Over the past 15 years many highly respected academics and experts have come forward to challenge the official narrative on the collapse of the WTC towers forwarded by the U.S. government. The official government position holds that the collapse of all three towers was due to intense heat inside of the buildings.
But a new forensic investigation into the collapse of the three World Trade Center towers on 9/11, published in Europhysics News – a highly respected European physics magazine – claims that “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.”
While many in the mainstream have attempted to label anyone questioning the official narrative as a “tin foil hat” conspiracy theorist, many highly respected experts have come forward to lampoon the idea that the buildings collapsed due to the intense heat and fires following two terrorist-directed plane crashes.
“Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities,” the four physicists conclude in the damning report.
The new study is the work of Steven Jones, former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University, Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer with over 25 years of structural design experience in the aerospace and communications industries and Ted Walter, the director of strategy and development for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a nonprofit organization that today represents more than 2,500 architects and engineers.
The comprehensive study in Europhysics News directly challenges the official narrative and lends to a growing body of evidence that seriously questions the veracity of the government narrative.
In 2002, the National Institute of Standards and Technology remarked that the case was exceptionally bizarre. There were no other known cases of total structural collapses in high-rise buildings caused by fires and so it is deeply unusual that it should have happened three times in the space of one day, noted NIST.
Official investigations have never been able to thoroughly and coherently explain how this might have happened and various teams tasked with examining the collapse have raised difficult questions about the veracity of the government’s story.
Perhaps most damning of all, the experts claimed that after a thorough forensic analysis of video footage of the building’s collapse, it revealed signs of a controlled implosion. Additionally, Jones has co-authored a number of papers documenting evidence of unreacted nano-thermitic material in the WTC dust.
The authors of the study note that the buildings fell with such speed and symmetry that they there was no other feasible explanation for the sudden collapse at free-fall speeds – directly refuting studies that attempted to debunk the idea that the building fell without resistance. These respected experts’ new forensic analysis only adds to the growing movement of people calling for a new and impartial investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center.
Revealing the scope and breadth of public disbelief in the official government narrative surrounding the events of 9/11, even presidential candidate Jill Stein has recently called for a new investigation.
Jay Syrmopoulos writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.
Do not pay attention to the little man behind the curtain
The Israeli Mossad planted nano thermite and W54 mini pit nukes in the buildings to bring them down in a controlled demolition. The CIA helped
Look up “Urban Moving Systems” and “Denko Mechanical” RIGHT NOW.
I hope Jill gets a government redress, that would go a long ways to revealing the hidden truth and the folks involved (hopefully).
I’ve read credible books by credible authors from some of the nation’s largest institutions, and they all say basically the same thing. It was an inside job. At first I thought it was Mossad using one of their famous false flag methods to assure the US would remain in the Middle East.
But now, newer revelations by the credible authors and investigators have discovered huge reasons of probable cause; i.e., the whole complex of buildings were closed during the prior weekend, which gave ample opportunity for a group of skilled technicians to have set charges of nano thermite or C4 explosives at critical structural points just as professional demolition companies do to drop buildings in their footprints.
This is the only way these buildings could have fallen straight down. And there is no way an airliner could have done that kind of damage to buildings like this as pointed out in the article above. Jet fuel accounts for the fires, but only in the top floors. And even jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to melt steel, as it would have had to do according to the government’s story. Then of course there’s the accounting for building 7 that had no contact with either of the other buildings and yet it fell, too. But actually some time later.
For those who can’t bring themselves to believe the government would do something so heinous, I can only say that there are groups in government that want the US to be in continuous wars and will do anything to accomplish that end. Unknown to us, these people have done worse especially in other countries to achieve their aims..
So who is this group?. If one connects the dots, as those who are smarter than me have done, you will find a loose knit group of corrupt politicians, the CIA, big oil companies, big banks and the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned of before he left office.
Cheney’s fingerprints are all over it.
In your third paragraph you talk about newer revelations and the closer of the buildings. Could you give me your sources? I would be very interested to read them.
I can help there! Check the Archives at the “Engineers & Architects for 9/11” site, and several of the Books written later, after the dust had settled, (no pun intended).
Everything, from the spurious sale of that WTC Property, to the confessed “pulling” of tower #7, (by the new owner — Silverstein I believe), to the DETAILS as to HOW such demolitions are developed & ignited, as well as the testimonies of “eyewitnesses” to the various anomalies that gave rise to greater suspicions as to WHAT ACTUALLY brought those buildings down!
If you DIG, you’ll find the answers….This is NOT a subject that’s been lightly investigated AND the event sequences ARE TOTALLY recorded…That’s WHY I stated that ALL of the EVIDENCE ACCUMULATED, concerning the events of 9/11, MUST BE collected into ONE SINGLE DOCUMENT and made available to ALL persons desiring that info!
Christian: the objective of theorists is to get rich by selling books and speeches. I won’t contribute to their dumbing people down. Telling people to do their research is playing into their greedy hands, not to mention your inability to support your arguments.
How many of the architects for 9/11 have designed 100 story office buildings? How can they possibly know the inner workings of the fire suppression systems and building design without training and experience in tall buildings?
“Pull it’ is a fireman’s term for ‘evacuate.’ But you knew that, right?
‘Pull It’ is not a blaster’s terminology.
Have you read any of the commission reports and NIST analysis? They use a bit of math and physics – remember Newton? – and draw plausible conclusions. OR, they simply say ‘we don’t know.’ That’s far more honest then the pseudoscientists here who take a tiny bit of fact and embellish it with impossible physics and unlikely strawmen. Claims that demo crews planted charges high in a building where they do no good are poorly informed. Nano-iron is the main ingredient in laser toner. Since these were office buildings, they had lots of the stuff. Thermite burns chaotically, exactly like a kid’s sparkler. It requires shaped charges to damage steel, not wall paint.
Tom, you are one stubborn and rather dense mother fffffer!
Krishna: Thanks for your thought provoking reply. Do you attack the messenger every time you are too stupid to attack the message or do you save your ad hominems for your pet conspiracy theories?
Here’s your sign, dumbass: Read it and try not to look quite so ignorant: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/system/App/Settings/size24x36posters/000/000/001/original/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf
Krishna: Did you read the physics journal article? Did you understand it? Was it credible?
Thanks for the ad hominem. Here’s your sign: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/system/App/Settings/size24x36posters/000/000/001/original/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf
my word Christina, the credible sources are all over the place. I could spend the next two hours listing them url by book etc. But I don’t have time.
Start with the people who compiled the Report on 9/11. Most of them regret being a part of what they knew was a lie.
Look into the magazine Mechanics Illustrated, I believe it was. They’ve provided every single way, from an engineering and demolitions reports, that there is no way this could have happened the way we’re told by our lying government.
Douglas: You got it backwards: PM debunked the myths spread by ae911 and so-called ‘truthers.’. http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a49/1227842/
Douglas, EXTREMELY well put! Simple and concise!
Only one factor remains to be determined, and you EVEN touched upon THIS…The PERPS who DID IT! AND! Those who ORDERED IT DONE! And, I suspect that you named ALL of the ORGS, (including MASSAD)! BUT! “We the People…” have the RIGHT to know SPECIFICALLY: “WHO DONE IT”!?!?!?
Christian: More than that: How did they synchronize the jet arrivals with the detonations? Why were demo-charges placed up high when all other demo crews work in the basement and let gravity pull down buildings? No demo crew has ever taken down more than 47 stories, and ‘implosion’ has been limited to 30 floors or less. How did crews figure out how to ‘implode’ 110 story buildings? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_voluntarily_demolished_buildings Not the column that denotes ‘method of demolition’: Manual vs implosion.
Careful planning by experts.
James: Please tell us what company was ‘expert’ at taking down 110 story buildings.
I’m surprised they’ve had that much patience with you mate.
Maybe it’s because I speak with data and known physics.
They softened up the core with the initial explosions that were heard by multiple witnesses, then they activated the timed charges from the top down because the structures were too tall to drop them any other way without damaging the real estate they wanted to keep. It’s all visible if you look at the videos. It took a huge amount of energy both thermal and kinetic to clear out the resistance and drop these structures.
Sure Brian. Top down ‘softening’. Can you explain the physics, both static and dynamic, of this ‘softening?’ What resistance was ‘cleared out?’
What real estate did ‘they’ succeed in saving?
Who is “they?”
Multiple explosions or girder rivets letting go? A two inch by 8″ rivet is going to speak loudly when it pops, and it pops because it is being stressed. What kind of sound does a heavy steel girder make when is released, or compressed and hits other girders?
How much more energy was needed in addition to a 500,000 lb airliner traveling at 500 mph loaded with 24,000 gallons of jet fuel?
A hell of a lot more energy. Try calculating the inertia in a 1400 foot column of 2 to 4 inch I-beam in a tight weight-balanced grid full of reinforced concrete with 47 interior load bearing columns. A hell of a lot more energy, especially considering that the energy in the jets and the fuel did very little to change the structural integrity of the buildings. The 2nd strike was at too sharp an angle (probably due to wind shear on the remote controlled plane) and most of the fuel blew out in a highly visible plume outside the tower. In ny case, that energy would be nothing against those towers.
Face it, you could have taken the top 400 feet of those towers and raised them up 200 feet and dropped them, and apart from the impossibility of getting a vertical collapse, it still just wouldn’t be enough energy to drop the buildings into their footprint with a 200 foot debris stack. Losing energy and dropping into an increasingly rigid structure the whole while. Vertical collapse from asymmetrical damage. Three buildings downed by two planes. Makes no sense. Add to that the traces of thermitic agent found in multiple independently collected dust samples. Further, you misread my statement. I didn’t cite top-down softening. I said they softened the lower cores first, then dropped the frames into that volume of space, once it had been “softened” meaning the structural resistance was reduced. Nothing mysterious about the physics. Are you being obtuse? Is it deliberate? What real estate?? All the highly valuable Lower Manhattan real estate “they” (the corporate mafia, Catch 22, what you will, obtuse much??) didn’t want to get rid of and for which they hadn’t applied for a demolition permit. You do know the prior owners of WTC applied to demolish the towers TWICE? And they were refused the permit because of the particulate debris it would create, which could damage the health of thousands, which is just what happened when they demolished the towers under the guise of a terror attack. Asbestos refitting was required and rendered the towers unprofitable. Probable cause all over the place. I could go on but you’re a lost cause.
While I prepare a response, how about telling us your background and training.
Then tell us where you got the information that led you to the following conclusions, with references.
