Some of the other WTC buildings had been damaged more severly and didn´t collapse in this orderly manner.
Even a crew with some years of practice has big problems do do such a good job. And WTC7 has collapsed from fire and structural damage? Are you kidding me. Look into the FEMA report about WTC3+4+5+6 and then look at WTC7 again.
that first video on the bottom right debunks the idea that wtc7 fell at free fall speed. since the collapse begins when the video starts (east penthouse), it isn't out of view until 14 seconds. truthers say WTC7 fell at free fall speed or "near free fall" speed (whatever that means). I hope this video will clear up that misconception.
btw, I know NIST says there was 2.25 sec of free fall after the penthouse. but truthers never qualified it like that.
wait, are you suggesting there is a "a mountain of strong evidence" supporting the inside jobbyjob/CT?
did someone say something about sounding like a complete tool?
to your final point, I typically use truthtard when I want to lump & ridicule. either one works for me, but thanks for the advice. anyway, those who still buy into this idiocy don't need my help to look stupid.
The official story supporters try to divert the discussion by arguing about how long WTC7 took to hit the ground and when the collapse really started. They don't understand the concept of "instantaneous acceleration." No shame in that; no one understood it until Isaac Newton. NIST has admitted that WTC7 dropped at free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds or 25 meters. That means a 25 meter section was removed from the vertical support columns suddenly. Not weakened by fire; suddenly GONE !
47 stories straight down in 6.6 seconds. Massive dust cloud, minimal damage to surrounding buildings. Looks like a professional controlled demolition. The rubble pile from building 7 so perfect. Broken down into small ready to dispose of pieces. Had these buildings fell from natural forces, large undamaged sections would of remained intact.
For a fire induced collapse the building seems to be fairly devoid of....fire...
Ahlywog 9 months ago
In the 7th tower there was no explosion and there were no deaths. Bear that in mind.
LyriMetacurl 1 year ago
@LyriMetacurl Not according to at least 1 witness.
Ahlywog 9 months ago
Why do they leave out the penthouse, that's when the collapse starts.
Weirdo10o4 2 years ago
@Weirdo10o4
"Why do they leave out the penthouse, that's when the collapse starts"
Simple. Conspiracy theorists are fucking morons
aggiefitz 1 year ago
Thanks for posting this video!
,
162747 2 years ago
good question...
log140 2 years ago
no wonder it was left out of the 911 commission report:-)
log140 2 years ago 3
it's a classic controled demolition
darealcase 2 years ago 7
Looks like a professional controlled demolition.
log140 2 years ago 5
well...no casualties were associated with the collapse. so what would be the point of that?
Transfectingood 2 years ago
there were some very interesting offices and papers in that building... Enron investigation...
log140 2 years ago 4
Some of the other WTC buildings had been damaged more severly and didn´t collapse in this orderly manner.
Even a crew with some years of practice has big problems do do such a good job. And WTC7 has collapsed from fire and structural damage? Are you kidding me. Look into the FEMA report about WTC3+4+5+6 and then look at WTC7 again.
pcuimac 2 years ago
that first video on the bottom right debunks the idea that wtc7 fell at free fall speed. since the collapse begins when the video starts (east penthouse), it isn't out of view until 14 seconds. truthers say WTC7 fell at free fall speed or "near free fall" speed (whatever that means). I hope this video will clear up that misconception.
btw, I know NIST says there was 2.25 sec of free fall after the penthouse. but truthers never qualified it like that.
good debunking job! 5 stars!
unclesamsnephew666 2 years ago
@unclesamsnephew666
With every subject, you're going to find people who really know what they're talking about and people who have their facts mixed up.
That's just the way it works.
We don't get to dismiss a mountain of strong evidence just because of a couple misstated facts or premature conclusions.
I wish it were that simple, but it's not.
And, by the way .. when you use the label "truthers", it just makes you sound like a complete tool.
It was invented solely for lumping & ridiculing.
,
162747 2 years ago 3
"a mountain of strong evidence"
wait, are you suggesting there is a "a mountain of strong evidence" supporting the inside jobbyjob/CT?
did someone say something about sounding like a complete tool?
to your final point, I typically use truthtard when I want to lump & ridicule. either one works for me, but thanks for the advice. anyway, those who still buy into this idiocy don't need my help to look stupid.
unclesamsnephew666 2 years ago
You're the only one here who looks like a TOOL, seeing as you said "inside jobby/job/ct"...
TOOL...
Where is your evidence? We have nanothermite (explosive evidence) Where's yours?
NanoThermite911 2 years ago 3
@162747
"It was invented solely for lumping & ridiculing."
If the boot fits...
aggiefitz 1 year ago
The official story supporters try to divert the discussion by arguing about how long WTC7 took to hit the ground and when the collapse really started. They don't understand the concept of "instantaneous acceleration." No shame in that; no one understood it until Isaac Newton. NIST has admitted that WTC7 dropped at free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds or 25 meters. That means a 25 meter section was removed from the vertical support columns suddenly. Not weakened by fire; suddenly GONE !
Skeptic121 2 years ago 13
Fuck !
zeboelgamed 2 years ago 3
Seems like you can debunk anything nowadays. Doesn't matter to them even if it sounds silly to some people.
umyafzal 3 years ago
47 stories straight down in 6.6 seconds. Massive dust cloud, minimal damage to surrounding buildings. Looks like a professional controlled demolition. The rubble pile from building 7 so perfect. Broken down into small ready to dispose of pieces. Had these buildings fell from natural forces, large undamaged sections would of remained intact.
paulymac 3 years ago 11