Riiiiiiight!! and one floor is going hold or contain 30 stories moving as one unit? Not possible. Not even REMOTELY possible. You are asking floor connections of 3/4 inch bolts and 5/8th's bolts securing the floor trusses directly below the failure point to hold 180,000 tons in motion? When the floor has a load limit of about 1500 tons??
Good fucking luck!! And it has NOTHING to do with George Bush. Numbers and math don't lie.
Math? What math? I thought math is about calculating. And 180kt "in motion" is not a momentum. There are variables you have to define first.
Your equasion probably looks like "pretty big" > "pretty small". And you call that math? I call that stupid.
And many ppl have done simulations in your favor. 0% mass ejection and instant bolt failure that doesn't absorb any energy. You still won't be able to get the destruction done in the observed time.
I ran several computer simulations reconstructng the WTC towers. The only way the computer would allow the tower to collapse at the speed it did was to cause the bottom floor to collapse before it was hit by the floor above. Essentially THE BOTTOM FLOOR HAS TO BE TAKEN OUT BEFORE THE FLOOR ABOVE HITS IT !!!! In other words, a controlled demolition. This also explains why uniform debri was shooting out the sides of the building all the way down. WAKE UP !!
@iamopinionated123 No it does not!! If explosives were in the building it would be removing the resistance as the building fell. That is why they are used. Gravity pulverizes the building not explosives. The WTC is encountering a great deal of resistance because the lower floors are completely intact as the upper liberated portion hits it. The debris has no where to go but out. That is exactly what we see taking place there. A CD falls very uniformly and cleanly to its footprint.
@iamopinionated123 everyone who believes this garbage are all retarded. no computer simulation is going to give you a correct understanding of anything... were any of you inside watching it? there are hundreds of reasons to as why the buildings fell as they did. as an exploded plain with VERY high amounts of rich gasoline would be burning everything in there, causing weak points in the structure... im sure you have heard of Einstein? law of physics from there on out kids... Go back to school.
@dune5star Newtonian physics explains building collapses just fine; no need to invoke Einstein. Since nothing in the collapse is moving close to the speed of light, you don't even need to mention Einstein, except to be a poser. BTW, you obviously have never raced because you don't understand that "rich" refers to the mixture, not the gasoline itself. A rich mixture actually burns cooler...do you OWN a car? Of course, it was jet fuel, not gasoline. It was a "plane" not a "plain". School?
@TheFerruccio real thing took 10 secs. US official stance on it said it was by the pancake theory. However even assuming pancake theory took place it takes at least 20 seconds for it to collapse that way.
@maydayfire WEll if you look, the whole bldg collapses of course, BUT it didn't go all the way flat to the ground like this model indicates, there was a pile of rubble many stories high after the collapse
@maydayfire FALSE. The two collapses took between fifteen to twenty seconds. You look at the videos that dont show the complete collapse just when the collapse is masked by large buildings.
top of south tower falls over the side so how does that weight transfer to the path of most resistance...the lower section? Answer- It doesn't...Also: Watch all the video and take notes. It is clearly MURDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@haolejohn Yes it was murder. Murders committed by extremist Muslims. They're called Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. Only paranoid delusional anti-government idiots would try to find a way to implicate the US government.
I didn't take anything out of context. The statement says the the collapse times were 9 seconds and 11 seconds, that the lower part of the structure was not strong enough to resist the collapse, and that the buildings came down "essentially in free fall".
"The statement says the the collapse times were 9 seconds and 11 seconds"
The EXTERIOR!!!! Like OUTER walls too free fall because, that is the rubble that conspiracy theorists like to show in the 10 seconds. But there is a complete building still standing obscured by the rubble still falling down. The last part of the rubble should be down in 10 seconds if the complete building fell in free fall. It is clearly not the case. CT only shows the first rubble hitting.
@obaeyens NIST says the buildings came down "essentially in free fall". First they talk about exterior panels hitting the ground in 9 seconds and 11 seconds. Then they say "these collapse times show that ... [the building] offered minimal resistance.... [and so] the building section above came down essentially in free fall."
That's what it says. You're trying to rewrite it so that it makes sense to you, but that's what it says.
@obaeyens I don't have an opinion on demolition. I think NIST's work was shoddy and dishonest, and NIST was so closely supervised by the Bush administration that there was no way they were going to lend any credence to evidence that casts suspicions on the competence of Marvin Bush's security company.
@TyVulpine Marvin Bush was on the board of Securicom/Stratesec from 1993 to 2000. His connection to the company would have been very embarrassing had security faults been found, even if he'd left the company the year before, and thus NIST was highly motivated to ignore the possibility of planted explosives.
@punxsutawneybarney 2000. Almost a YEAR before the attacks. Hmmm. And please explain how one can get several THOUSAND POUNDS of explosives past metal detectors and handbag check security points around every single elevator point.
@TyVulpine Many of the tenants used their office space as warehouses. It was the World Trade Center. Also, office furniture and computers would have been moved in routinely. Also, a six-month elevator upgrade project would have involved the moving in of enormous quantities of stuff, as well as fireproofing upgrade projects.
@punxsutawneybarney And you think security wouldn't do a sweep of everything that comes in? I was at NIH yesterday morning and they inspect everything that comes in. The personnel, the vehicles, the cargo, EVERYTHING. Even have bomb-sniffing dogs.
Don't bother with punxsutawneybarney. His real name is Brian Good. He's an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents despite being in his late 50s. He spends pretty much every waking hour stalking a guy named Willie Rodriguez. Nobody really cares about Rodriguez, but Brian Good is obsessed with him.
Brian also likes to babble endlessly about thermite and other stuff he doesn't understand (such as the WTC collapse).
@TyVulpine South tower was hit by plane...fire may have detonated a few on those floors. The upper section if you watch carefully falls to the side and away from tower intact. The section below of course is detonated from bottom floor up as they are in controlled demolition if you researched that. Search youtube for explosions heard and you can actually hear testimony of FDNY and NYPD and the actual explosion. go listen and watch then tell me they didn't have explosives. go watch them
@haolejohn Explain how 50,000 people plus security "missed" explosives that magically survived both the force of the impact and explosion without moving an inch.
@TyVulpine If the planes flew in on autopilot on a radio beacon, then you'd know exactly which floors the planes were going to hit, and simply leave the explosives off of those floors.
@punxsutawneybarney Commercial 767s were designed to prevent remote flying, as any Boeing engineer could tell you. Funny that no engineer or maintanence personnel that worked on any of the four planes has ever come forward and proven the planes were somehow modified to allow remote flying, and the only people that claim such nonsense are people that no training in airplane engineering.
@TyVulpine I didn't say anything about remote flying. I said autopilot.
As to remote flying, in August of 2001, Raytheon not only flew a 727 remotely, it landed it six times. That was reported in an AP story Oct 2, 2001 "Remote Piloting: Solution or Disaster-in-the-making?"
@punxsutawneybarney You seriously think the pilots, that were KNOWN to be in the cockpit, wouldn't simply turn off or disable the auto-pilot the instant they knew something was wrong? And the plane changing course without pilot approval would be a big tip-off.
@punxsutawneybarney Uh, yes, but the hijackers would have flown the planes manually. I doubt they would have known how to turn on the auto-pilot on a 767. Go sit in the cockpit of one and try to find the autopilot navigation and program a flight path and turn it on. Go ahead.
@punxsutawneybarney Okay, now explain how they could fly hundreds of miles on a radio beacon. A 767 is not exactly a smart bomb. And a radio signal could not travel hundreds of miles to the plane. It would degrade well before it ever reached the plane, no? Especially since they wouldn't know beforehand precisely where to aim the signal.
@TyVulpine I didn't say they could. Atta flew down the Hudson River until he saw the WTC. When he gets close he switches on the autopilot. Easy. I don't know what al Shehhi's landmarks were.
@punxsutawneybarney Again you're grabbing at straws because remember the South Tower, the plane came in at an angle instead of head-on, as a radio signal should have had the plane do.
@TyVulpine So what if something went slightly wrong with the course. Maybe there was a fight for control of the wheel or something. It doesn't change the practicality of a plan to pick the target floors by use of a radio beacon.