1. Security procedures that allowed pre-loading explosives.
2. How much fuel ‘blew out’ and how much puddled and ran down various shafts.
3. What was the 3rd building downed by planes?
4. Who found ‘thermitic’ materials, where, and what lab certified the materials as such?
5. When were demolition applications submitted, by whom, and who denied them?
6. Please share your calculations or reference to calculations that support this claim: “raising the top 400 ft of the towers 200 feet and dropped them, and apart from the impossibility of getting a vertical collapse,
7. Ditto: it still just wouldn’t be enough energy to drop the buildings into their footprint with a 200 foot debris stack. Losing energy and dropping into an increasingly rigid structure the whole while.
8. What makes your position ‘correct,’ and mine a lost cause?
All that info is available online. I’m at work right now so limited time to reply.
What 3rd building? WTC 7! Jeez, that’s so basic I didn’t think it needed an explanation. My qualifications? A degree in comp lit & critical studies (Irvine, not a community college) where you learn how to tell who’s lying. How much fuel? I can’t give you a figure in gallons, just look at the video. Most of it, clearly, judging by the huge fireball, just look and see. Thermite discovery: Niels Harrit, Copenhagen U. & Steven Jones, BYU physics prof at the time, with co-authors. Samples were submitted by volunteers. By the way, Google will suppress many useful search results. Nothing in particular guarantees that my position is correct. I’m not that arrogant. But I’ve read and thought a great deal about it for the last 16 years. Sorry I called you a lost cause.
Wow. You make a very credible case. its good to know there are intelligent discerning people still on earth who strive to seek the truth behind the lies we are fed.
Brian says: All that info is available online. I’m at work right now so limited time to reply.
That’s the corollary to ‘do your own research,’ which really means you don’t have the answers, so I should support your argument for you. That’s not how it works: You make the claim, you provide the evidence.
Brian says: What 3rd building? WTC 7! Jeez, that’s so basic I didn’t think it needed an explanation.
You said ‘brought down by aircraft.’ Have you watched the videos? How many aircraft hit WTC7?
Have you seen the aerial photo of the aftermath, with outlines where the buildings once stood? If collateral damage from WTC 1&2 is considered ‘brought down by aircraft,’ then we can say that about the Verizon building, the community college, a church and WTC 1-7 inclusive, eh? See ‘aftermath, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center
Brian said: My qualifications? A degree in comp lit & critical studies (Irvine, not a community college) where you learn how to tell who’s lying.
I’m sure that is a useful skill. How does it work exactly? More important, how do you know when it isn’t working, or as in VooDoo and pseudoscience, when it fails? People present the facts that support their case and repress that that doesn’t. Can you detect that?
Where do you stand on cold fusion?
How to lie with statistics is a good primer https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500845316&sr=1-1&keywords=how+to+lie+with+statistics+by+darrell+huff
I find just about anything written by Steven Milloy is instructive and useful. He also has a blog junkscience.com.
Peter Huber’s Galileo’s Revenge, junk science in the courtroom is a lesson in bad science: https://www.amazon.com/Galileos-Revenge-Junk-Science-Courtroom/dp/0465026249/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1500847776&sr=8-1&keywords=galileo%27s+revenge
As is Robert Park’s ‘VooDoo science.’ https://www.amazon.com/Voodoo-Science-Road-Foolishness-Fraud/dp/0195135156/ref=pd_ybh_a_28?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=9YW1RSGN4C4X2KKK0W42
Are you familiar with the scientific method? It is a process that helps lead to the truth and pisses you off along the way because it illuminates our bias and preconceived notions.
Do you know the difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory?
Brian says: How much fuel? I can’t give you a figure in gallons, just look at the video. Most of it, clearly, judging by the huge fireball, just look and see.
Applying my well-trained aircraft accident investigator eye to the fireball, I estimate that we saw about 10% ignition. Remember, for a liquid hydrocarbon to ignite, it has to vaporize and mix with oxygen to get a stoichiometric burn. For Jet-A it’s about 18:1. In that case, it was most likely fuel rich. [Unlike movies, where a match tossed into stream of fuel leaking from a jet taking off is ignited by a cigarette, and the flame follows the puddle to the jet, which of course explodes. All of that is pure fantasy. Try it.]
Brian says: Thermite discovery: Niels Harrit, Copenhagen U. & Steven Jones, BYU physics prof at the time, with co-authors. Samples were submitted by volunteers.
This must be the Steven Jones forced to retire from BYU for making unsupported claims about thermite. Neither Harritt nor Jones offered any sort of chain of custody for their samples, so they could have come from anywhere.
Brian says: By the way, Google will suppress many useful search results.
For example? You are aware that if that were true, there are many other search engines.
Brian says: Nothing in particular guarantees that my position is correct. I’m not that arrogant. But I’ve read and thought a great deal about it for the last 16 years. Sorry I called you a lost cause.
Back to the scientific method: If you apply rules of logic, plausibility and some physics, arguments from ae911 and their ilk become implausible if not fraudulent. Books, speaking fees, and videos have made some of the promoters quite wealthy. They have an answer, mostly based on hyperbole, never mind how silly. Humans seem to need patterns, and many hate loose ends. Throw in dragons and things that go bump in the night. The same kind of thinking that makes religion so popular: No evidence necessary. A savior provides answers, and that’s good enough.
On the other hand, science rarely gives a straight answer.
Joe and Susie Sixpack find it frustrating and search elsewhere for quick answers.
Science is based on observation and data, rules of logic, shared data and reproducibility. a researcher rarely offers opinon, and when they do, it is couched in prevarication and conditions. If we don’t know, that’s what we say.
As Will James once said:
“Our storehouse of ignorance isn’t the ‘I don’t know, it’s the knowledge of so much that isn’t so.”
Well, Tom, that’s an awful lot of condescending ad hominem stuff for very little content. I can tell the difference, because that’s one of my useful critical skills. And yes, you can do your own research, and yes, I am at work. I have no internet at home. So I have to waste my employer’s time asking you to prove YOUR case, including how Building 7 came down at all (beyond citing the word “aftermath”). Prove the fuel lost in the fireball left enough fuel in the stairwells to soften structural steel.. prove how much steel and how much tensility it lost and where in the structures (all three, mind you) such that a vertical collapse became possible. Prove there are no evil men running things behind the scenes. Prove conspiracies are as rare as dragons. Prove that the war plans, the Patriot Act, and all the other strategic elements were not already drafted and in position. Prove that Bin Laden didn’t really die in Pakistan in December 2001, like Benazir Bhutto said he did, just a month before they blew her to smithereens like they did those towers. Or maybe she just collapsed into her own footprint due to the fire in her coiffure and the cigarette lighter in her pocket. Give me some numbers on the inertia in those towers and formulate for me how that resistance was exceeded by a collapse sequence starting at zero velocity. “Science is based on observation and data…” but you haven’t even observed the evidence, have you? Which is why you don’t substantiate your own claims, like your absurd claim that all the rivets popped out. I’ve come to the conclusion that your’e a troll and I take back what I said. You are indeed a lost cause.
Brian: That’s quite a Gish Gallop. If you think my words were ‘condescending ad hominem ‘stuff’ because you have a ‘critical skill’ that helps you tell the difference, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
What do you do for a living, and where do you work? Looking at your lengthy posts on discus and others, you spend a lot of time doing it, which makes you look like a shill. However, you haven’t said much that is substantive, so maybe ‘troll’ fits you better.
I’m retired, with degrees in chemistry and biology, and a masters in systems management. I ran test teams that designed tests, collected data and hid while statisticians ran analysis on B707 sensor mods for the warfighter. I don’t have many skills and certainly make no claim to having ‘critical skills in lie detecting.’ I just try to know when to hire two experts in atopic, so they could take shots at each others methodologies and conclusions. It works from a scientific perspective, but often the customer wanted the widget no matter how poorly it worked. ‘We can always fix it later.’ So in the end, their minds were made up and the science didn’t matter. That ‘bias’ is even more prevalent among journalists, bloggers and the great unwashed.
About your special powers: Have you tried applying your bullshit detector kit to ae911 and the others who shill for their books, speaking fees and videos? Could ae911 and others have ulterior motives? After 911, investors and occupants viewed highrise buildings as money pits and inherently dangerous when they aren’t targets. I see ae911 diverting attention from inherent risk by claiming. Thermate! Some here make the vague claim that WTC7 occupants were all three letter agencies. If that means government tenants, it might also mean that only government could afford the rent.
As I’ve stated before, there is very little ‘proof’ in science: There is data, and we both lack it. What there is is in the hands of others, who want to interpret it for us. Neither of us have data beyond some suspect videos. The rest is babble from talking heads and people with agendas. You have provided zero references for your claims. I have provided references, which you ignore.
I re-watched the ae911 video last night https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYUYya6bPGw . The only part that is new from ten years ago is a ‘recent discovery’ of more bone fragments on the roof of a nearby building. ‘Families need to know this’ said a family member. “Why’ is never mentioned. Just more hyperbole and pathos.
We need a ‘new’ investigation’ Says Richard Gage, ‘based on ‘abundant’ forensic data and eyewitness testimony. Yet, the video does not present any evidence that wasn’t available ten years ago, and the eye-witness claims are old now. To what end? Could it lead to criminal charges? That would require yet another, criminal investigation. Good job security for lawyers.
What do your lie detector skills tell you about Gage’s claims?
The 911 commission and NIST reports are factual. They avoid speculation, and don’t use hyperbole. As I said before, science leads you to the truth. But first it will piss you off. They didn’t address controlled demolition, because the jetliners were pretty obviously involved. So was fire. Occams razor.
Brian: For your enjoyment:
Kinetic Energy Calculations of Flight 11 and Flight 175 Impacts
Formula for Kinetic Energy (KE)
KE = 0.5 · M · V2
Takeoff Weights for Boeing 767 –200ER and Boeing 707 –320B
The Maximum Takeoff Weight for a Boeing 767 -200ER is 179,170 kg
The Maximum Takeoff Weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 152,400 kg
Aircraft Type, Speed and Kinetic Energy Impact Calculation the WTC Towers Were Designed to Withstand and Survive
KE of Boeing 707 at 270 m/s*
(0.5) · (152,400 kg) · (270)2
= 76,200 kg · 72,900
= 5,554,980,000 Joules
Actual Aircraft Types, Impact Speeds of Flights 11 and 175 and Kinetic Energy Impact Calculations
Flight 11 Impact Speed into North Tower at 08:46:
KE of Boeing 767 at 198 m/s**
(0.5) · (179,170 kg) · (198)2
= 89,585 · 39,204
= 3,512,090,340 Joules
Flight 175 Impact Speed into South Tower at 09:03:
KE of Boeing 767 at 243 m/s**
(0.5) · (179,170 kg) · (243)2
= 89,585 · 59,049
= 5,289,904,665 Joules
Learn about joules here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule
*270 m/s = 600 mph.
