This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Funny how this guy fails to mention the MASSIVE structural damage to WTC7 caused by the falling debris. I'm so tired of the "OMG! IT LOOKS LIKE ANOTHER VIDEO I SAW OF A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION SO IT MUST ALSO BE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!"
Stupid conspiracy theories like this do nothing but remove credibility from legitimate questions that need to be asked, like "Why did the US government allow these attacks to happen?" There's FAR more credible evidence of government complicity than there is CD.
The trouble with what you are saying is that MASSIVE damage caused by EXTERNAL sources should not have caused a straight down symmetrical collapse. Damage from external sources should have damaged one side more resulting in a tilt to one side. Plus how do you explain the sudden crimp in the roof just before collapse JUST LIKE A NORMAL CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
B'cos of idiots like u the cover-up has been sucessfull.
Two towers were hit and a third one went down ???????? Are buildings made up of paper. C'mon man even britney spears would understand the logic here.
Secondly why only ONE additional building went down why not two or three more????? Or why did not more buildings get damaged. How the f*** did only one building get damaged.
I don't have a problem with an investigation but do we need an investigation to be told the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of the WTC? How much steel was on the 81st floor that had to weaken in 56 minutes?
Do you need a PhD in physics and masters in engineering to know every level had to be strong enough support all levels above it? Didn't the designers in the 60s have to figure that out? So why haven't we heard it from EXPERTS in SIX YEARS?
One thing is sure, svelteShill: Thermite cannot keep metal in a molten form for 5 minutes, let alone for weeks. The reaction ends & then the metal cools. That's it. There were no ongoing thermite reactions in the debris piles observed by anyone. The anecdotal references were to pools, not explosive thermite reactions. Big difference.
NIST didn't analyze post-collapse phenomenon like the debris hotspots. But it's funny to see svelte jumping up and down insisting that there just had to be molten steel. But the reports of it were anecdotal. The people who made the comments about it were not in a position to know the composition of the hotspots, & the aerial infrared scans showed no temps hot enough to melt steel. So much for the "molten steel" myth.
Gage is an architect, yet doesn't discuss the unusual structural design of WTC 7 with its major use of transfer trusses. Instead, he makes claims about a demolition. But he's not a demo expert. Why post a video by an expert if he speaks on things outside his area of expertise. He claims the little bursts of smoke and ash are actually demo charges going off. Nonsense. No demo experts say that.
Why would Gage make the false assertions that the WTC 7 collapse was symmetrical & that it collapsed into its own footprint? The seismic record showed an 18 sec collapse, indicating it fell in sections, starting with the heavily damaged south side you can't see in the videos. WTC 7 slammed into 30 W. Broadway, requiring its demo and rebuilding. So much for falling in its "footprint."
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Funny how this guy fails to mention the MASSIVE structural damage to WTC7 caused by the falling debris. I'm so tired of the "OMG! IT LOOKS LIKE ANOTHER VIDEO I SAW OF A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION SO IT MUST ALSO BE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!"
Stupid conspiracy theories like this do nothing but remove credibility from legitimate questions that need to be asked, like "Why did the US government allow these attacks to happen?" There's FAR more credible evidence of government complicity than there is CD.
Nightshade76767676 4 years ago
The trouble with what you are saying is that MASSIVE damage caused by EXTERNAL sources should not have caused a straight down symmetrical collapse. Damage from external sources should have damaged one side more resulting in a tilt to one side. Plus how do you explain the sudden crimp in the roof just before collapse JUST LIKE A NORMAL CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
psikeyhackr 3 years ago 2
Massive structural damage? Not in any video I've seen.
J1Goro 2 years ago
B'cos of idiots like u the cover-up has been sucessfull.
Two towers were hit and a third one went down ???????? Are buildings made up of paper. C'mon man even britney spears would understand the logic here.
Secondly why only ONE additional building went down why not two or three more????? Or why did not more buildings get damaged. How the f*** did only one building get damaged.
jaideepbs 2 years ago
I don't have a problem with an investigation but do we need an investigation to be told the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of the WTC? How much steel was on the 81st floor that had to weaken in 56 minutes?
Do you need a PhD in physics and masters in engineering to know every level had to be strong enough support all levels above it? Didn't the designers in the 60s have to figure that out? So why haven't we heard it from EXPERTS in SIX YEARS?
watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q
psikeyhackr 4 years ago
One thing is sure, svelteShill: Thermite cannot keep metal in a molten form for 5 minutes, let alone for weeks. The reaction ends & then the metal cools. That's it. There were no ongoing thermite reactions in the debris piles observed by anyone. The anecdotal references were to pools, not explosive thermite reactions. Big difference.
PoetryHound 4 years ago
NIST didn't analyze post-collapse phenomenon like the debris hotspots. But it's funny to see svelte jumping up and down insisting that there just had to be molten steel. But the reports of it were anecdotal. The people who made the comments about it were not in a position to know the composition of the hotspots, & the aerial infrared scans showed no temps hot enough to melt steel. So much for the "molten steel" myth.
PoetryHound 4 years ago
Gage is an architect, yet doesn't discuss the unusual structural design of WTC 7 with its major use of transfer trusses. Instead, he makes claims about a demolition. But he's not a demo expert. Why post a video by an expert if he speaks on things outside his area of expertise. He claims the little bursts of smoke and ash are actually demo charges going off. Nonsense. No demo experts say that.
PoetryHound 4 years ago
Why would Gage make the false assertions that the WTC 7 collapse was symmetrical & that it collapsed into its own footprint? The seismic record showed an 18 sec collapse, indicating it fell in sections, starting with the heavily damaged south side you can't see in the videos. WTC 7 slammed into 30 W. Broadway, requiring its demo and rebuilding. So much for falling in its "footprint."
PoetryHound 4 years ago