You debunkers all have this amazing "can't do" spirit. Nothing is possible, to hear you tell it.
@TyVulpine I didn't lie, I didn't make any empty claims, and I didn't use any terror tactics. You proposed a simple question and I gave a simple, plausible answer that is absolutely consistent with the facts.
@punxsutawneybarney Unless you can PROVE that they used a radio signal to guide the plane, your claim is an empty one. So, good luck proving they did.
@TyVulpine Not so. You said that explosives could not be used in the towers because the fires and the planes would set them off. I showed that your empty claim was not true--that by targeting specific floors with the planes the explosives could be left off those floors. I even suggested a perfectly reasonable mechanism for facilitating this. I made my point and disproved your empty claim. The question of whether radio beacons were used or not is irrelevant to the point..
@punxsutawneybarney Yet you convinently ignored the FACT that there were bomb-sniffing dogs in the Towers plus just to GET to the upper floors required passing security points and bag checks, not to mention that 50,000 people work in each building. Yet somehow nobody saw the bombs? Nor the dogs discovered them?
@TyVulpine Are bomb-sniffing bombs trained to recognize thermite? It's iron oxide and aluminum. Do bomb-sniffing dogs routinely patrol the elevator shafts? If it possible the explosives were made in a lab in the towers, and made of chemical precursors the dogs would not recognize? How would anybody find the bombs if they were hidden inside the hollow core columns and in the elevator shafts? Your can't-do spirit is truly inspiring. No wonder America is turning to shit.
@punxsutawneybarney All 50,000 employees, maintence workers, security at the entry points to all ground-level elevators, and you think someone would be able to slip a thousand pounds of explosives past all of them? Not to mention that the two biggest byproducts of thermite, aluminium oxide and barium nitrate, were NOT found anywhere in the samples taken from Ground Zero.
@TyVulpine Aluminum oxide is a gas at high temperatures. Iron-rich spheres consistent with thermite and molten iron consistent with thermite were found. Why would you expect barium nitrate?
Could you slip 1000 pounds of explosives in? Sure! Paint, boxes of drywall screws, buckets of drywall mud, sacks of fireproofing compound, tiles, plumbing parts--there was heavy stuff going up the freight elevator all the time!
@punxsutawneybarney And you think security wouldn't check everything going up? In such a high-security building? Apparently you never went to the WTC. I did in 1994 and the security was amazing. And Alumium oxide and barium nitrate are the two biggest byproducts of thermite. Yet neither were ever found at Ground Zero and the other byproducts (like sulfur in the drywalls) were known to be in the Towers prior to 9/11. So nothing unexpected was found in the tested samples.
@TyVulpine Open every can of paint? You're nuts. There are lots of flavors of thermite, and barium is optional. I much doubt there's any nitrate left after ignition. The high-energy red/gray chips found in the dust by Dr. Steven Jones were unexpected, as are the iron microspheres--and large amounts of 1,3-diphenylpropane seemed to impress the EPA. They'd never seen it before.
So I don't know where you get your information, but somebody is misinforming you.
@punxsutawneybarney That's what the dogs are for. Especially bloodhounds and German Shepherds. Their noses are excellent. Now why don't YOU go research thermite and the byproducts and why nothing out of the ordinary was found in any of the dust samples tested.
@TyVulpine I just told you the unusual stuff that was found in the dust--iron microspheres, energetic bilayer chips, and 1,3-diphenylpropane. And you didn't answer whether bomb-sniffer dogs are trained to recognize thermate, or whether they are trained to recognize the precursor chemicals to explosives which might then have been mixed up in a lab inside the building.
@punxsutawneybarney They are trained to sniff explosives. And you haven't answered why aluminium oxide or barium nitrate, THE BIGGEST BYPRODUCTS OF THERMITE DETONATION, weren't found.
@TyVulpine You're not reading my posts. You just keep repeating the same nonsense. There are different flavors of thermite. Not all of them have barium. You're not going to find barium nitrate after the ignition for obvious reasons. And you're not answering my questions about whether the dogs are trained to sniff for thermite and whether they are trained to sniff for the precursor chemicals to explosives that might then be mixed in a lab inside the building.
@punxsutawneybarney But they still should have found dust traces of it, and DIDN'T, in the cooled dirt. Unless somehow they kept it at hundreds of degrees during the testing?
@TyVulpine Jones and Farr found Aluminum in the steel samples they looked at. Aluminum has to be found in the dust, it's one of the most abundant elements on earth.
@punxsutawneybarney Aluminium oxide, you idiot. OXIDE. It's the most common byproduct (effect) of thermite detonation, yet none was found in the soil samples that were tested. If there WAS a thermite detonation, then it would have been IN THE SOIL. The LACK of aluminium oxide ANYWHERE at Ground Zero, and the LACK of Barium nitrate ANYWHERE at Ground Zero can only mean one thing: NO CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
@TyVulpine Even if the lack of barium meant no thermite (and it doesn't), no thermite does not mean no controlled demolition. At thermitic temps aluminum oxide is a gas. It blew away. Where do you get your information that no aluminum oxide was found at Ground Zero?
@TyVulpine Nobody ever tested for explosive residue, so the claim that none was found is somewhat disingenuous. Actually USGS found very high levels of barium in their report # 01-0429--more barium than copper and more barium than lead in most samples (see figure 4). I'm not sure Jones's tests or anybody's tests had any way to distinguish aluminum oxide from elemental aluminum, so I'm not sure your claim has any meaning. If you would reference a specific paper that would help.
@TyVulpine Why do you expect to find barium nitrate? The nitrate will be consumed in the reaction. I have no reason to think you know what you're talking about. Why won't you reveal your source of information? Are you ashamed of it?
@punxsutawneybarney Why? Because it's one of the two biggest byproducts of thermite, THAT'S WHY. You'd know that if you've actually researched thermite. Apparently you haven't.
@TyVulpine Where do you get your information? Barium nitrate is a constituent of some flavors of thermite. but not all. But it is not a byproduct of the thermite reaction. The byproduct would be Barium oxide. You're getting bad information.
@punxsutawneybarney In any event, thernite cannot be controlled to the split-second timing necessary for demolition. Plus NIST tried to cut a steel core beam smaller than the ones in the Towers and failed. (You can research this too) Plus can you explain how the thermite not only survived the force of the impact but also the explosion without being forced out of place? (Remember, the collapse began in the impacted zone, not on any other floor!)
@TyVulpine How do you know thermite can not be controlled? All it takes is a lot of experimentation to be able top predict its behavior quite precisely. I've never heard of NIST's experiment, it doesn't sound like something they would do, and I suspect you are confusing the experiment with one done by National Geographic and another one done by New Mexico Tech for Jesse Ventura. The north tower's collapse
did not begin at the impact floor. The floors above the impact zone collapsed first.
@punxsutawneybarney For one thing, thermite cannot cut sideways, that is a known fact of thermite. It can cut straight down, but not sideways. You obviously don't know anything about thermite or it's byproducts or anything at all about it.
@TyVulpine For years now AE911Truth has been showing a patent diagram of a means of thermite cutting sideways. Maybe your should go to their website and watch the video and educate yourself.
@punxsutawneybarney Oh, you mean the site full of lies and manipulated testimony? If I'm ever desperate for a good piece of fiction, I might go there.
@punxsutawneybarney 1,200 people on AE91,, but how many are actual professional structural engineers? How many are actual professional demolition experts?
@TyVulpine My educated guess is 40 professional structural engineers (last time I checked over a year ago it was 30) and maybe 8 or 10 demolition experts. How many independent structural engineers have you got who are willing to endorse the NIST report? I haven't been able to find any.
@TyVulpine Yes, you claimed that thermite could not be controlled with any precision, and I wanted you to watch the AE911truth DVD online and learn about the patented device that makes thermite into a cutter charge.
@punxsutawneybarney but it's impractical and huge, and not easy to hide. And you'd have to plant 23 of them in the Tower IN THE IMPACT ZONE and hope they're not shoved out of place when the plane hits.
@TyVulpine They don't have to be planted in the impact zone at all. To facilitate the official "piledriver" theory, they should be planted just under the impact zone.