**NIST reports the impact speed of Flight 11 at 440 mph (198 m/s) and the impact speed of Flight 175 at 540 mph (243 m/s).
As is readily observed in the above calculations, the kinetic energy unleashed upon the towers by the impacts of Flights 11 and 175 fell well within the capabilities of the towers to withstand such trauma. The towers were built to survive the impact of a Boeing 707 traveling at 600 miles per hour (965.6 km/h). The kinetic energy of such a strike would unleash 5,554,980,000 Joules. Although the Boeing 767s that struck the towers on September 11, 2001 were each approximately 59,000 lbs. (26,770 kg) heavier than the Boeing 707s the designers of the towers had based their calculations on, the reduced airspeeds of the impact aircrafts over-compensated for this greater weight, resulting in less kinetic energy expended.
The kinetic energy expended in the first strike on the North Tower by Flight 11 is calculated at 3,512,090,340 Joules, below the 5,554,980,000 Joules the towers were designed to withstand and survive. The greater velocity of Flight 175 (540 mph or 874.8 km/h vs. 440 mph or 712.8 km/h for Flight 11), resulting in a kinetic energy calculation of 5,289,904,665 Joules, which is very close to the designers’ allowance of 5,554,980,000 Joules for the towers.
It should also be noted that the maximum jet fuel capacity for a Boeing 707-320B is 23,000 gallons, while the maximum jet fuel capacity for a Boeing 767-200 is 23,980 gallons. The actual amount of jet fuel that spilled into each tower was approximately 10,000 gallons, or 37,854L.
The energy released by 37,854L of Jet-A is 37.4MJ/L, or roughly 1,415,740,000 Joules of energy.
The sum of the kinetic and chemical energies of either aircraft exceeds the design limit of 5,554,980,000 Joules.
There was no fire suppression: Water was cut off in both towers 1 and 2. Insulation was a spray-on mix of rock wool and binders at the 77th and 92nd floors where the impact occurred, and was probably knocked loose by the impacts.
It’s also likely that the impacts loosened fasteners. The heat of expansion of horizontal girders and floor supports may have sheared loose fasteners. Floors were 4″ of concrete poured on corrugated sheet iron supported by trusses. Truss sagging from the fire is theorized to have caused the inward bulging of the outer trusses as observed in many photos. When the trusses fell off their supports, and/or main beam fasteners failed, they collapsed.
Brian – You’re kidding, right? You avoid all questions by building a strawman that has total strangers forcing you to misbehave at work. You poor little snowflake.
This snowflake knows you’re a shill copping your “work” from NIST. Your argument concerning the fireball doesn’t even support your conclusions. “Applying my well-trained aircraft accident investigator eye to the fireball, I estimate that we saw about 10% ignition. Remember, for a liquid hydrocarbon to ignite, it has to vaporize and mix with oxygen to get a stoichiometric burn.” Oooh… So the fuel that stayed in the buildings burned better than the fuel that got forcefully ejected into the open air, thus spraying it into droplets and mixing it with oxygen? The fuel that stayed inside burned hot and clean enough to weaken steel, although the flames inside the towers soon died out and gave way to the dark smoke of low-oxygen fires, long before the so-called “collapse” was initiated? This looks to me like a pure bluff, perhaps just to use the word “stoichiometric.” Another dodgy argument: you interpret the firing of Steven Jones as if it showed that his findings were fraudulent, as if there were no possibility that his firing was due to the political implications of the findings. Your “scientific method” is an exercise in cherry picking. It would be more scientific to assess the political background honestly. It’s part of the picture, the facts on the ground, which you’d better respect if you want to wield that razor. “What distinguishes this our 19th Century is not the victory of science, but the victory of scientific institutions OVER science.” That’s Nietzsche, around 1880. No one else would have been capable of writing that in 1880, but today it’s pretty obvious. That’s why NIST is able to raise a wall of falsification in the face of every honest 9/11 investigator. To put it simply, we KNOW what it is we are dealing with.
Brian says: This snowflake knows you’re a shill copping your “work” from NIST.
And your evidence is?
Brian says: Your argument concerning the fireball doesn’t even support your conclusions. “Applying my well-trained aircraft accident investigator eye to the fireball, I estimate that we saw about 10% ignition. Remember, for a liquid hydrocarbon to ignite, it has to vaporize and mix with oxygen to get a stoichiometric burn.” Oooh… So the fuel that stayed in the buildings burned better than the fuel that got forcefully ejected into the open air, thus spraying it into droplets and mixing it with oxygen? The fuel that stayed inside burned hot and clean enough to weaken steel, although the flames inside the towers soon died out and gave way to the dark smoke of low-oxygen fires, long before the so-called “collapse” was in itiated? This looks to me like a pure bluff, perhaps just to use the word “stoichiometric.”
Just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it wrong. Stoichiometric combustion is a term commonly used in aviation were proper combustion extends range and engine life. I have 4500 hrs of turbine time and almost 6000 hrs of piston, where the term is commonly used. Piston engines have a ‘red knob’ used to lean combustion for efficiency as noted with fuel flow and exhaust gas temperature. The science behind it is probably a bit much for truth-telling snowflakes. but you can learn about it here: https://www.advancedpilot.com/
Brian says: Another dodgy argument: you interpret the firing of Steven Jones as if it showed that his findings were fraudulent, as if there were no possibility that his firing was due to the political implications of the findings.
Do you have data or a credible source that shows ‘as if’ Jones was let go for other reasons?
Brian says: Your “scientific method” is an exercise in cherry picking.
Do you have specifics, or are you relying on hyperbole to make your argument?
Brian says: It would be more scientific to assess the political background honestly. It’s part of the picture, the facts on the ground, which you’d better respect if you want to wield that razor. “What distinguishes this our 19th Century is not the victory of science, but the victory of scientific institutions OVER science.” That’s Nietzsche, around 1880. No one else would have been capable of writing that in 1880, but today it’s pretty obvious.
More hyperbole and another gish gallop. You’re really wobbling.
Brian says: That’s why NIST is able to raise a wall of falsification in the face of every honest 9/11 investigator.
Yet, you provide only hyperbole.
Brian says: To put it simply, we KNOW what it is we are dealing with.
Too bad you can’t articulate it. For a self-proclaimed journalist with special training in lie detection, that’s rather sad.
Here’s a statement that your poor little snowflake journalist truth detector is going to have problems with. It has to do with that fireball thingy:
“Flammable and combustible liquids themselves do not burn. It is the mixture of their vapors and air that burns. Gasoline, with a flashpoint of -40°C (-40°F), is a flammable liquid. Even at temperatures as low as -40°C (-40°F), it gives off enough vapour to form a burnable mixture in air.”
Both Jet A and Jet A-1 have a flash point higher than 38 °C (100 °F), 140F higher than mogas. with an autoignition temperature of 210 °C (410 °F). Compared to mogas, its almost non-flammable.
All of that is why mogas is blended for summer and winter use: Adjust the vapor pressure and flashpoint so it doesn’t evaporate too readily in summer and create smog, but evaporates readily enough in winter to get a cold engine to light off. Diesel fuel is quite similar to jet fuel, and requires some sort of preheat to start, like glow plugs.
Note the word ‘vapor.’ Not atomized. Not splashes. Not puddles, barrels or tankers. It’s the vapor that burns.
Your belief that most of the fuel burned on impact is wrong because cold fuel simply would not all instantly vaporize. Or even atomize. Without vapor, it can’t burn. Within the fireball, conditions are fuel rich, and stoichiometric conditions do not exist for lack of oxygen. Such explosions can self extinguish, except for other stuff that caught fire in the explosion. That stuff reignites the fire as more fuel vaporizes from the heat of the initial blast.
For someone who claims to be a walking, talking truth detector, I think you screwed up and misquoted Nietzsche. What he really said is: “What distinguishes this our 19th Century is not the victory of science, but the victory of THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD OVER science.” Source:
Nietzsche and Science (Scientism 3 of 5) | Volatility
Sep 5, 2009 – This post will trace the development of Nietzsche’s ideas on science … Science itself henceforth requires justification (which is not to say there is any such justification). ….. WP 466: “It is not the victory of science that distinguishes our nineteenth century, but the victory of the scientific method over science.”.
Did they teach you anything about fact checking at journalism school?
Also, Tom, I would like to know what are you qualifications or expertise in political analysis and not getting conned? Are you an expert on the subject of government corruption? On the history of false flags, psychological warfare and diversionary tactics? How are you qualified to say there’s nothing more to it than the official story? Because so far, I’m the only one being asked for credentials, and personally I put little stock in them. I try to consider what people say on its own merits. What about gravitational waves? Do you believe in those? There’s a big credibility war going on, but to me, no one has any. And re: dropping the top part down 200 feet to gain momentum, well, no one has ever tested that! But imagine a scale model in your backyard, 14 feet instead of 400. Steel, concrete, etc. Tiny little rivets and everything. Drop it 2 feet and see if it smashes the whole thing to the ground. It won’t!
Type: that’s “14 feet instead of 1400.” You get the point.
Brilliant response mate!
And building 7? 😉
Like # 3, 4, 5 & 6.
Or there were others ready to take bombs into the buildings once the planes hit and confusion and fear set in. That is a much more reasonable version than yours. There is no way these buildings could have been rigged to fall straight down, and no way they could have done it without being detected and removing large part of the structure beforehand. Your scenario is impossible, which leaves the other one.
No, they had to rig the buildings for detonation in advance. That’s why they conducted security shutdowns in the two weeks prior, this is well documented. That gave the teams a chance to get in and rig the towers. They used both conventional and thermal charges. Some think they also used micro-nukes. I don’t claim to know for sure about that but the radiation spike was recorded. I don’t know what you mean saying there’s no way they could have been rigged to fall straight down, because that’s the only way to do it. Which is why it was necessary to pulverize so much building material in the process, producing an incredible amount of fine powder, 10 to 50 micron dust which is quite fine and it requires enormous energy to pulverize that much concrete so finely. By the way the other guy talked about girder rivets letting go, without explaining the mechanics of that at all. They’re basically cylindrical bolts under even vertical pressure. How are they all forced out laterally? How does this mechanism engulf the whole of all three towers? Where does it initiate? Ten stories below the impact zone? Twenty? In the sections above the impact zones that were under no possible additional pressure? Those sections (400 feet of tower!) also disintegrated into finely crushed material. They did not fall intact onto the rest. One must ask why, because those sections weren’t being crushed from above and would have made one hell of an impact falling intact into the canyons of Lower Manhattan. It all adds up to a tremendous amount of energy put into the system, whether thermal, kinetic, or both.
