulation assumes some of the falling mass fell over the side after each floor collapse. I mentioned possible tampering with the rivets in my earlier comments.
Skeptic121 3 months ago
@Skeptic121 Let's also add in what wasn't taken into account by this video and which is totally relevant, so you will understand and perhaps get it through your head. When the above floors came down onto the immediate floor below and it gave away, that floor didn't just disappear like in the vid. It added its mass to collapse as well. The following floor did the same and so forth and so on till they reached the bottom. Not one floor would have withstood to total weight as it kept getting larger
drifter01z 3 months ago
@drifter01z Look at the list of parameters on the left. In the middle; find the one called "Cap/Tower" which starts at 15% and increases to 100% during the first simulation. "Cap/Tower" is the mass of the falling floors divided by the mass of the entire tower (times 100). Each time a floor is hit by the falling mass, that floor JOINS the falling mass. The LAST simulation assumes SOME of the falling mass goes over the side and fails to hit the lower floors.
Skeptic121 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drifter01z How is it that the South tower's, (I think it was), upper block started toppling out to the side & was going to fall over the side of the building. Then, in a split second, it changed its mind and plunged straight down through the centre of most resistance, (actually, I think the top did mostly fall to the side but, incredibly, the tower still started collapsing and continued down to the ground). That should have been totally impossible as there was no huge mass to destroy the tower.
CalumGilhooly 3 months ago
@TheHungrySnail Prove that 15% cannot destroy 85%? Sure. There is no experiment that can show it is possible. Why don't you provide an experiment that can show that it IS possible?
1,600 means nothing... Yea, and your credentials are what?
And show just one video or link proving their scientific findings/theories/conclusions wrong.
You're blowing bullshit.
Kill0Your0TV 3 months ago
Computers get faster and software gets better. Prediction: no reputable group will ever publish a simulation of the towers collapsing all the way to the ground. They would have to assume the steel turned to linguini. Many reputable groups will RUN the simulation, and show the towers COULD NOT collapse all the way to the ground. They will not publish their work. No one enjoys being vilified.
Skeptic121 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
steven jones, who all you conspiracy theorists idiots look up to, ADMITTED that he was wrong and ignored all the evidence. not only that he admitted he carried on peddling BS conspiracy theories so as not to disappoint you morons who believe them. LOL!
ItWasTyped. com under 'conspiracy theories' to realise why all this stuff is nonsense
culturebully3 3 months ago
The tower is designed to have the biggest insurance ever. Connecting with terrorist approved the payment. Sad.
pogpog28 3 months ago
@pogpog28 You have any sources to that or is it just your believes?
cACTIfARM 3 months ago
Pas besoin d'aller chercher loin,le deuxième avion à frapper les twins tower,on voit clairement que ce n'est pas un avion normal de passager avec des ublo(genre de pettite fenêtre) sur les côté de l'avion,sur le 2 avion on ne vois pas de ublo,donc ce n'est pas un avion qui a été pirater par des sois disant terroriste dal qu'aide mes un coup de poker de bush et ses copain pour pouvoir aller en afguanistan et préparer la chute de sadam avait vous tout oublier moi pas et jamais.
NIBIRUTHEJUGEMENT 3 months ago
I'm watching: 9/11 Conspiracy Road Trip.
1) Girl who had issue with people being able to fly plane so easily, after a flight lesson, learned how relatively easy it is to do.
2) Guy with issue with C.D; after talking to someone about C.D, learns it wasn't C.D
3) Guy who liked the Thermite idea, after doing an ex with Thermite, sees its B.S—the hundreds of pounds or more you'd need for every beam, the time it would take to put it in, the vast people needed, hrs and so on.
This Conspiracy is B.s
willdrake1 4 months ago
fuck you troofer morons.
aegisgfx 4 months ago
@aegisgfx Bring it.
joshbarber89 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How anyone can say that this destruction was casued by fires and failing steel is beyond me.
Watch the high quality video below and observe how all those steel beams are being blasted horizontally outward, hundreds of feet in the air.
What kind of force was required to do that?
Its pretty obvious!
/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98
TyroneSandalphon 4 months ago
15% of the structure cannot destroy 85% of the undamaged structure, let alone destroying 100% of itself.
Kill0Your0TV 4 months ago 7
@Kill0Your0TV The guy who built this structure, sat at a desk and worked out the load distributions for it, engineered it... has said. "there is no way one floor is going to hold the weight of 14 or more stories landing on it. Not possible. It would collapse instantly and to the foundation" (Les Robertson SE WTC)
What people need to understand here is that the columns hold the vertical loads in the building. The floors do not. They have a load limit of about 1500 tons.
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles You have a link to that? Because I have Lee Robertson saying that he saw a "river of molten steel" at the B1 level of the WTC debris pile. It's in my Favorites. The WTC was designed to withstand almost anything (including jet crashes).
Kill0Your0TV 4 months ago 7
@Kill0Your0TV The WTC was designed to withstand almost anything (including jet crashes).
LOL!! No it wasn't!! It was designed to take the impact of the largest jet of the time. The 707. But that was a consideration that the jet would be on landing approach (IE moving slow). In addition the fuel load was never factored in because they couldn't model it back in 1968.
The scenario of Sept 11th was far and above its design limitations.
Would you like a link to Les Roberston saying this?
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@Kill0Your0TV "river of molten steel" at the B1 level.
So what!!. Big deal.
The buildings collapsed in to the parking levels. Filled with cars. No chemical (Thermite etc) reacts for weeks at a time. So shelve that. What does burn for weeks at a time?? Try car gas tanks, car tires, elevator greases. All covered in thousands of tons of debris. When it gets uncovered fresh oxygen is introduced. It flares up even more.
Time for a little common sense in this topic!!
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles "So what!!. Big deal." This quote really shows how you are so blindly passive to scientific facts. It is impossible for normal to elevated fires due to jet fuel to reach temperatures hot enough to cause molten steel as seen dripping from the towers. Molten steel does not feed off oxygen, there is some common sense. If you argue it is molten aluminum, you are sadly wrong. Here is something for nonsensical mind to figure out. If these temperatures where hot enough initially to
joshbarber89 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles collapse columns, how were there survivors noticed at the plane's impact are. Would these temperatures of over 1800 C not set them on fire....? Because scientifically to make these columns collapse that is the temperature it would have to over exceed.
joshbarber89 4 months ago
@Kill0Your0TV You have a link to that?
Sure do!!
watch?v=053IpeEBji0
Skip to the 4:00 mark
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles Sorry some minor mistakes, are = area and C =F
joshbarber89 4 months ago
@joshbarber89 Once again?
In English.
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles can't read all of a sudden? Afraid to face facts..?
joshbarber89 4 months ago
@joshbarber89 I don't play games. Post what you are talking about or fuck off.
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles Who here is really playing the game?
joshbarber89 4 months ago
@joshbarber89 If you want to post something or make a point. MAKE IT!!
Otherwise beat it.
roquefortfiles 4 months ago
@roquefortfiles I did, you just have to read it. You ignorant shill
joshbarber89 4 months ago
@joshbarber89 There's a thing called communication. I have no idea what you are talking about. If you want to spend your time posting cryptic half messages that's your problem. If you want me to reply to something. Then direct me to it. Or post it.
roquefortfiles 4 months ago