Tye video of the north tower collapse initiation shows that before the impact zone failed, the floors above it failed. I told you that earlier but you weren't paying attention.
@TyVulpine The videos clearly show that on the north tower the collapse began in floors above the impact zone before the impact zone failed. You don't know what you're talking about.
@TyVulpine You keep saying that, and you're wrong. In videos of the north tower you can see that first the antenna starts to fall and then the roofline starts moving down before the impact zone collapses. watch?v=4BMPfI7wzhc&feature=related
@TyVulpine No. To make that claim you have to provide evidence. I've noticed that you're mighty long on assertions, and you rarely provide actual evidence. What was your source for the belief that barium nitrate should have been detected? Ignition would have burned the nitrate.
@punxsutawneybarney What PROOF have you offered that proves thermite? NONE, that's what. YOU have claimed yet have not offered any defense for your claim.
@TyVulpine I never claimed there was proof of thermite. You asked a simple question about how you could blow up the building when a plane was going to crash into it. I answered it. If you're interested in thermite you can read the paper by Jones and Harrit, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust .from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe".
@punxsutawneybarney Oh that's right, you claimed they "guided" the planes in on radio signal....even though the South Tower got hit at an angle instead of head on.
@TyVulpine Yes, we discussed the south tower angle, which could be explained by an attempt to overpower the autopilot. Or a last-minute struggle for control of the wheel.
@punxsutawneybarney You're the nut job. Evidence is enormous to show controlled demolition of the WTC. Even the firefighters heard the damn explosions and they say and I quote "It sounded like popping on every floor all the way up, like a demotion"
FDNY said this not me....NYPD also...officer hears explosions.
Workers, witnesses, actual AUDIO I CAN HEAR MYSELF...F'n BANG!!
@haolejohn Right....in buildings where over 50,000 people work in each, and security extremely tight, with bomb-sniffing dogs, someone managed to bring in thousands of pounds of explosives and in just 56 minutes climb up into the impact zone and mark, drill and plant the stuff despite thick smoke, heat and fires on 8-10 damaged floors and still get out in time (without being seen)
@TyVulpine I see why your confused now...These explosives were not put in that day. It would take weeks to wire it. That is just what happened. These columns are accessible via the elevator shafts. They had been servicing the elevators prior to this. Nanothermite could easily have been wired. I see you don't know about this so I will explain. These are wrapped around the columns on angle and the thermite material is ignited. These angle cuts are seen clearly in photos of WTC ground zero
@haolejohn Right, so explain how the explosives magically survived not only the force of the impact without being blown out of place but also the massive fireball without being destroyed or set off. Go ahead and LOGICALLY explain. I'll wait.
Yes, it says the building above came down essentially in free fall. Just like I said. It says the lower part of the building offered little resistance. I didn't take anything out of context.
Do you claim that the complete building came down in 10 seconds indication demolition? Because your references (9.3.3 in my case) states clearly :NO demolition" a few paragraphs lower in the same section. in NCSTAR 1-6.pdf
When you ignore the conspiracy videos that convienantly stops at 10 seconds when the first rubble hits the ground, you measure 15 and 22 seconds.
A building in free fall means ALL the rubble will hit the ground in 10 seconds, this clearly does not happen if you look at the video's looking longer than 10 seconds.
@obaeyens NIST says in its FAQs and in section 6.14.4 of its NCSTAR1 report that the towers came down "essentially in free fall". If you disagree then you should join us in calling for new investigations that we can believe.
As I expected, typical conspiracy theorist quote mining and taking everything out of context. You should read the first part too. The part that says that it is ONLY the INITIAL gap where there was no support left.
"Since the stories BELOW the level of collapse INITIATION provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section ABOVE came down essentially in free fall"
Also NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first EXTERIOR panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1.
EXTERIOR panels are in free fall so this takes 10 seconds, INTERIOR took 15 and 22 seconds indication NO free fall. This 15 and 22 seconds can be easily checked by looking at the video's that runs longer than the 10 seconds and a stopwatch. No black magic needed.
@punxsutawneybarney So the "essentially in free fall" you took out of context is only a few floors high. Where all the mass of the top floors could fall in free fall initially until it hit a few floors lower the still stable floors like a big hammer. This big hammer got bigger and bigger because it added all mass of the previous floors to hit the next floor.
"Still there is going to be resistance unless you wish to think the building was built weak and just waiting to collapse. "
If that is true then there is no free fall as conspiracy theorists claim and they should show the rest of the 10 seconds clips to see what is happening next. .
The huge fireball, by the way, was the jet fuel burning up on the outside of the building. In the official story this amazing jet fuel made the tower explode about 1 hour after the jet fuel was actually burnt up.
The stories are so ridiculous. If Osama had done this we wouldn't have all this ridiculous shit. They found one of the hijackers' passport right by WTC. How stupid isn't that. If one evidence is fake, all of them are.
Eric Hufschmid, after he realized I had figured he was in on the cover up too:
Why are you so upset? The Jews are involved in lots of crime, but the reason they are so successful is because they are smart.
Even when they get caught, they figure out how to trick the stupid people into letting them get away with their crime. They got caught in 1946 when they bombed the King David Hotel, and they tricked the stupid British into letting them get away with it.
No intelligent person is disputing that the debris didn't fall at freefall speed. What's questionable is that the waves of destructive force moved down the side of the building as fast, or even faster, than freefall speed.
watch?v=eXSHm3CdHf4
And why dust plumes out the windows so far down the building?
@jelinto 1. The debris is falling faster than the building, so the "waves of destruction" couldn't possibly be.
2. The plumes are from air trapped inside the stairwells and elevator shafts. The air got forced DOWN because of the debris falling, and suddenly there's TOO MUCH AIR in the stairwell, so what happens? A stairwell door gets busted open and the air bursts into the floor, but it's not just going to STOP there, it's going to push the air on that floor in the same direction, towards and
1. Wrong! Did you watch the video? The waves of explosive destruction and the overall collaspe of the building are two separate things. You're confusing these two.
2. Wrong again. The "dust plume" 40 storeys below occurs WAY too early for your stairwell or elevator shaft scenario to be the cause.
The suggested official 9/11 version of collapses Would have been chaotic events. You cannot have symmetry from chaos. Undamaged columns would create resistance in the collapse and would cause the building to either stop collapsing, or fall to the path of least resistance causing a non-symmetrical collapse. Simple physics.
haha,, the clip is 34 sec long but the clock show what??? not 34 sec thats for sure. which shows the sort of ppl who work for THE AGENCY putting clips on utube.. watch out ppl , there are agents about..
@jelinto Either way, the "conspiracy" would be so large, it'd be impossible to keep it quiet this long. 9 years and so far not one person has even accidently blabbed? Pretty incredible.
You're kidding right? Why not do the least bit of research before making such a claim?
watch?v=G-h4Zc57QKg
watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I
If it weren't the President and concerning 9/11, but a ordinary criminal speaking about an ordinary crime, don't you think it would get proper scrutiny?
watch?v=bvay28lZiHU
watch?v=jZK1VqAYp34
The truth of JFK's assassination hasn't come to light 46 years on. People were murdered in the wake of that. Let me guess, you think LHO did it alone.
@jelinto Actually, no I don't believe Oswald acted alone (the final headshot blows BACKWARDS which would mean a shot from in FRONT of Kennedy). But for 9/11, all the people they'd have to bring into the conspiracy, it'd get too big to keep quiet for long. Eventually someone would slip and leak something. Nobody has so far. Rather odd, don't you think?
@AgainstWars You have no proof of Silverstein doing any killing. And it's amazing how you believe that SO MANY people can "in on" the cover up and somehow NOT ONE has managed to leak out the "truth" in the last 9 years.
@TyVulpine And that's a pretty farfetch Strawman claim, when you have to use the Pentagon's groundbreaking ceremony to try to "convict" Silverstein, since Silverstein didn't OWN the Towers, he was merely the leaseholder. Nor did he have the authority to order ANY demolition. Nor did he order any at all.
@AgainstWars You mean the magical explosives that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny came and scooped up all traces of so that rescue personnel and the demolition expert team surveying Ground Zero couldn't find it?