“tom” is one of the anti-truth trolls that show up like clockwork on every discussion of controlled demolition on 9/11. Someone with deep pockets has been funding them for over a decade.
They recite the same tired old lies that have been repeatedly refuted, trying to cast doubt on the only explanation that makes sense (and that is supported by 2500 architects and engineers).
“tom”: “No demo crew has ever taken down more than 30 stories.”
An obvious lie. Buildings over 40 stories have been taken down multiple times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_voluntarily_demolished_buildings
Thanks for the comment on building size vs demolition, where you are wrong.
Referring to the figure in the wiki reference, note the column that lists ‘method.’ The options are ‘manual’ or ‘implosion.’ Everything over thirty floors was taken apart piece by piece, not the big bang theory. Do you understand why?
I await your apology.
Aside from your inattention to detail, can you cite the other tired old lies we’ve been telling? It seems we need to update our spiel, eh?
Do you have similar references for your claim that deep pockets have been funding me?
I need to contact them for back pay.
I assume you are a fanboy of the planted explosives theory. The one that has crews going unnoticed as they spend months drilling and charging blasting holes in support columns, cut stairwells and elevator shafts and load the explosives in seven buildings. And the four aircraft that left various airports loaded with people were faked, and the planes that hit the towers, pentagon and field were holograms? Is that, or some version of it the one you buy into?
Or do you ‘believe’ dr judy woods’ particle beam theory?
Same tired old lies. It’s public record that extensive “elevator maintenance” occurred for weeks in the three WTC buildings before 9/11. With armed guards posted outside 24/7.
Multiple researchers have found military-grade nanothermite residues in the debris of all three WTC buildings. This is used for demolition, and is also a matter of public record. And published in a peer-reviewed physics journal.
I don’t know what happened with the planes, but records can be easily faked.
The particle-beam and other science-fiction stories are being spread to discredit the 9/11 truth movement claims.
Can you explain what ‘elevator maintenance has to do with drilling and charging columns in the cellars? Which elevators? Have you looked at the elevator layout in WTC1&2? Do you have credible references for any of your claims?
PS: I reversed my decision on the 30 floor thing. You are wrong. See previous edited post.
That is the only real argument. Any other is stupid. Of course, I believe that if it had been the US or Israel, they would have done it at night. You don’t need mass casualties when you blow up the World Trade Center.
So, IF they laid explosives…how did they hide the lines of detcord or other lines that detonate those explosives that no one would see them?
Well, how would I know? But since many things have been blown up most unexpectedly, there is a way to do it. I’d guess it could be done by electronic or radio signals, which may be the reason no one was allowed to use their two-way radios or cell phones that day. But that’s just speculation.
Here’s one source for you: take it as you like:
WOW! Your reference is a mishmash of unrelated events and topics that are irrelevant. The only good part is this: “When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains–however improbable–must be the truth.”
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
At least it won’t bother you too much. You don’t understand it well enough.
Douglas: Fabulous answer. You just can’t bring yourself to attack the message, can you?
Douglas claims: “I’ve read credible books by credible authors from some of the nation’s largest institutions, and they all say basically the same thing. It was an inside job.”
What were those books and who were those ‘credible’ authors? Your logical fallacy is an appeal to higher authority, without naming the authority. Here’s your sign: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/system/App/Settings/size24x36posters/000/000/001/original/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf
Russell claims the buildings came straight down. They didn’t. The debris field from #1&2 hit many other buildings, including #7. Some collapsed immediately. #7 took longer, but also collapsed far outside its footprint, damaging multiple buildings nearby.
You’ll have to believe your own eyes. The buildings came about as straight down as possible. Of course they left a sizeable debris field. Anything falling from more than 100 stories will be spread out a bit — down the streets, etc. But the airplanes didn’t bring them down or they would have toppled, and they didn’t. Fire from the jet fuel was a problem, but that didn’t cause the bigger problem of total demolition. Fire is not hot enough to melt steel.
Douglas said: “You’ll have to believe your own eyes.
WTH does that mean? I wasn’t there, were you? You are aware that humans are lousy eyewitnesses, right? Have ten people document a staged event and we get ten different versions.
Video is better. Unfortunately, it’s not hard to doctor it with voiceovers, missing scenes, airbrushing etc, so video on the web is suspect, especially from those making a buck on the deal, like the architect group.
Douglas says: The buildings came about as straight down as possible. Of course they left a sizeable debris field. Anything falling from more than 100 stories will be spread out a bit — down the streets, etc.
Then stop saying they fell within their footprint when you admit none did.
Douglas says: “But the airplanes didn’t bring them down or they would have toppled, and they didn’t.
Are you expecting a 500mph 500,000 lb jet would push over a building weighing several thousand times as much? You need a course in physics. Start with Newton’s laws of motion. This event is that writ large.
The jets and fire DID bring them down using gravity, which is a vertical force, not lateral, so ‘toppling’ isn’t expected by rational people, nor did it happen. Damage from the impact weakened the structures, and fire weakened it further. Occams razor: The simplest explanation is often the right one.
Douglas says: Fire from the jet fuel was a problem, but that didn’t cause the bigger problem of total demolition. Fire is not hot enough to melt steel.
Fire is plenty hot enough to melt steel. How do you think we make the stufff?!? But it didn’t have to melt, it just has to weaken. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA In a structure already weakened by the impact that destroyed supports and the fire suppression system and insulation, no good could have come of a jet fuel fire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl0tHx36RRQ
This test is ridiculous. What about the main beams that were a lot thicker than the beams they are using in this test. Those beams had diagonal cuts that sheared, not melted, the beams. Also, the fires in the towers were oxygen starved meaning the fires were a lot lower temperature. In this test the fires were concentrated on bare beams with a plentiful supply of oxygen. The actual beams in the buildings were surrounded by concrete. Saying this test was done under the same conditions which existed in the buildings is moronic and just saying it is, doesn’t mean its true.
Even if the fires did weaken the beams on the floors of impact, a partial collapse of those floors would NEVER bring down the building at free fall speed. This test does not say anything about the bombs that went off inside the building or the nano particles that were found or the 5000 degree molten steel found in the basement 30 days later.
There was no rating for type of steel used in this test — there are various grades of steel. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the explosion. There were NO concentrated pools of fuel as in this bogus test. There are a lot more flaws in this test, but the ones already mentioned are enough to relegate this test to the same garbage heap where the government version now lies.
Nice try all of you doubters. This test may be good enough to convince you, but you will have to do better to convince the expert engineers and physicists.
Doran says: This test is ridiculous. What about the main beams that were a lot thicker than the beams they are using in this test.
Good point. How thick were the beams at the 77th and 92 floors of WTC1 and 2?
The test was done to dispel claims that jet fuel can’t soften steel. Obviously, this disproves the claim.
Doran says: Those beams had diagonal cuts that sheared, not melted, the beams.
By ‘those beams’ I have seen photos of beams cut by the salvage crews with torches, then the exact same photos on conspiracist sites claiming it was done with bombs. It isn’t so.
Doran says: Also, the fires in the towers were oxygen starved meaning the fires were a lot lower temperature.
With huge holes punched in two sides of each tower, plus the chimney effect of the maintenance shafts, I see no convincing evidence that the fires were O2 starved. Flame color is another.
Doran says: In this test the fires were concentrated on bare beams with a plentiful supply of oxygen. The actual beams in the buildings were surrounded by concrete. Saying this test was done under the same conditions which existed in the buildings is moronic and just saying it is, doesn’t mean its true.
Your ignorance is overwhelming. WTC steel insulation was a spray-on mixture of mineral wool, asbestos and binders. The theory is that the impact dislodged the asbestos enough to allow direct flame contact. Recovery of beams blued from heat, twisted and folded support the theory. The new WTC tower uses concrete encasement like the Empire state building that resisted fire from a B25 that hit it in the 40s.
Doran says: Even if the fires did weaken the beams on the floors of impact, a partial collapse of those floors would NEVER bring down the building at free fall speed.
What do you mean by a ‘partial collapse? The buildings were designed to support huge vertical dead loads and absorb a B707 kinetic energy laterally. But once the collapse began, the kinetic energy of a single 20 INCH drop of the 18 and 33 floors above would be enough to collapse the floor below. There is no design that can withstand that much kinetic energy. (F=MA). Wiki explains it in a way that even you might understand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center#Collapse_of_the_South_Tower
Doran says: This test does not say anything about the bombs that went off inside the building or the nano particles that were found or the 5000 degree molten steel found in the basement 30 days later.
Enter wild speculation. Controlled demolition is done in the cellar to weaken main support beams by drilling and charging with explosives so gravity will bring it down.
There are no demo teams that start a collapse from the top. None. The collapse of the towers began at the point the airliners impacted. How did the demo teams know that’s where to plant the charges?
Laser printer toner is made of iron spheres, and there were thousands of printers in the buildings. There are many explanations for the discovery of hot steel at the bottom of the pile. http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm#molten
Doran says: There was no rating for type of steel used in this test — there are various grades of steel.
Nat Geo stated the test girder was of the same grade and size used as a vertical column on the 77th floor of WTC1&2.
Dorans says: Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the explosion. There were NO concentrated pools of fuel as in this bogus test.
And your evidence is? A b767 carries up to 24,000 gallons of JP4. I’ll leave it up to you to calculate the heat released if it all flashed at once, but it’s a bunch.
If there is an O2 poor scenario, this might be it as fuel tanks broke open and dump all that fuel at once. The Marine KC130 that crashed last week burned for almost a day after the initial explosion on impact. Compare and contrast. http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm#molten
Doran claims: when There are a lot more flaws in this test, but the ones already mentioned are enough to relegate this test to the same garbage heap where the government version now lies.
You’re welcome to your opinion, since you can’t specify those other flaws.
Doran says: Nice try all of you doubters. This test may be good enough to convince you, but you will have to do better to convince the expert engineers and physicists.
