coolest building implosion
Top Comments
All Comments (1,375)
-
Will everybody STU about 9/11?! God, I know it was the worst thing that could've happened to the US, but that was 10 years ago. GET OVER IT!!!
-
911
-
The difference between this and 911, is that 1.) if fell from the bottom down, NOT top down. So if fell like wtc7, NOT 1&2. 2nd.) The top was not exploding out with huge nuclear dust cloud. Yes ADM "Atomic Demolition Munitions" very low yield of < 100m were used on 911. ADM's are routinely used in canal building and coal mining. Not new technology. 3.) No molten steel 6 months after here, that is because there is no radioactive decay in this situation. Cheers.
-
@TheChristmasFan You think jet fuel didnt burn off right after the impact I mean look at the explosion that was massive on both buildings people on the lower levels may have escaped fire didnt kill them.
-
@TheChristmasFan not building 7 and it took under 2 hours for the first twin then under 1 for the second!
-
the collapse did. not the fire dude. u know what i mean
-
@TrueArsenic Burning jet fuel
-
@Tracid87 It did not take 10 seconds for jet fuel to take down the building, it took nearly three hours
-
for me it looks like that explosions on the side of the towers.
and explosive on the ground.
I trust my eyes and my ears :)
And i dont think that jet fuel can collapse 2 towers in 10 seconds to the ground. think about it.
WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ISRAEL? This is a video about explosions, for god's sake!
eruption257 4 months ago 8
@GW8941 Not as loud and as prominent as this. Reporters on the scene said they heard rumbling, not explosions and not nearly as many as this. Stop with your dumbass conspiracies and look at the evidence. The building started to collapse exactly where the planes hit. Can you explain that? Were the people flying them so skilled that they knew exactly where to fly them so that the explosives, placed months before, would be right below the impact points?
a021692 4 months ago 4