@TyVulpine Flashes? You see the same thing as you see when a building explode. WTC7 sank down to earth in freefall speed, as if the floors vanished from bottom to top, which they did. There's no other way that can happen. Falling straight down like that in freefall speed can only mean that explosives placed on strategic places evenly in the floor detonated simultaniously. And you know that. You're probably a lying Jew.
@AgainstWars Yes, FLASHES. If you've ever seen a demolition, there's FLASHES as the charges detonate, followed a few seconds later by a 130 db BOOM. Yet NEITHER were present when Building 7 fell. Not to mention it is logically IMPOSSIBLE to plant several THOUSAND pounds of explosives and have NOBODY catch on. "If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains—however improbable—must be the truth" -Spock
@AgainstWars No, they didn't, because no explosive residue, blasting caps or detonation wires were found BY THE EXPERTS THAT SURVEYED THE AREA. What's impossible is for people to plant several THOUSAND POUNDS of explosives and NOBODY find out. NOT ONE PERSON in a building where over 10,000 people work. That's roughly 20,000 people in just Towers 1 and 2. Not sure how many in Building 7, but that's even more people, and still somehow nobody caught on? THAT is impossible.
@TyVulpine "BY THE EXPERTS THAT SURVEYED THE AREA"
The government did it, and you trust these experts more than your own eyes?
No, I don't think so. You're a liar.
There are plenty of deceptive videos and webpages about 9/11. It's not bin Laden who sent out a lot of people to confuse. The truth movement is in on the cover-up. They mix truth with lies and diversions.
@AgainstWars It was an independant demolition crew, PLUS you had dozens of construction personnel PLUS resuce personnel PLUS trained dogs there. It's IMPOSSIBLE that with all the sifting and removal that went on that NOT ONE PERSON found evidence of explosives NOR has anyone come forward in the last nine years and "admitted" either.
@AgainstWars That doesn't prove "how" people were able to "plant" several thousand pounds of explosives in three buildings with over 20,000 people between them with nobody catching on. Nor does it explain why the collapse started in the IMPACTED AREAS. That would mean someone would have to climb up into those areas without ropes (remember, no climbing ropes found!), meticiously mark and plant the explosives, climb back down and get out. All in 56 minutes for So Tower or 111 minutes for No Tower.
@TyVulpine "the collapse started in the IMPACTED AREAS. That would mean someone would have to climb up "
You're ridiculous. Why would anyone have to climb? If you take a close look at the demolition of WTC1, you can see that the top floors get demoished like WTC7, bottom to top. The top floors are gone before the rest of the building explodes froom top to bottom. This "trick" to make the event fit the official story better. Carefully planned by extremely evil people.
@AgainstWars Why would anyone have to climb? I don't know. Maybe because A PLANE HAD HIT THOSE FLOORS? If they had planted explosives, it most likely would have been SET OFF ON IMPACT, causing the building to collapse instantly! Not to mention that they "waited" so long before setting off the charges, thus allowing hundreds of people to escape. Rather goes against any logic I know of. WAIT and LET people escape. Yep, that's a good way to kill as many people as possible.
@TyVulpine They can detonate the explosives in whichever order they want. No need to climb anywhere.
"it most likely would have been SET OFF ON IMPACT, "
You know the story. It was "intense fire" over a certain period which supposedly made it collapse. It would have been too obvious if they made the buildings dissappear in impact. What kind of magic planes are these?
@AgainstWars There was a HUGE FIREBALL ON IMPACT. You seriously think something EXPLOSIVE as demo charges could survive a plane impact without setting off? And then something as simple as an electrical charge (which is how charges are set off, no?) would be necessary to detonate?
@TyVulpine "HUGE FIREBALL" There are plenty of different explosives. Not all ar set off by fire. I don't know what the names of explosives used are. But it's extremely obvious that they used explosives.
@TyVulpine The proof is right there. But there are plenty of liars who pretend they don't see it. And they own the media and are in control of the information.
The conspiracy proof is so divided and inconsistent even contradicting each other suggesting that these people are sucking the stories it from their thumbs.
@obaeyens Some of the conspiracy folks are lunatics who believe in lizards from outer space, some of them are hoaxsters out to make fools of the people who believe them, and some are honest researchers who make very good points if you bother to pay attention. The 911research.wtc7 website is very solid. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is pretty solid.
You really have to bring Silverstein in court and ask him when he did it. There were reports of drills and downtime in weekends some weeks before. But I think this may be a fake story, to give truthers the impression that it was planned shortly before. Silverstein signed an insurance contract just before. Just another fake lead to make truthers think that money is the motive.
But the motives are of the religious kind. Read Deuteronomy 20.
@AgainstWars I love how Truthers have declared themselves judge jury and executioner and "decided" what Silverstein said, by cherry picking his quotes and twisting them to mean something entirely different. Who needs a fair trial by peer? Just declare the man guilty and carry the execution out yourself, logic and evidence to the contrary be damned.
YES! very simple and pointless...
korayek 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why is there so few computer simulations of the WTC on the Internet?
There should be hundreds made in advanced cad physics programs.
Why is no architects and engineers testing the collapse in programs to see what happens?
I think this is most disturbing.
M.Sc. in Engineering Physics
magi55 1 month ago
Riiiiiiight!! and one floor is going hold or contain 30 stories moving as one unit? Not possible. Not even REMOTELY possible. You are asking floor connections of 3/4 inch bolts and 5/8th's bolts securing the floor trusses directly below the failure point to hold 180,000 tons in motion? When the floor has a load limit of about 1500 tons??
Good fucking luck!! And it has NOTHING to do with George Bush. Numbers and math don't lie.
Can you say INSTANT OVERLOAD? Thought you could.
roquefortfiles 6 months ago
@roquefortfiles
Math? What math? I thought math is about calculating. And 180kt "in motion" is not a momentum. There are variables you have to define first.
Your equasion probably looks like "pretty big" > "pretty small". And you call that math? I call that stupid.
And many ppl have done simulations in your favor. 0% mass ejection and instant bolt failure that doesn't absorb any energy. You still won't be able to get the destruction done in the observed time.
Tsutomu6 5 months ago
Question: damaged and burning tower section hits undamaged tower section. Which one is blasted into oblivion?
Super911truth 7 months ago
Nearly freefall and crushing dont work together, except more enrgy is inserted into the system.
fisheye441 8 months ago
20 seconds???? lol Try under 10.
1971SuperLead 10 months ago
I ran several computer simulations reconstructng the WTC towers. The only way the computer would allow the tower to collapse at the speed it did was to cause the bottom floor to collapse before it was hit by the floor above. Essentially THE BOTTOM FLOOR HAS TO BE TAKEN OUT BEFORE THE FLOOR ABOVE HITS IT !!!! In other words, a controlled demolition. This also explains why uniform debri was shooting out the sides of the building all the way down. WAKE UP !!
iamopinionated123 1 year ago 2
@iamopinionated123 Sure you did.
MrPointless 1 year ago
@iamopinionated123 Wake up? What about momentum?
scaremengaviation 1 year ago
@iamopinionated123 No it does not!! If explosives were in the building it would be removing the resistance as the building fell. That is why they are used. Gravity pulverizes the building not explosives. The WTC is encountering a great deal of resistance because the lower floors are completely intact as the upper liberated portion hits it. The debris has no where to go but out. That is exactly what we see taking place there. A CD falls very uniformly and cleanly to its footprint.
roquefortfiles 11 months ago
@iamopinionated123 everyone who believes this garbage are all retarded. no computer simulation is going to give you a correct understanding of anything... were any of you inside watching it? there are hundreds of reasons to as why the buildings fell as they did. as an exploded plain with VERY high amounts of rich gasoline would be burning everything in there, causing weak points in the structure... im sure you have heard of Einstein? law of physics from there on out kids... Go back to school.
dune5star 10 months ago
@dune5star Newtonian physics explains building collapses just fine; no need to invoke Einstein. Since nothing in the collapse is moving close to the speed of light, you don't even need to mention Einstein, except to be a poser. BTW, you obviously have never raced because you don't understand that "rich" refers to the mixture, not the gasoline itself. A rich mixture actually burns cooler...do you OWN a car? Of course, it was jet fuel, not gasoline. It was a "plane" not a "plain". School?