The test video has been available for ten years, yet it seems to surprise you and all the others who claim that jet fuel can’t soften steel. It must be awfully dark in the backwaters where your idea some from.
At this point in time and with all the evidence of an inside job that has been submitted, we are well beyond the point of trying to convince errant stragglers who still insist on believing the government’s version. Yes, that same government that has lied to us about their many involvements in wars not to mention the daily lies we are fed.
It is a complete waste of time to continue to talk to the doubters for if they are willing to discount all of the expert testimony and the video evidence, there is not much beyond that which we can do to convince those people. My advice is to leave the narrow-minded doubters alone with their thoughts and their smugness in believing they possess the truth.
It is easier to fool someone than it is to convince them that they have already been fooled.
Doran: I agree. Fact and data should prevail over opinion and doctored videos. Those stragglers who accept opinion, hyperbole and innuendo as fact are a shameful lot, especially those who happily pay for books and videos of talking heads filled with energy rays and holograms. It just perpetuates the myths.
Fact and data have been hard for engineering panels to come by thanks to the secretive behavior of the FBI and others. The military was the first to come clean with their bungled defense of the US against terrorists. The FAA has been less forthcoming, but we were able to get the audio tapes, which helped a lot. FOI lawsuits have forced other three-letter agencies to release data, and it confirms earlier engineering and scientific conclusions. The NIST report on building 7 had a glaring error where they missed the diesel fuel from pressurized tanks in the basement fueling fires in the City’s emergency command center after it had been abandoned. The revised analysis is available free online. The science and forensics is slow, but that’s how data-driven research is done.
An important fact I keep in mind is, “Perceived truth is more powerful than truth itself.”
It is amazing that people persist in believing the government’s version of anything. Everything the government says is lies. Even the authors of the 9/11 Report are distancing themselves from having been a part of it since much new information has become “publicly” available.
Russell claims: “even jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to melt steel.”
Au contraire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q
But it doesn’t have to. Steel loses half it’s strength at 900F, well within the detected range of the fires that burned. Half or more of the outer support columns were destroyed on the side the airliners penetrated, shifting loads to other beams. This damage is readily visible in the videos and possibly more that we couldn’t see. As the steel softened the floors sagged inward until they fell of the clips that held them to the outer shell. This was also readily visible in the videos where the outer walls bowed inward.
The buildings were designed to support static loads. Once the top 1/4 of the building collapsed into the floors damaged by the jets, momentum took over, and there is no design that could withstand the forces. Newton won. This is easily demonstrated with a few simple formulae.
Add to your list of culprits, Israel, do not remove them from the list. There was a good reason for the “dancing Israelis” (Mossad agents) who were arrested and the more than 40 “art students” (also Mossad agents) who were sent back to Israel. Two of the “dancing Israelis” did an interview on Israeli TV wherein they admitted that they were sent to the U.S to record the “incident.”
Read Christopher Bollyn’s book titled. “Solving 9/11” and Dr. Judy Wood’s book, “Where did the Towers go?” For video general overview, watch the latest version of Dylan Avery’s “Loose Change.”
Doran: You repeat 911 garbage that was debunked a decade ago. Get over it.
Do you understand Wood’s claims?
Well, quite an impressive scientific study. So wise-one, YOU tell me how a jet aircraft flying very slowly could have knocked down a 107 storey building — a well-built building at that. Seriously, I want to know how Newtonian physics went out the window only during 9/11. It’s back in place now. But more, I’m curious about how a jet fuel fire could melt steel. (It can’t, but figure it out anyway)
As an engineer, please tell me how a building being hit on the side by a midsize jet aircraft could do so much damage to the building except for the immediate area in which it struck the building. And then go back and reassure us of how fire can melt steel.
And don’t forget to prove to us that, due to one airplane, a whole 107 storey building was destroyed entirely and totally. That has to rank close to the top of unexplained phenomenon in the world. Your prolific science paper did not dissuade me of anything.
Also, check out the authors of the so-called “9/11 Report”. I’m sure they wouldn’t mind telling you why they are backing away — distancing themselves — from having been a part of assembling the report.
You are addressing yourself. Comical, but is that what you intended?
Anyone with a brain and working eyes can see that the portion above the crash sites collapses into the remaining part of the buildings and the weight and pressure push the rest of the building down. The plan was to try to hit one of them with planes. Nothing more.
Pud: I’m just playing devils advocate here. I agree, the simplest explanation is as you say: impact + fire = byebye. But . . .
A few amateurs have taken the time to design experiments and models to see if they can replicate what we saw in the videos. And failed unless they add an explosive outward element. Perhaps the models are wrong. Or, well, I’ll see what develops.
Contrast what we see vs the rather complicated and messy theory of motive and opportunity: Creating a reason to go to war by drilling and planting explosives nobody noticed, explosive crews that never talked, timed with the jets. It’s an interesting problem.
The problem with all of this is that even to the truthers, the actual target isn’t the how. Yet, they want to talk about how, even though they look like idiots doing it and damage their who argument, which not only would be more important, but is a whole lot easier to make a case for and have a discussion about.
Oh please, you don’t need to melt the steel. It becomes very plastic at temperatures far below the melting point. Ask any welder or blacksmith.
Before a new impartial investigation is created, make sure to watch members of the Bush League as they will be anxious to leave the country for parts unknown.
Let’em…their demise will be more easily applied outside our bounds!
Yeah, good idea. They can all go to Iraq and guard their oilfields, freeing up our military to come home. Bastards.
Please stop giving ammunition to the conspiracy people. It has already been proven that the towers collapsed as a result of the impacts of jets crashing into the structures and the high-temperature fires that further weakened vital support beams.. The debate is over. Move on.
” It has already been proven that the towers collapsed as a result of the impacts of jets crashing into the structures and the high-temperature fires that further weakened vital support beams.. ”
Try doing some actual research.
And I used my eyes and my God given intellect..
What did you do?
You swallowed the Government conspiracy theory without question.
There is no conspiracy, only internet nonsense. In order to plant enough explosives to bring down the towers it would take months and dozens of men. Why is it that not a single person witnessed the massive amount of work that it would take to plant explosive charges in the twin towers.?
You obviously never heard about/forgot about the truck bombs scattered in New York on that day. No problem, the media buried that, but they were reported by dozens of news agencies (no time for references I need to go to bed).
–Hint– one of the trucks was found stopped on the George Washington by NYPD and the men were taken into FBI custody but later released by Micheal Chertoff.
You also never heard about the Denko Mechanical or Urban Moving Systems and what they were up to in the months prior to the event. You haven’t looked up what witnesses said about the men working on the towers sprinkler/fire suppressant systems, the basement, and the chronically broken elevators. You haven’t heard that they were unauthorized since the port authority was solely responsible for the sprinkler system maintenance.
It would require hundreds of tons of explosives placed in the proper areas to bring the two towers down and you are telling me that no one in building maintenance or security or administration noticed?
“It would require Hundreds of tons of explosives OR a few gallons of diesel fuel to bring the two towers down”
You can’t even convince YOURSELF that the govt story makes sense.
Give it up Zimmerman. You have no idea what you are talking about. 15 years later and it’s been unequivocally proven that it was done by controlled demolition, the players who did it successfully made their political plays to verify the fact, and idiots like you still think it was the A-rabs.
Fear of brown people goes a long way.
I made my points. You didn’t. The structural damage from the impact of the jets and the resulting high-temperature fire are what brought the towers down not some fairy-tale conspiracy.
You have not made any points, only regurgitated the ridiculous 911 commission talking points repeated ad naseum in the MSM. No steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire and / or airplane impact. Building 7 was not even hit by an airplane and did not have much fire. You are the conspiracy theorist, you believe a few dozen men in a cave on the other side of the world were able to plan and execute this attack, circumventing the multi – trillion dollar, most high tech, highly guarded air space in the world.
Bill hes a shill hes been at it before ,just delete him and we will get on with the real job of forcing a new honest open inquiry,AIPAC is the real enemy of the USA.
Do you speak English?
“The structural damage from the impact”
Which fails to take into account the core of the towers and how they actually functioned. The towers dropped at free-fall speed, as in nothing impeding them/ Now according to the Newton’s Laws of Motion, the towers should have slowed to a crawl or stopped collapsing, as to the third law. I bring up the the Thrid law of Motion because you’re describing a pancake collapse. That the floors weren’t designed that way isn’t my point, though they weren’t. What’s that third law again?
“When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body.”
Which means “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. As one floor is crashing onto the other the second floor will resist then give, rinse and repeat 110 times.
Now back to the floor design.
The floors were not one piece of steel and concrete. They were separate pieces
Here’s the blue print from Tower A – Upper floor design.
Please explain how, as a singular piece these floors “collapsed”
Brent: I don’t understand your post. Here’s the crux of the matter: The structures were designed to withstand tremendous vertical static loads, but not live loads, ie, kinetic. Obviously they withstood the horizontal kinetic energy of the jets, but it caused serious damage. Heat from fire weakened the steel and the collapse began.
WTC2 was hit second by a jet at the 77 floor and was the first to collapse. WTC1 was hit first at the 92nd floor. It was the second to collapse. That means either the damage in WTC1 was worse, or the added dead weight of 33 floors above overwhelmed the damage at the 77th floor faster than in WTC1 at the 92nd floor.
Once the collapse initiated, bring on Newton and gravity, especially momentum, F=MA. The kinetic energy exceeds that of any structural design and it could not be stopped until it ended in the basement. The outer and core boxes up to the 66th floor remained standing for hours, which eliminates controlled demolition from below.
Robert said: “It would require Hundreds of tons of explosives OR a few gallons of diesel fuel to bring the two towers down”
And two 500,000 lb jets, carrying 24,000 gallons of jet fuel each, going 500 mph. Calculate the kinetic, chemical and potential energy of each smacking a solid object and tell us what you think will happen.
From this post, you just proved you are not an engineer and you know absolutely nothing about explosives.
Are you an engineer and what do you know about explosives?
Did you look up Denko Mechanical or Urban Moving Systems yet? Did you read the FBI reports yet?
so what happened? oh wise one?
“It would require hundreds of tons of explosives placed in the proper areas to bring the two towers down”
It’s almost like you’re just about to have a major breakthrough here.
KOOLAID KOOLAID tastes great, KOOLAID KOOLAID can’t wait….
CraigZimmerman12 you are a funny fellow.
Do you not deny that you are compensated for posting here as you have?
so what happened?
You really should do some research for if you were to, you would realize your posts make you look like an idiot.
@sshat ! U don’t know how to research yer own self.
Look up “FBI Urban Moving Systems 911” and “FBI Denko Mechanical 911”.
Craig Zimmerman, you are either a government shill or a complete ignoramus. Nobody can be that stupid with all of the evidence presented over time. Go play with your toys.
When people have no point to make they resort to insults.
I made my point, half-wit. Just do a little research and expand that tiny brain for once in your life. Overwhelming evidence backed up by hundreds of engineers. Again, go play with your toys. This is for adults.
shills are on a 50 cent a post,thats why you will see so many short posts like ,prove it ,liar,wrong,BS etc so this one must be bored or new at it.
By your claim, then you are a shill, getting rich on shillbucks.
BTW: Ad hominems are logical fallacies. Here’s your sign. Study it and stop being the poster child: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/system/App/Settings/size24x36posters/000/000/001/original/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf
Yep, you attacked the messenger rather than the message. That’s how people with no clue do it. Here’s your sign. Study it and get a clue: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/system/App/Settings/size24x36posters/000/000/001/original/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf
What is it like to be an easily manipulated sucker who believes whatever your masters tell you unquestioningly?
Bill, what is is like to believe in conspiracies promoted by men and women who will get rich off your ignorance?
Tom what is it like to be an easily duped idiot who believes everything the government tells you? What a good little sheep you are, Stalin would be so proud.
In addition, moron, nobody is getting rich just because I do not believe the official government story, go back to your coloring book.
That’s right Zimmerman is likely a shill, there are paid shills who go on the internet and post nonsense to detract attention from his tribe. Search for “Confessions of a paid disinformation internet shill”.
There is none so blind as those that dont want to see.
There were no commercial planes that could cut concrete floors and boxed steel columns without leaving parts of the plane outside the building and falling in a heap which we would all have seen before the towers collapsed but there was none. How come? You must have seen plenty of commercial Plane crashes lately and Germanwings plane that crashed into the mountain. And yet it seems you believe a Commercial Plane can actually disappear and immerse itself inside the building tail wings and Jet motors and all and not leave 2 jet motors on the road outside or some wings or some people sitting in seats?
Andrew they did find a jet motor but there was a little problem, it cams from a 747 ,some one made a booboo
And those high temperature fires also caused debris to froth upward and out in an arc…interesting. Who knew fire could do that. No one actually knew that fire could do that because it’s never ever previously happened–and then hey, 3 times in one day, which would sort of be like suddenly witnessing human beings defy the laws of gravity 3 times in one day by flying, but never witnessing it again. Not only that, not one building code was changed in light of events that should have completely changed our understanding of physics, structural engineering, and building science…but didn’t.
WTH are you babbling about? froth? When, where, why? The rest of your drivel doesn’t follow either.
what was the 3rd time you frothed?
Your post is too vague and too stupid to merit further time.
The long video at the end of the article provides what appears to be the true facts regarding the three towers. Now what happened to those who planted the explosives and ecellerents. Obviously it could not have been done by just one or two men. Where are they now? Why has no one come forward to say they were hired to do the job? How many demolition specialist companies are there that could plan and do this job? Who at the top authorized it and for what reason? Were all of the workers “eliminated” after the job was done so they could not talk? This was not done in just a day or two. Why was George Bush conveniently in Florida at the time and not in Washington in the White House?
Was all of this done as an excuse to go to war? War generates millions of dollars for the manufacturing companies who profit from it.
It would take dozens of men several months to place enough explosives in the towers to bring them down. I suppose the conspiracy people have an explanation as to why NO ONE witnessed the placement of hundreds of tons of explosives in the twin towers before 9-11.
Actually many people did witness suspicious maintenance activity. Way too much info for me to bother to type up here, a whole can of worms so please…
Look up “Urban Moving Systems” and “Denko Mechanical”. Do it right now.
Sorry, just realized search engines bring up too many businesses with similar names. Seriously you deserve to know the truth because the truth will set you free.
Look up “Urban Moving Systems 911” and “Denko Mechanical 911”.
I looked up the references. They are irrelavent. You owe me half an hour of wasted time. Putz!
Where was the twin towers security when this was supposedly happening. Did they take a break for several months? I once worked security for an office tower. It would be impossible to carry out an operation of this magnitude without a huge number of people approving it.
That would mean that ALL of the twin towers administration, security, and maintenance would have to be involved. Good luck trying to keep that many people quiet.
Of course you completely ignore the fact that all of them could have stated a different purpose and easily concealed the nano thermite as something innocuous, such as fire retardant or paint. You also completely fail to address building 7, which was not hit by an aircraft nor did it have much fire. You also ignore the fact that no other steel framed buildings have ever collapsed due to fire. So, all you have is a group of highly motivated and well financed people could not do this. Not much of an argument.
I would add that the painters and even the paint company may not have know what was in their paint cans. To pull this off all you need to do is control the supply of the “paint” the painters used. Not so difficult.
building 7…amazing how people completely fail to remember. I watched it, and remember the news casts about bldg 7 but when I mentioned it to my sister some time later,,,like a few months maybe…she didn’t know what I was talking about. This was before i even started wondering. I wasn’t searching for evidence, just remembering how devastating it was and what a surprise that bldg 7 went down. “Building 7? What are you talking about?”
Bill stated: “Of course you completely ignore the fact that all of them could have stated a different purpose and easily concealed the nano thermite as something innocuous, such as fire retardant or paint. ”
Thermite burns chaotic like a sparkler. It has to be in a shaped charge to cut steel. painting it on plasterboard isn’t going to cut steel. But it will be an impressive fire if the coatng is half inch thick or so.
Bill says: You also completely fail to address building 7, which was not hit by an aircraft nor did it have much fire.
Huge chunks of WTC2 fell on #7, destroying about 1/3 of the east end, and punched a hole in the roof. Several hundred tons of steel do a lot of damage when dropped from 500 ft above.
Bill says: You also ignore the fact that no other steel framed buildings have ever collapsed due to fire.
Simply false. The USA bombed the snot out of Dresden GE and Tokyo Japan with incendiaries, setting steel buildings ablaze. They collapsed. The Japs have a memorial of twisted girders in a memorial of the event.
As a result, the USA has required buildings to have fire suppression systems and fire retardant applied to the steel. The jetliners cut off supply lines to the water tanks on top of WTC 1&2, so there was no suppression. It is theorized that impact of the jets knocked insulation off the steel. Add the missing support columns and the picture is there for collapse.
Nist did a study of other steel buildings that collapsed from fire. Here ya go: https://www.jensenhughes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/White_Paper_Historical_Survey_Building_Collapse_NIST_JBeitel-NIwankiw_OCT-2006.pdf
Bill says: “So, all you have is a group of highly motivated and well financed people could not do this. Not much of an argument.”
I agree. Why do 911 conspiracy theorists continue to think it could be so.
You know…several months weeks before 9/11, the “elevators” were being worked on. Why would security question it? Answer: they wouldn’t. Also, as another poster stated, the nano-thermite would have been quite easy to hide as something else.
That you don’t believe it could be kept secret is your opinion, and in no way alters the physical evidence that controlled demolition happened.
Your points about security and controlled demolition are pure speculation. Maybe you didn’t notice, but the towers collapsed from the point of jetliner impact. Demolition is done from the bottom. Drilling and filling support columns with explosives is noisy and easily detected. Even Barny Fife would notice.
Military people did the work
>It would take dozens of men several months to place enough explosives in the towers to bring them down. I suppose the conspiracy people have an explanation as to why NO ONE witnessed the placement of hundreds of tons of explosives in the twin towers before 9-11.
Shows not only your ignorance about demolitions, but that you didn’t actually read the article:
“In 1935, the two 191-m-tall Sky Ride tow-
ers of the 1933 World’s Fair in Chicago were demolished
with 680 kg of thermite and 58 kg of dynamite.”
If you actually had dozens of men, they could have rigged the towers over a weekend with some hard work and a few kegs. I bet you’ve never shifted a ton of equipment onto/off-of a van by hand over the course of a day. I have.
We can also see that you didn’t know the twin towers had many empty offices by September 2001, that their design, with most strength being contained in core columns that supported floors on spans tied to an outer facade, meant that the most important structures were concealed from the towers’ users around the elevator shafts, and that they were undergoing elevator renovations months beforehand.
Kind regards, an engineer for 9/11 truth.
HEY! GREAT brother! I’ve always wanted to be able to thank you guys for your tireless work! AND YES! EVERYTHING you stated is EXACTLY what I’ve found, (either ON the site, OR from directions as to WHERE to find that info!) CONGRATS Andrew!! c
Andrew: Lots of speculation there, especially the part where you claim a few men could rig the place in a weekend. I bet that if you were to get a certified blaster in this discussion, he’d change your mind. Just the drilling of main columns would take months. All in the cellar, where the first truck bomb failed to take the place down. I know of no blaster who plants charges above the 20th floor, and there are zero blasters with experience with 110 floor buildings.
Videos show the collapse sequence began from the 77 and 92nd floors, where the jets hit. How did the demo crew know to plant explosives there? From what I know, they always blow the cellar structures and let gravity do the rest. But I’m not an architect trained in building demolition. Maybe blowing the top off of buildings is how you would do it?
Perhaps you hadn’t noticed, but each of the towers were hit by 500,000 lb jets, tearing out support columns. A fire ensued, weakening steel, and they collapsed.
WTC2 was hit second but collapsed first, possibly because the damage was at the 77th floor, so the remaining supports held 33 floors above and more static load. WTC1 was the first hit but collapsed later, possibly because it was hit at the 92 floor, so the static stresses of supporting the 18 floors above were less.
Once initiated, collapse damage was similar, because F=MA: the ballistics of dynamic impact loads as the floors above crushed the floors below were about the same. That crushing is why we only found tiny bits of humans and furnishings.
Here’s what the experts think happened.
“While the buildings were designed to support enormous static loads, they provided little resistance to the moving mass of the sections above the floors where the collapses initiated. Structural systems respond very differently to static and dynamic loads, and since the motion of the falling portion began as a free fall through the height of at least one story (roughly three meters or 10 feet), the structure beneath them was unable to stop the collapses once they began. Indeed, a fall of only half a meter (about 20 inches) would have been enough to release the necessary energy to begin an unstoppable collapse.”