Skeptic121 9 months ago 2
This looks JUST like the real thing.
TheFerruccio 1 year ago 2
@TheFerruccio real thing took 10 secs. US official stance on it said it was by the pancake theory. However even assuming pancake theory took place it takes at least 20 seconds for it to collapse that way.
maydayfire 1 year ago
@maydayfire *woosh*
TheFerruccio 1 year ago
@maydayfire WEll if you look, the whole bldg collapses of course, BUT it didn't go all the way flat to the ground like this model indicates, there was a pile of rubble many stories high after the collapse
jimmym1a1 1 year ago
@maydayfire FALSE. The two collapses took between fifteen to twenty seconds. You look at the videos that dont show the complete collapse just when the collapse is masked by large buildings.
phlyegles43 11 months ago
top of south tower falls over the side so how does that weight transfer to the path of most resistance...the lower section? Answer- It doesn't...Also: Watch all the video and take notes. It is clearly MURDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
haolejohn 1 year ago
@haolejohn Yes it was murder. Murders committed by extremist Muslims. They're called Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. Only paranoid delusional anti-government idiots would try to find a way to implicate the US government.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
I didn't take anything out of context. The statement says the the collapse times were 9 seconds and 11 seconds, that the lower part of the structure was not strong enough to resist the collapse, and that the buildings came down "essentially in free fall".
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney
"The statement says the the collapse times were 9 seconds and 11 seconds"
The EXTERIOR!!!! Like OUTER walls too free fall because, that is the rubble that conspiracy theorists like to show in the 10 seconds. But there is a complete building still standing obscured by the rubble still falling down. The last part of the rubble should be down in 10 seconds if the complete building fell in free fall. It is clearly not the case. CT only shows the first rubble hitting.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens NIST says the buildings came down "essentially in free fall". First they talk about exterior panels hitting the ground in 9 seconds and 11 seconds. Then they say "these collapse times show that ... [the building] offered minimal resistance.... [and so] the building section above came down essentially in free fall."
That's what it says. You're trying to rewrite it so that it makes sense to you, but that's what it says.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney
"That's what it says. You're trying to rewrite it so that it makes sense to you, but that's what it says. "
You still have not explained if you agree to the demolition or disagree with it?
The document clearly states NO demolition or rocket. Just read the paragraph under your quote.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens I don't have an opinion on demolition. I think NIST's work was shoddy and dishonest, and NIST was so closely supervised by the Bush administration that there was no way they were going to lend any credence to evidence that casts suspicions on the competence of Marvin Bush's security company.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Marvin Bush was out by the time 9/11 happened.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Marvin Bush was on the board of Securicom/Stratesec from 1993 to 2000. His connection to the company would have been very embarrassing had security faults been found, even if he'd left the company the year before, and thus NIST was highly motivated to ignore the possibility of planted explosives.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney 2000. Almost a YEAR before the attacks. Hmmm. And please explain how one can get several THOUSAND POUNDS of explosives past metal detectors and handbag check security points around every single elevator point.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Many of the tenants used their office space as warehouses. It was the World Trade Center. Also, office furniture and computers would have been moved in routinely. Also, a six-month elevator upgrade project would have involved the moving in of enormous quantities of stuff, as well as fireproofing upgrade projects.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney And you think security wouldn't do a sweep of everything that comes in? I was at NIH yesterday morning and they inspect everything that comes in. The personnel, the vehicles, the cargo, EVERYTHING. Even have bomb-sniffing dogs.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Magic bomb wands are a scam. Are bomb dogs trained to sniff nanothermite?
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney How should I know? I'm not in that field.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney
TyVulpine,
Don't bother with punxsutawneybarney. His real name is Brian Good. He's an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents despite being in his late 50s. He spends pretty much every waking hour stalking a guy named Willie Rodriguez. Nobody really cares about Rodriguez, but Brian Good is obsessed with him.
Brian also likes to babble endlessly about thermite and other stuff he doesn't understand (such as the WTC collapse).
ianat841 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney bomb sniffing dogs were removed just prior...it is out already in testimony.
haolejohn 1 year ago
@TyVulpine South tower was hit by plane...fire may have detonated a few on those floors. The upper section if you watch carefully falls to the side and away from tower intact. The section below of course is detonated from bottom floor up as they are in controlled demolition if you researched that. Search youtube for explosions heard and you can actually hear testimony of FDNY and NYPD and the actual explosion. go listen and watch then tell me they didn't have explosives. go watch them
haolejohn 1 year ago
@haolejohn Explain how 50,000 people plus security "missed" explosives that magically survived both the force of the impact and explosion without moving an inch.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine If the planes flew in on autopilot on a radio beacon, then you'd know exactly which floors the planes were going to hit, and simply leave the explosives off of those floors.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Commercial 767s were designed to prevent remote flying, as any Boeing engineer could tell you. Funny that no engineer or maintanence personnel that worked on any of the four planes has ever come forward and proven the planes were somehow modified to allow remote flying, and the only people that claim such nonsense are people that no training in airplane engineering.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I didn't say anything about remote flying. I said autopilot.
As to remote flying, in August of 2001, Raytheon not only flew a 727 remotely, it landed it six times. That was reported in an AP story Oct 2, 2001 "Remote Piloting: Solution or Disaster-in-the-making?"
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Autopilot can't land or take off 767s. You need humans at the controls. And the pilots would not always use autopilot.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I didn't say autopilots can land. I said the plane could be flown into the building by the autopilot on a radio beacon.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney You seriously think the pilots, that were KNOWN to be in the cockpit, wouldn't simply turn off or disable the auto-pilot the instant they knew something was wrong? And the plane changing course without pilot approval would be a big tip-off.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine This may come as a shock to you, but there's a rumor going around that the 767s were hijacked.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Uh, yes, but the hijackers would have flown the planes manually. I doubt they would have known how to turn on the auto-pilot on a 767. Go sit in the cockpit of one and try to find the autopilot navigation and program a flight path and turn it on. Go ahead.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine They trained on simulators for hundreds of hours. Atta had a commercial license. They knew how to run the autopilot.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Okay, now explain how they could fly hundreds of miles on a radio beacon. A 767 is not exactly a smart bomb. And a radio signal could not travel hundreds of miles to the plane. It would degrade well before it ever reached the plane, no? Especially since they wouldn't know beforehand precisely where to aim the signal.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I didn't say they could. Atta flew down the Hudson River until he saw the WTC. When he gets close he switches on the autopilot. Easy. I don't know what al Shehhi's landmarks were.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Again you're grabbing at straws because remember the South Tower, the plane came in at an angle instead of head-on, as a radio signal should have had the plane do.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine So what if something went slightly wrong with the course. Maybe there was a fight for control of the wheel or something. It doesn't change the practicality of a plan to pick the target floors by use of a radio beacon.
You debunkers all have this amazing "can't do" spirit. Nothing is possible, to hear you tell it.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney And you Truthers have nothing but lies, empty claims and terror tactics whenever someone stands up and questions your claims.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I didn't lie, I didn't make any empty claims, and I didn't use any terror tactics. You proposed a simple question and I gave a simple, plausible answer that is absolutely consistent with the facts.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Unless you can PROVE that they used a radio signal to guide the plane, your claim is an empty one. So, good luck proving they did.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Not so. You said that explosives could not be used in the towers because the fires and the planes would set them off. I showed that your empty claim was not true--that by targeting specific floors with the planes the explosives could be left off those floors. I even suggested a perfectly reasonable mechanism for facilitating this. I made my point and disproved your empty claim. The question of whether radio beacons were used or not is irrelevant to the point..
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Yet you convinently ignored the FACT that there were bomb-sniffing dogs in the Towers plus just to GET to the upper floors required passing security points and bag checks, not to mention that 50,000 people work in each building. Yet somehow nobody saw the bombs? Nor the dogs discovered them?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Are bomb-sniffing bombs trained to recognize thermite? It's iron oxide and aluminum. Do bomb-sniffing dogs routinely patrol the elevator shafts? If it possible the explosives were made in a lab in the towers, and made of chemical precursors the dogs would not recognize? How would anybody find the bombs if they were hidden inside the hollow core columns and in the elevator shafts? Your can't-do spirit is truly inspiring. No wonder America is turning to shit.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney All 50,000 employees, maintence workers, security at the entry points to all ground-level elevators, and you think someone would be able to slip a thousand pounds of explosives past all of them? Not to mention that the two biggest byproducts of thermite, aluminium oxide and barium nitrate, were NOT found anywhere in the samples taken from Ground Zero.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Aluminum oxide is a gas at high temperatures. Iron-rich spheres consistent with thermite and molten iron consistent with thermite were found. Why would you expect barium nitrate?
Could you slip 1000 pounds of explosives in? Sure! Paint, boxes of drywall screws, buckets of drywall mud, sacks of fireproofing compound, tiles, plumbing parts--there was heavy stuff going up the freight elevator all the time!
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney And you think security wouldn't check everything going up? In such a high-security building? Apparently you never went to the WTC. I did in 1994 and the security was amazing. And Alumium oxide and barium nitrate are the two biggest byproducts of thermite. Yet neither were ever found at Ground Zero and the other byproducts (like sulfur in the drywalls) were known to be in the Towers prior to 9/11. So nothing unexpected was found in the tested samples.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Open every can of paint? You're nuts. There are lots of flavors of thermite, and barium is optional. I much doubt there's any nitrate left after ignition. The high-energy red/gray chips found in the dust by Dr. Steven Jones were unexpected, as are the iron microspheres--and large amounts of 1,3-diphenylpropane seemed to impress the EPA. They'd never seen it before.
So I don't know where you get your information, but somebody is misinforming you.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney That's what the dogs are for. Especially bloodhounds and German Shepherds. Their noses are excellent. Now why don't YOU go research thermite and the byproducts and why nothing out of the ordinary was found in any of the dust samples tested.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I just told you the unusual stuff that was found in the dust--iron microspheres, energetic bilayer chips, and 1,3-diphenylpropane. And you didn't answer whether bomb-sniffer dogs are trained to recognize thermate, or whether they are trained to recognize the precursor chemicals to explosives which might then have been mixed up in a lab inside the building.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney They are trained to sniff explosives. And you haven't answered why aluminium oxide or barium nitrate, THE BIGGEST BYPRODUCTS OF THERMITE DETONATION, weren't found.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine You're not reading my posts. You just keep repeating the same nonsense. There are different flavors of thermite. Not all of them have barium. You're not going to find barium nitrate after the ignition for obvious reasons. And you're not answering my questions about whether the dogs are trained to sniff for thermite and whether they are trained to sniff for the precursor chemicals to explosives that might then be mixed in a lab inside the building.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney And the aluminium oxide?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I already told you. It's a gas at thermitic temperatures.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney But they still should have found dust traces of it, and DIDN'T, in the cooled dirt. Unless somehow they kept it at hundreds of degrees during the testing?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Jones and Farr found Aluminum in the steel samples they looked at. Aluminum has to be found in the dust, it's one of the most abundant elements on earth.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Aluminium oxide, you idiot. OXIDE. It's the most common byproduct (effect) of thermite detonation, yet none was found in the soil samples that were tested. If there WAS a thermite detonation, then it would have been IN THE SOIL. The LACK of aluminium oxide ANYWHERE at Ground Zero, and the LACK of Barium nitrate ANYWHERE at Ground Zero can only mean one thing: NO CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Even if the lack of barium meant no thermite (and it doesn't), no thermite does not mean no controlled demolition. At thermitic temps aluminum oxide is a gas. It blew away. Where do you get your information that no aluminum oxide was found at Ground Zero?
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney No detonation wires
No blasting caps
No explosive residue
No aluminium oxide
No barium nitrate
As for where the information that no aluminium oxide was found, even Steven Jones couldn't find any and HE tested samples.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Nobody ever tested for explosive residue, so the claim that none was found is somewhat disingenuous. Actually USGS found very high levels of barium in their report # 01-0429--more barium than copper and more barium than lead in most samples (see figure 4). I'm not sure Jones's tests or anybody's tests had any way to distinguish aluminum oxide from elemental aluminum, so I'm not sure your claim has any meaning. If you would reference a specific paper that would help.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Alumium OXIDE. Barium NITRATE, you twat. Do you have reading comprehension difficulties?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Why do you expect to find barium nitrate? The nitrate will be consumed in the reaction. I have no reason to think you know what you're talking about. Why won't you reveal your source of information? Are you ashamed of it?
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Why? Because it's one of the two biggest byproducts of thermite, THAT'S WHY. You'd know that if you've actually researched thermite. Apparently you haven't.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Where do you get your information? Barium nitrate is a constituent of some flavors of thermite. but not all. But it is not a byproduct of the thermite reaction. The byproduct would be Barium oxide. You're getting bad information.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney In any event, thernite cannot be controlled to the split-second timing necessary for demolition. Plus NIST tried to cut a steel core beam smaller than the ones in the Towers and failed. (You can research this too) Plus can you explain how the thermite not only survived the force of the impact but also the explosion without being forced out of place? (Remember, the collapse began in the impacted zone, not on any other floor!)
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine How do you know thermite can not be controlled? All it takes is a lot of experimentation to be able top predict its behavior quite precisely. I've never heard of NIST's experiment, it doesn't sound like something they would do, and I suspect you are confusing the experiment with one done by National Geographic and another one done by New Mexico Tech for Jesse Ventura. The north tower's collapse
did not begin at the impact floor. The floors above the impact zone collapsed first.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney For one thing, thermite cannot cut sideways, that is a known fact of thermite. It can cut straight down, but not sideways. You obviously don't know anything about thermite or it's byproducts or anything at all about it.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine For years now AE911Truth has been showing a patent diagram of a means of thermite cutting sideways. Maybe your should go to their website and watch the video and educate yourself.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Oh, you mean the site full of lies and manipulated testimony? If I'm ever desperate for a good piece of fiction, I might go there.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine If the patent diagram they show there is a work of fiction, please prove it. Show AE911Truth for liars. Make yourself famous.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney 1,200 people on AE91,, but how many are actual professional structural engineers? How many are actual professional demolition experts?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine My educated guess is 40 professional structural engineers (last time I checked over a year ago it was 30) and maybe 8 or 10 demolition experts. How many independent structural engineers have you got who are willing to endorse the NIST report? I haven't been able to find any.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Out of 1,200+ registered on there? Uh-huh...and you want people to go there to "get educated"?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Yes, you claimed that thermite could not be controlled with any precision, and I wanted you to watch the AE911truth DVD online and learn about the patented device that makes thermite into a cutter charge.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney but it's impractical and huge, and not easy to hide. And you'd have to plant 23 of them in the Tower IN THE IMPACT ZONE and hope they're not shoved out of place when the plane hits.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine They don't have to be planted in the impact zone at all. To facilitate the official "piledriver" theory, they should be planted just under the impact zone.
Tye video of the north tower collapse initiation shows that before the impact zone failed, the floors above it failed. I told you that earlier but you weren't paying attention.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Yes, they DID since that was WHERE THE COLLAPSE STARTED. IN THE IMPACT ZONE. Not above, not below.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine The videos clearly show that on the north tower the collapse began in floors above the impact zone before the impact zone failed. You don't know what you're talking about.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney What? The collapse started IN the impact zone, not above, not below.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine You keep saying that, and you're wrong. In videos of the north tower you can see that first the antenna starts to fall and then the roofline starts moving down before the impact zone collapses. watch?v=4BMPfI7wzhc&feature=related
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney "I'm right, you're wrong, end of discussion! I win!"
Am I doing it right?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine No. To make that claim you have to provide evidence. I've noticed that you're mighty long on assertions, and you rarely provide actual evidence. What was your source for the belief that barium nitrate should have been detected? Ignition would have burned the nitrate.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney What PROOF have you offered that proves thermite? NONE, that's what. YOU have claimed yet have not offered any defense for your claim.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I never claimed there was proof of thermite. You asked a simple question about how you could blow up the building when a plane was going to crash into it. I answered it. If you're interested in thermite you can read the paper by Jones and Harrit, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust .from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe".