“After the planes struck the buildings, but before the buildings collapsed, the cores of both towers consisted of three distinct sections. Above and below the impact floors, the cores consisted of what were essentially two rigid boxes; the steel in these sections was undamaged and had undergone no significant heating. The section between them, however, had sustained significant damage and, though they were not hot enough to melt it, the fires were weakening the structural steel. As a result, the core columns were slowly being crushed, sustaining plastic and creep deformation from the weight of floors above. As the top section tried to move downward, however, the hat truss redistributed the load to the perimeter columns. Meanwhile, the perimeter columns and floors were also being weakened by the heat of the fires, and as the floors began to sag they pulled the exterior walls inwards. In the case of 2 WTC, this caused the eastern face to buckle, transferring its loads back to the failing core through the hat truss and initiating the collapse. In the case of 1 WTC, the south wall later buckled in the same way, and with similar consequences.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center
People did witness suspicious activity and the security supervisor for the complex was George Bush’s brother. I hate the pathetic arguing tactic of hypothesizing something that doesn’t fit in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary and smugly concluding your work here is done. That is like people who say “Oh the government didn’t kill Kennedy, they can’t keep anything secret!” It’s like thanks for that valuable insight, go drop a load in your diapers.
the only way to keep a secret among three people is if two are dead
Disquieted said: “the security supervisor for the complex was George Bush’s brother.”
Which brother, and do you have evidence?
I agree. We are well past the point of trying to convince morons. There is a mountain of evidence that says “inside job.” Trying to convince the doubters is like trying to convince the O.J, Simpson jury that the blood evidence mattered, something they immediately discounted because as the jurors stated, “they just did not understand it.”
It is time for us to move on leaving the doubters with their hands in their pockets and whistling in the dark.
What is “suspicious activity’ in your mind? And which Bush? Your vagueness is suspicious.
there is one theorist out there who pointed out the extreme ease with which nano thermite can be sprayed on, like paint. That wouldn’t look like planting anything…just painting. And the workers would not have to know what was in their paint.
Why is the building that totally burned , Still standing.Same frame structure..https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/06/13/report-fire-ravages-london-apartment-complex/102834158/
The demolition and placement of explosives and the wires and lines tying them all together would be quite obvious and ridiculously hard to hide. This would NOT be a matter of sticking a wad of C4 and a timer on a wall or column.
In building 7, tenants were mostly three letter agency people.
ALL eliminated…ALWAYS, after such a horrendous “wet work” job! So…Check & see what Companies suddenly had to release a large contingent of their employees…ALSO, consider the MILITARY…They have such experts AND tech to hasten the job AND eliminate the “actors”! BUT! The “TOP TIER” facilitators are STILL kicking…at LEAST some are…One recently got a new heart…LITERALLY! They’re STILL out there…look at the ones that hated, (and STILL DO), Pres. Trump!
An excuse to go to war, & Use the muslim caliphate,,( refugees ) to usher in the NWO.
Why is the building that totally burned , Still standing.Same frame structure..https://www.usatoday.com/story/news…
The CIA does jobs like this routinely and they keep it quiet, and I wouldn’t take long to do set the explosives. That could have been done over a several week period working only on weekends when no one is there and the place is closed.
You know it was done as an excuse to go to war. The FBI said the Saudi’s did it. So Bush attacked Iraq. Why didn’t he attack Saudi Arabia? Read a bit about Prescott Bush and the founding of the House of Saud.
The military industrial complex is huge business. If all the wars were to stop now, we’d see a big surge in unemployment. And possibly some mansions in Virginia for sale.
That’s one gun that started smoking the split second it was fired.
This is turning out to be one truth that won’t take 30+ years to fully bring to light. And while there are so many people whose tireless service made this all possible, what is to be said about the free internet that facilitated such global cooperation and support for those efforts?
Could this have all been accomplished otherwise? We must keep this resource public no matter what. It is the best chance the human race has ever had to break free from the ruling class once and for all.
SAY IT AGAIN JAMES!!! SAY IT AGAIN, and AGAIN, and AGAIN, and AGAIN, until it reverberates throughout the ENTIRE EARTH!! The “NET” is our STRENGTH against such monsters who will do such atrocities, OR order them done!!! AND! Those fools, (who have said “There is no God”!), are NOW attempting to destroy our Government and it’s PROPER USE!! BEWARE! BE AWARE! PREPARE & CARE!
I agree James, the internet allows rapid sharing of info. Unfortunately, most of it is wrong, and contributes to knowing so much that isn’t so. Backwater sites such as this allow like-minded people to gather and reinforce their pre-conceived notions.
Equally problematic are those who are not looking for the truth at all. What I like about C S Lewis was his honest search for the truth – “Mere Christianity.”
US ways.. tarnished Islam first..and now Afghanistan and Iraq already finished completely.. this findings just academic matters.. nothing can change whatever happened to Afghanistan and Iraq…
Perhaps some of the same folks who put the fix on the Murrah building where the OKC tragedy was created.
Hardly to “long a post”.
Surely a wonderfully provocative post!
Thank you RND for some illumination over the illusion.
No doubt the CraigZimmerman12 entity has seen the video. Those who created the 911 debacle , and their certain thirst for wars without end will continue to manufacture deception add infinitum in attempt to cover truth. It’s the way evil operates throughout the universe. .
All the Bush administration had to do was pay some dudes with accents to fly a plan into the buildings to get the cause they needed. They didn’t need a controlled demolition and so many moving parts. You’re looking from the bottom up not top down.
That’s a hell of a lot better theory than what’s presented here.
The failure to analyse the physics of 9/11 is a serious problem in and of itself. Don’t 1,000 foot skyscrapers have to hold themselves up? Doesn’t that mean the lower portions must support more weight than the upper portions, and therefore have more steel? So where have “engineers” and “scientists” discussed the distributions of steel and concrete in the towers in relation to a straight down collapse? Ever heard of the Conservation of Momentum? The 10.000 page NCSTAR1 report does not even specify the total amount of concrete in the towers.
So the social failure to solve this problem for 15 years is as much an issue as the physics problem itself.
umb: Social failure indeed. As soon as the dust settled, engineering groups were formed to study the collapse of wtc 1, 2 and 7. The conclusions were the same as the aftermath of the collapse of other steel structures by fire: If fire suppression fails, and fire proofing on the girders fails, and the fire persists, it will collapse. https://www.jensenhughes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/White_Paper_Historical_Survey_Building_Collapse_NIST_JBeitel-NIwankiw_OCT-2006.pdf
The structural failures of WTC 1, 2 and 7 have been analyzed to death and made public. What parts are you missing? See “Mechanics of Twin Towers’ collapse” here” And if you don’t trust wiki, pursue the wealth of engineering references at the end of the wiki article.
Since the collapse began at the 77th and 92nd floors respectively, what does the bottom of the tower have to do with it? Ditto the amount of concrete?
911TRUTH WILL DRAIN THE SWAMP.
911 truth has been outed.
Zelikow and his b.s. Commission is part of the cover up.
Now go make some arrests, must look in very elite places.
NO MORE 4th of JULY, 911 was the last day of the USA it is DEAD at HEART and DEAD in FACT, US CITIZENS have WASTED 16 YEARS protesting and signing Petitions for NOTHING, we EVEN CHANGED the nation by DEFEATING the SCUM of CLINTON and VOTED for the BRIGHT PROMISES of TRUMP.
WHAT FOR GIVE UP and let our POOR NATION R.I.P it is GONE.
Whoever destroyed those three buildings committed treason (if they were American) and if government helped cover up the treason then it was complicit in it.
This Is an OLD STORY rite new! AND! It’s a FULLY DOCUMENTED, IMPERIAL EVIDENCED, Investigation that has, (several times over), proven that the WTC #1 & #2 were CLEARLY the product of man made “CONTROLLED DEMOLITION”!
This Report is STUPENDOUS! BUT! It is also repetitious to a degree; and that DEGREE is that, building #3 (Tower 7), “collapse”; (which it is DOCUMENTED and confessed, to have been “pulled”), was in EXACTLY the SAME MANNER as TOWERS #1 & #2!!! Thus giving GLARING evidence that ALL 3 Towers were demoed!
THUS TOTALLY debunking the Government Commissioned INVESTIGATION! (Which, it seems, is the NORM for Government Commissioned Investigative Reports…considering the JFK Report was ALSO DEBUNKED, but no one ever indicted OR tried, NOR convicted!
NOW! The only work left to do, is to determine WHO placed the charges, AND! WHO ordered them demolished so! THAT should be an Investigation done by a WHOLLY INDEPENDENT PROSECUTOR & TRIED by a jury of their peers!
There NEEDS to be a TOTAL REVIEW of ALL of the EVIDENCE, [note: NOT CONJECTURE or OPINION], and, ALL of it NEEDS to be revealed in ONE DOCUMENT, which SHOULD be made available to the General Public!
Does ZIMMERMAN sound familiar “The truth”? And, I’ve watched demo jobs of MAJOR LARGE buildings that only took a weekend to conclude…How many people would it take to paint those interiors, with the equipment they had available? ALSO, (remember I mentioned Silverman?…That NEW owner)…Ck him out too!
Also, the policeman who was in the basement section, and heard enormous explosions going off below him? ALSO…has Mr. Zimmerman asked about the “GOLD DEPOSITS” in the basement?? What happened to THEM???
How about the PROFESSIONAL PILOT who actually had flown that second plan during his career, talking about the difficulty of pulling off those maneuvers to hit the towers at the angle that second plane struck at….OR…how about the FACT that 80%+ of it’s gas was exploded OUTSIDE of the building…so…there went their fire degrees NEEDED to “melt Steel “I-beams”…
NO! Mr. “Z” isn’t REALLY interested in FACTS…he’s INTERESTED in “CTA”…(Covering Their A$$e$!)….(And! I’ll bet you $$$ that his name isn’t Zimmerman, BUT! It IS a M.E. ethnic name)…
so, are you saying that a plane did NOT hit the building? Keep in mind, with respect to the assertion that ‘80%’ of it gas was exploded outside the building that simple physics apply that if an object moving a speed strikes an immovable object such as a building, a bridge or other similar object that results in an explosion, the exploded object, in this case the plane and the fuel will continue moving in the straight line path of momentum. There is no way the fuel would explode at the point of impact and just remain there. Momentum carries it forward. Simple physics.
All the hijacker pilot had to do was put the lat/long and arrival altitude of the intended target in the NAVIGATION SYSTEM and it would do the rest. EASY PEASY. If your PROFESSIONAL PILOT couldn’t figure that out, she wasn’t very professional.