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Oh that's right, you claimed they "guided" the planes in on radio signal....even though the South Tower got hit at an angle instead of head on.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Yes, we discussed the south tower angle, which could be explained by an attempt to overpower the autopilot. Or a last-minute struggle for control of the wheel.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Now who's long on claim and short on proof?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine You are.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney Blind as a bat and twice as dumb as an ox.... that fits you perfectly.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
Less than having 850000+ sq. meters of office space unused for 10 years
Weirdo10o4 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney
How come you never responed to me anymore, Petgoat? Are you afraid that I'm going to pwn you like I've done 10,000 times before?
ianat841 1 year ago
@ianat841 I don't respond to you, ian, because you're a nut.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney You're the nut job. Evidence is enormous to show controlled demolition of the WTC. Even the firefighters heard the damn explosions and they say and I quote "It sounded like popping on every floor all the way up, like a demotion"
FDNY said this not me....NYPD also...officer hears explosions.
Workers, witnesses, actual AUDIO I CAN HEAR MYSELF...F'n BANG!!
haolejohn 1 year ago
@TyVulpin not 2000 lbs. much much less...this is Nanothermite found at the wtc.
They were brought down by controlled demo. Now, we need to confirm the people responsible and hang them.
haolejohn 1 year ago
@haolejohn Right....in buildings where over 50,000 people work in each, and security extremely tight, with bomb-sniffing dogs, someone managed to bring in thousands of pounds of explosives and in just 56 minutes climb up into the impact zone and mark, drill and plant the stuff despite thick smoke, heat and fires on 8-10 damaged floors and still get out in time (without being seen)
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine I see why your confused now...These explosives were not put in that day. It would take weeks to wire it. That is just what happened. These columns are accessible via the elevator shafts. They had been servicing the elevators prior to this. Nanothermite could easily have been wired. I see you don't know about this so I will explain. These are wrapped around the columns on angle and the thermite material is ignited. These angle cuts are seen clearly in photos of WTC ground zero
haolejohn 1 year ago
@haolejohn Right, so explain how the explosives magically survived not only the force of the impact without being blown out of place but also the massive fireball without being destroyed or set off. Go ahead and LOGICALLY explain. I'll wait.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney But that is impossible without explosives. Preposterous
haolejohn 1 year ago
Yes, it says the building above came down essentially in free fall. Just like I said. It says the lower part of the building offered little resistance. I didn't take anything out of context.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@punxsutawneybarney
" I didn't take anything out of context. "
Do you claim that the complete building came down in 10 seconds indication demolition? Because your references (9.3.3 in my case) states clearly :NO demolition" a few paragraphs lower in the same section. in NCSTAR 1-6.pdf
obaeyens 1 year ago
When you ignore the conspiracy videos that convienantly stops at 10 seconds when the first rubble hits the ground, you measure 15 and 22 seconds.
A building in free fall means ALL the rubble will hit the ground in 10 seconds, this clearly does not happen if you look at the video's looking longer than 10 seconds.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens NIST says in its FAQs and in section 6.14.4 of its NCSTAR1 report that the towers came down "essentially in free fall". If you disagree then you should join us in calling for new investigations that we can believe.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney "essentially in free fall"
As I expected, typical conspiracy theorist quote mining and taking everything out of context. You should read the first part too. The part that says that it is ONLY the INITIAL gap where there was no support left.
"Since the stories BELOW the level of collapse INITIATION provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section ABOVE came down essentially in free fall"
obaeyens 1 year ago
Comment removed
obaeyens 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney
Also NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first EXTERIOR panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1.
EXTERIOR panels are in free fall so this takes 10 seconds, INTERIOR took 15 and 22 seconds indication NO free fall. This 15 and 22 seconds can be easily checked by looking at the video's that runs longer than the 10 seconds and a stopwatch. No black magic needed.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@punxsutawneybarney So the "essentially in free fall" you took out of context is only a few floors high. Where all the mass of the top floors could fall in free fall initially until it hit a few floors lower the still stable floors like a big hammer. This big hammer got bigger and bigger because it added all mass of the previous floors to hit the next floor.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens Still there is going to be resistance unless you wish to think the building was built weak and just waiting to collapse.
Tzimnewman3 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tzimnewman3
"Still there is going to be resistance unless you wish to think the building was built weak and just waiting to collapse. "
If that is true then there is no free fall as conspiracy theorists claim and they should show the rest of the 10 seconds clips to see what is happening next. .
obaeyens 1 year ago
The huge fireball, by the way, was the jet fuel burning up on the outside of the building. In the official story this amazing jet fuel made the tower explode about 1 hour after the jet fuel was actually burnt up.
The stories are so ridiculous. If Osama had done this we wouldn't have all this ridiculous shit. They found one of the hijackers' passport right by WTC. How stupid isn't that. If one evidence is fake, all of them are.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
They get caught in 1967 when they bombed the US Navy ship, and they tricked the stupid Americans into letting them get away with it.
They outsmart everybody.
If you are not careful, they will outsmart you, also.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
Eric Hufschmid, after he realized I had figured he was in on the cover up too:
Why are you so upset? The Jews are involved in lots of crime, but the reason they are so successful is because they are smart.
Even when they get caught, they figure out how to trick the stupid people into letting them get away with their crime. They got caught in 1946 when they bombed the King David Hotel, and they tricked the stupid British into letting them get away with it.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
Ridiculous claims of TV Fakery from Jews:
watch?v=uhtjNVWZGHU
AgainstWars 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
George Bush is a Jew:
tinyurl com / 2vgl3yz
AgainstWars 1 year ago
No intelligent person is disputing that the debris didn't fall at freefall speed. What's questionable is that the waves of destructive force moved down the side of the building as fast, or even faster, than freefall speed.
watch?v=eXSHm3CdHf4
And why dust plumes out the windows so far down the building?
watch?v=_4dpBzDm5MU
jelinto 1 year ago
@jelinto 1. The debris is falling faster than the building, so the "waves of destruction" couldn't possibly be.
2. The plumes are from air trapped inside the stairwells and elevator shafts. The air got forced DOWN because of the debris falling, and suddenly there's TOO MUCH AIR in the stairwell, so what happens? A stairwell door gets busted open and the air bursts into the floor, but it's not just going to STOP there, it's going to push the air on that floor in the same direction, towards and
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine out the window. SImple physics.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine
1. Wrong! Did you watch the video? The waves of explosive destruction and the overall collaspe of the building are two separate things. You're confusing these two.
2. Wrong again. The "dust plume" 40 storeys below occurs WAY too early for your stairwell or elevator shaft scenario to be the cause.
jelinto 1 year ago
@jelinto What about the plumes three or four stories below? If those can occur, why not the others?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine
The suggested official 9/11 version of collapses Would have been chaotic events. You cannot have symmetry from chaos. Undamaged columns would create resistance in the collapse and would cause the building to either stop collapsing, or fall to the path of least resistance causing a non-symmetrical collapse. Simple physics.
jelinto 1 year ago
haha,, the clip is 34 sec long but the clock show what??? not 34 sec thats for sure. which shows the sort of ppl who work for THE AGENCY putting clips on utube.. watch out ppl , there are agents about..
bigbrother1994 1 year ago
it took only 10 seconds for it to fall, not 20
DewbieHaut 2 years ago 2
So you can see inside the dust? Over 15
Weirdo10o4 1 year ago
Presidents and/or owners:
Jew - CBS - William S. Paley, Leslie Moonves
Jew - NBC - Jeffrey Zucker
Jew - ABC - Stuart Bloomberg and George W. Bodenheimer
Jew - ABC News - David Westin
Jew - CNN - Gerald Levin, Reese Schonfeld (co-founder)
Jew - FOX - Gail Berman, Rupert Murdoch
Jew - MBS - Ronnessen
Jew - Daily News - Maxwell, real name Hoch
Jew - US News - Zuckerman
AgainstWars 2 years ago
@AgainstWars I find it hilarious that you're so paranoid you have to try to pin it on Jewish people.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine
Not Jews. Zionism. You don't need to be a Jew to be a zionist.
watch?v=6ougc2ea9ZU
Likewise, you don't need to NOT be a Jew to be against zionism.
watch?v=M9OIqy6md9w
Yeah...it's complicated and too many people keep trying to simplify it. It isn't black and white.
jelinto 1 year ago
@jelinto Either way, the "conspiracy" would be so large, it'd be impossible to keep it quiet this long. 9 years and so far not one person has even accidently blabbed? Pretty incredible.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine
You're kidding right? Why not do the least bit of research before making such a claim?
watch?v=G-h4Zc57QKg
watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I
If it weren't the President and concerning 9/11, but a ordinary criminal speaking about an ordinary crime, don't you think it would get proper scrutiny?
watch?v=bvay28lZiHU
watch?v=jZK1VqAYp34
The truth of JFK's assassination hasn't come to light 46 years on. People were murdered in the wake of that. Let me guess, you think LHO did it alone.
jelinto 1 year ago
@jelinto Actually, no I don't believe Oswald acted alone (the final headshot blows BACKWARDS which would mean a shot from in FRONT of Kennedy). But for 9/11, all the people they'd have to bring into the conspiracy, it'd get too big to keep quiet for long. Eventually someone would slip and leak something. Nobody has so far. Rather odd, don't you think?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Larry Silverstein is Jewish and you can't deny that.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars What's your point?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine The Pentagon, which is formed as the center of a pentagram,
which Jewish Eliphas Levi identified as a symbol of evil,
had its groundbreaking ceremony on 9/11-1941.
Exactly 60 years later, the Jewish mass murderer Larry Silverstein
blew up his buildings killing the Gentiles in them...
And the Jewish media are covering it up. Even Alex Jones and others in the truth movement are in on the cover up.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars You have no proof of Silverstein doing any killing. And it's amazing how you believe that SO MANY people can "in on" the cover up and somehow NOT ONE has managed to leak out the "truth" in the last 9 years.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine And that's a pretty farfetch Strawman claim, when you have to use the Pentagon's groundbreaking ceremony to try to "convict" Silverstein, since Silverstein didn't OWN the Towers, he was merely the leaseholder. Nor did he have the authority to order ANY demolition. Nor did he order any at all.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine The proof is all over the place. Everyone can see that WTC1, 2 and 7 were demolished by explosives.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars You mean the magical explosives that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny came and scooped up all traces of so that rescue personnel and the demolition expert team surveying Ground Zero couldn't find it?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine The explosives exploded, you ridiculous fool. Everyone can see that the buildings exploded.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars Where was the flashes? Where was the 130 db booms that should have preceded the actual collapse?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine Flashes? You see the same thing as you see when a building explode. WTC7 sank down to earth in freefall speed, as if the floors vanished from bottom to top, which they did. There's no other way that can happen. Falling straight down like that in freefall speed can only mean that explosives placed on strategic places evenly in the floor detonated simultaniously. And you know that. You're probably a lying Jew.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgainstWars Yes, FLASHES. If you've ever seen a demolition, there's FLASHES as the charges detonate, followed a few seconds later by a 130 db BOOM. Yet NEITHER were present when Building 7 fell. Not to mention it is logically IMPOSSIBLE to plant several THOUSAND pounds of explosives and have NOBODY catch on. "If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains—however improbable—must be the truth" -Spock
TyVulpine 1 year ago
Comment removed
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars No, they didn't, because no explosive residue, blasting caps or detonation wires were found BY THE EXPERTS THAT SURVEYED THE AREA. What's impossible is for people to plant several THOUSAND POUNDS of explosives and NOBODY find out. NOT ONE PERSON in a building where over 10,000 people work. That's roughly 20,000 people in just Towers 1 and 2. Not sure how many in Building 7, but that's even more people, and still somehow nobody caught on? THAT is impossible.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine "BY THE EXPERTS THAT SURVEYED THE AREA"
The government did it, and you trust these experts more than your own eyes?
No, I don't think so. You're a liar.
There are plenty of deceptive videos and webpages about 9/11. It's not bin Laden who sent out a lot of people to confuse. The truth movement is in on the cover-up. They mix truth with lies and diversions.
The Jews are very eager to cover this up.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgainstWars It was an independant demolition crew, PLUS you had dozens of construction personnel PLUS resuce personnel PLUS trained dogs there. It's IMPOSSIBLE that with all the sifting and removal that went on that NOT ONE PERSON found evidence of explosives NOR has anyone come forward in the last nine years and "admitted" either.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine "independant demolition crew"
So, they said that and you believed them. You're a fool.
There are many videos on the net supposed to prove that Bush is not a liar, and that there were no conspiracy.
Why is that neccessary?
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars That doesn't prove "how" people were able to "plant" several thousand pounds of explosives in three buildings with over 20,000 people between them with nobody catching on. Nor does it explain why the collapse started in the IMPACTED AREAS. That would mean someone would have to climb up into those areas without ropes (remember, no climbing ropes found!), meticiously mark and plant the explosives, climb back down and get out. All in 56 minutes for So Tower or 111 minutes for No Tower.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine "the collapse started in the IMPACTED AREAS. That would mean someone would have to climb up "
You're ridiculous. Why would anyone have to climb? If you take a close look at the demolition of WTC1, you can see that the top floors get demoished like WTC7, bottom to top. The top floors are gone before the rest of the building explodes froom top to bottom. This "trick" to make the event fit the official story better. Carefully planned by extremely evil people.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars Why would anyone have to climb? I don't know. Maybe because A PLANE HAD HIT THOSE FLOORS? If they had planted explosives, it most likely would have been SET OFF ON IMPACT, causing the building to collapse instantly! Not to mention that they "waited" so long before setting off the charges, thus allowing hundreds of people to escape. Rather goes against any logic I know of. WAIT and LET people escape. Yep, that's a good way to kill as many people as possible.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine They can detonate the explosives in whichever order they want. No need to climb anywhere.
"it most likely would have been SET OFF ON IMPACT, "
You know the story. It was "intense fire" over a certain period which supposedly made it collapse. It would have been too obvious if they made the buildings dissappear in impact. What kind of magic planes are these?
AgainstWars 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgainstWars There was a HUGE FIREBALL ON IMPACT. You seriously think something EXPLOSIVE as demo charges could survive a plane impact without setting off? And then something as simple as an electrical charge (which is how charges are set off, no?) would be necessary to detonate?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine "HUGE FIREBALL" There are plenty of different explosives. Not all ar set off by fire. I don't know what the names of explosives used are. But it's extremely obvious that they used explosives.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars 9 years, and NOBODY has been able to conclusively prove that.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@TyVulpine The proof is right there. But there are plenty of liars who pretend they don't see it. And they own the media and are in control of the information.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@AgainstWars "The proof is right there". You'd think after 9 years, the "proof that is right there" would have proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
TyVulpine 1 year ago
@AgainstWars
"The proof is right there"
The conspiracy proof is so divided and inconsistent even contradicting each other suggesting that these people are sucking the stories it from their thumbs.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens Some of the conspiracy folks are lunatics who believe in lizards from outer space, some of them are hoaxsters out to make fools of the people who believe them, and some are honest researchers who make very good points if you bother to pay attention. The 911research.wtc7 website is very solid. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is pretty solid.
punxsutawneybarney 1 year ago
@obaeyens "proof is so divided". No it's very clear.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
@TyVulpine ""how" people were able to "plant""
You really have to bring Silverstein in court and ask him when he did it. There were reports of drills and downtime in weekends some weeks before. But I think this may be a fake story, to give truthers the impression that it was planned shortly before. Silverstein signed an insurance contract just before. Just another fake lead to make truthers think that money is the motive.
But the motives are of the religious kind. Read Deuteronomy 20.
AgainstWars 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AgainstWars I love how Truthers have declared themselves judge jury and executioner and "decided" what Silverstein said, by cherry picking his quotes and twisting them to mean something entirely different. Who needs a fair trial by peer? Just declare the man guilty and carry the execution out yourself, logic and evidence to the contrary be damned.
TyVulpine 1 year ago