A cop in the basement heard ENORMOUS explosions going off BELOW him? How does that relate to what was going on ABOVE him?
Chriatian: What MAJOR buildings did you WATCH demo? Where, when and just how MAJOR were they? Were they 100 stories tall?
What do you mean when you say they WERE CONCLUDED in a WEEKEND?
Christian claims: “80%+ of it’s gas was exploded OUTSIDE of the building…so…there went their fire degrees NEEDED to “melt Steel “I-beams”…
How do you know that ‘80%’ of the fuel exploded outside the building, and if so, what makes you think that that explosion didn’t contribute heat to the steel structure?
The B767 can carry 24,000 gallons of jet-A. Assuming your assumption is correct, 20%, or 4800 gallons went into the building. The jet took out almost all of the support columns on the side it penetrated, overloading other supports.
How much jet-A does it take to heat and weaken the remaining supports until they collapse?
Answer: A lot less than 4800 gallons.
Us shills and trolls want to hear your answer. And, show your work.
Christian says: “NO! Mr. “Z” isn’t REALLY interested in FACTS…he’s INTERESTED in “CTA”…(Covering Their A$$e$!)….(And! I’ll bet you $$$ that his name isn’t Zimmerman, BUT! It IS a M.E. ethnic name)…
Well that solves everything. You are not just a wackadoodle, but a racist wackadoodle to boot. Are you well paid to shill for racist groups?
Cuo Bono? Israel. And the Mil/Ind complex. Companies like Halliburton, Bechtel, Lockheed, Raytheon.
It is simply false to claim that Europhysics News (EPN) “concluded that 9/11 was controlled demolition when:
1. That very article has a disclaimer which states “This feature is somewhat different from our usual purely scientific articles, in that it contains some speculation. ”
2. That very article’s disclaimer clearly states, “Obviously, the content of this article is the responsibility of the authors.”
3. That very journal also stated that, “EPN is a magazine that publishes a range of news and views to stimulate discussion – unlike peer reviewed research which would be published in a scholarly journal” AND THAT “A counter article is to be published.”
So you are not being honest when you post what you do. Regardless if you want to believe whatever it is you want to believe about 9/11, it doesn’t give you a right to misrepresent what that journal actually says and what their position actually is. They did NOT “conclude” what you claim.
That isn’t a situation of belief, we can read what they wrote and it shows that they did NOT “conclude” anything about it. They published disclaimers with that article and made it clear it was just the speculation of the authors of that article. So your headline is false. Europhysics News made a point of publishing a counter article: https://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/abs/2017/01/epn2017481p18/epn2017481p18.html
Thanks for your thoughtful analysis and point-out to the disclaimers, use of opinion and the counter-argument by Le and Bazant. Unfortunately, there are too many on this blog who believe in magic, such as Dr. Wood’s ‘unknown’ particle beam weapon that ‘evaporated’ WTC1&2.
jet fuel will not melt steel
Riiiight… I think I’ll stick with reputable sources, thanks!
The “airplane” for each building was a jumbo jet. At high speed. Each wiped out all the fire insulation and sprinkler systems in their path of destruction THROUGH the tower. All four reasons they state why high rise buildings have never collapsed are blown out of the water by what planes hit the towers and how.
And then never explain how beams get cut and thousands of pounds of thermite get planted in the right places after the planes hit. Couldn’t do it before, guiding a plane into a building like that is extremely hard and unpredictable. Oh? A precision guided bomb can be that accurate? HAHAHAHAHA so where are the thousands of people necessary to pull that off hiding and keeping their mouths shut? Either way, hundreds if not thousands of people have to keep their mouths shut.
I hope this “journal” publishes the responses and comments they get.
Man, this shit pushes a great big button on me! The bogus analysis here and elsewhere is embarrassing.
The mere fact that you leave this incorrect article here uncorrected, despite being rejected by the European scientific journals in question, makes it emphatically clear that you aren’t interested in reality.
If you have to fabricate articles to try to justify a belief – you are literally in the land of fiction.
Don’t we have REAL WORLD problems like global warming to tackle – rather than some tin foil conspiracy theory that has already been debunked ?
Bullshit. They collapsed because the steel I beams lost structural integrity due to prolonged exposure to temperatures in excess of 950 degrees while under load. The amount of weight supported causes the steel to lose integrity faster which is why the second tower hit was the first to fall… it was hit lower. The massive fires caused the heat to be fairly even throughout the tower plus steel conducts heat well which is why the floors buckled evenly. Finally the tower was designed to naturally pancake rather than fall over.
The process of setting up a controlled collapse takes weeks or even months and causes massive damage to the internal structure of the building, someone would have noticed the giant holes in the walls and the det cord strung through the building. Also the fires would have caused damage to the explosives, causing premature detonations and affecting the timing of anything left which would change the way the building fell. It couldn’t have been planned or controlled. Anyone with any basic understanding of real world physics could understand this.
But you won’t believe actual facts that don’t agree with your conspiracy so feel free to ignore me…
TheTruth: Look up shill. You are using it wrong. In what universe would someone get paid to comment on a backwater site like this? I bet you are a paid shill for activistpost. How’s the money coming?
Where are those damning FBI reports you claim to have given us? It seems you skipped a step, called actually sharing references. Your hyperbole and innuendo are not convincing.
Great site with news articles and links to everything 911
because there is no evidence?
My main comment is a snarky one: I hardly think that treasonous whore of a sell-out Jill Stein has EVER held an opinion that she wasn’t paid to have, so I don’t think that dropping her name at the end of the article was the wisest of moves on the author’s part.
Can I take off my tin-foil hat yet?
I have a crazy idea. Let’s risk guaranteed discovery by spending a couple of weeks rigging some buildings to explode and then get some Muslims to fly planes into them just because.
What a bunch of pure center-cut bologna. Notice that these allegations are made by “engineers” instead of people who know how things really work. You want an expert? Talk to one of the Loiseauxs from Controlled Demolition Incorporated. They know how to drop buildings. And bridges, and smokestacks. They are the experts consulted by the people who manufacture explosives. Ask for their opinions and then apply Occam’s razor. After a career as a welder and mechanic, I have only contempt for engineers who are long on theory and short on experience. My acid test is to get an engineer who designed a car and make him repair it. If you want to know about structural steel, don’t ask an engineer, ask a welder. My college degree was useful in that it taught me how to learn. College taught me theory, experience taught me application.
Of course the towers were imploded! 9/11 was a very highly suspected inside job! The Republicans have become heavily criminal and especially expert at getting so many gullible Americans to believe like jet fuel burns at 6,000 degrees, Fahrenheit, and there are people who even want all carry on items banned permanently from planes. A few even mentioned before ideas of making everyone fly naked and comatosed. And Former president George W Bush was never arrested and charged with treason. The suspected scenario is; Bush and his cronies perpetrated 9/11 and then pointed their crooked fingers at Iraq.
And now a much more foreboding president, Donald Trump is in office, and my predictions are, Trump is going to perpetrate a national catastrophe so big that over 90 percent of Americans will literally be on their knees begging for Martial law. Many will even be begging for an all out ban on all travel; plane, train, bus, car, you name it, they’ll be begging for military roadblocks on every single street, including all rural roads and county highways, as well as for all skies to be roaring with loaded F-16s waiting to shoot down anything civilian seen flying over the United States of America.
There is one 9/11 truth. There will NEVER be an independent, autonomous investigative body that ever forcibly gets the real facts–and any suspects that evidence would produce–much less penalize/punish these strongly entrenched “powers that be.” That should happen–but it won’t.
There is one 9/11 truth. There will NEVER be an independent, autonomous
investigative body that ever forcibly gets the real facts–and any
suspects that evidence would produce–much less penalize/punish these
strongly entrenched “powers that be.” That should happen–but it won’t.
You people actually believe this shit, don’t you? Amazing.
there is a lady who has done extensive research on this and she claims it was done with another type of weapon that vaporizes. You can actually watch the big steel mast turn into dust. There is definitely something wrong here and the firefighters know it. One made a particularly interesting comment that when a fire happens, especially one of such magnitude, there is always an investigation. They couldn’t get rid of the rubble fast enough. It will take a huge effort now to get an investigation done properly and independently. As in mass protests in the street. For those of us who have read extensively on this and other matters it wouldn’t surprise me at all that the Shadow/Black government planned this out. What types of people would do this? We’d better find out because I do believe that’s who is running this world of ours. How far do you think any of us would get before we had an “accident”. Tin foil hatter I may be but realistically we are in a whole pile of crap which is why the sheeple are content to keep their heads down. So happy to see these very respected and knowledgeable individuals standing up to question the official story.
So there is an online market for stupid people. Who knew?
I believe we all owe a debt of gratitude to Richard Gage and all the other A&Es for 9/11 Truth and the many other professional associations wanting 9/11 truth. Take a bow gentlemen and ladies for no doubt you have all suffered the slings and arrows that accompanied your brave stance. Thank you so much! Special kudos to Richard Gage.
They would have needed 2 weeks per building to rig them and even then, they don’t implode buildings that size because they can’t control them.
I replied to Tom and explained how I know he’s a shill. As for you, you sound like a rube. That’s a big step down from a shill. If I can tell a duck from a dog, you can’t spout a load of empty math that proves you’re not a rube. The whole 9/11 job was OBVIOUS from day 1.
The Government’s 1998 film “Enemy Of The State” threaded some FBI investigations into the premiere 911-indicative film. Jon Voight’s NSA character in the film was born on September 11th, while Gene Hackman and Will Smith discuss bringing down the Twin Towers. I can provide three of the residentil addresses from which the FBI provided film scenes, through in-hom surveillance. One of the addresses was on Woodlawn Avenue in Tustin, california, and was also the premise for Jon Voight’s more recent film, “Woodlawn” – a religious film which, given enough space, I could also explain. They cover all the bases, quite an obscenity when you think about it for a nano-second or two.
It was a buried nuclear demolition device, (Not a bomb) that started all of the events of the WTC disintegration. The extreme heat from the nuke caused a pyroclastic surge. Go look at videos that show volcanoes erupting and you will see the exact same phenomenon as the ash/dust clouds at ground zero. The cauliflower shaped clouds, the way it moves, the way it progresses.
WHILE ‘I’ ”’AGREE With the credible expert’s ! THE FACTS REMAIN That many lives were ”” LOST”” But by God’s grace “I” survived. I lost friend’s Firefighter’s and Police. There are just too / too many “””UNEXPLAINED””” things that go on in today’s world.