simple question for the WTC collapse

[Gamolon]

In 2008 they found the explosive; nano thermitic devices, brand new technology in 1999, the only people who had it in 2001 was US military Labs (probably still the case).

You make false statements. You obviously have an agenda.

7 years after the fact some conspiracy people supposedly tested some dust from supposedly 4 different places and found particles of elements that make up thermite.

There is no way this so called evidence can be admitted into court because there is no train of custody on the dust. And the amount of so called thermite found in the dust would mean there would have had to have been hundreds of tons to leave behind that much thermite.

Please play again......

they did not find the elements...they found unignited nano-thermite

No, they found paint.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I've posted this picture a dozen times now, the upper floors are blown to bits, there's nothing remaining of the upper floors, just debris blown outward in every direction....

Why not show the image at the moment of structural failure instead?

The collapse is clearly occurring along the impact lines where the 767 severed the outer curtain walls. Furthermore you can clearly see that "the upper portion of floors above the impact area is fragmented in 5 seconds time and blown outward in every direction" did not happen at all. It is still largely intact as the damaged curtain and central core fail.

 

[Gamolon]

In 2008 they found the explosive; nano thermitic devices, brand new technology in 1999, the only people who had it in 2001 was US military Labs (probably still the case).

You make false statements. You obviously have an agenda.

7 years after the fact some conspiracy people supposedly tested some dust from supposedly 4 different places and found particles of elements that make up thermite.

There is no way this so called evidence can be admitted into court because there is no train of custody on the dust. And the amount of so called thermite found in the dust would mean there would have had to have been hundreds of tons to leave behind that much thermite.

Please play again......

they did not find the elements...they found unignited nano-thermite

Another self-debunking.

If they used thermite, what supposedly EJECTED the beams and chunks of concrete Days keeps talking about? Thermite doesn't explode, it BURNS.

 

[Gamolon]

It does appear that a considerable portion of the mass of the buildings was ejected beyond the perimeter of the buildings, and so would not participate in the collapse of the lower floors.

.

It seems very difficult to tell to me. There is so much smoke, how can you determine the amount of debris falling away from the structure?

that is not smoke that is the debris made into a cloud of pulverized concrete

It's not just "pulverized concrete". There was a shitload of gypsum wallboard and ceiling tiles. surrounding the core. I suppose you've never worked with wallboard eots?

 

[Gamolon]

And Days nor anyone else has been able to account for the bowing in of the building before the collapse...I suppose some magical thermite caused that too........

its not magical ..nothing magical about it...account for bowing ?...ti was hit by a plane maybe ?...none of the explains how a small over-all portion of the building crushed not only itself but everything underneath it with almost no Resistance.. NIST report and computer simulation only show their collapse initiation theory then stops...so they do not have to explain the rest of the collapse because there is no way they could NIST simply avoids these issues by simply claiming that "global collapse" was "inevitable" after the "initiation of collapse."

Another lie. It did not "crush" the structure below. It tore it apart. Do you know the difference between shearing and crushing? Obviously not.

 

[Gamolon]

And no one else can explain them in any other manner that makes any sense........

There were no demolitions...

There is no evidence of demolition, there is no evidence of explosives......

There is no evidence of any damage other than that instigated by the planes crashing into the buildings......

you forgot steel and concrete crushing steel and concrete with...no resistance..no slowing of the collapse...no loss of energy

As I've said before, you need to study the work of femr2. What you're saying is pure ignorance because you haven't looked any further than what hear from other truthers.

If there wasn't resistance, why didn't the towers totally collapse in 9 seconds?

 

[Gamolon]

The towers didn't collapse when the planes hit them. Neither did anyone, except you, attribute their collapse to the jet impacts. So, No, it didn't help.... and it is totally untrue.

Now for your garbage.

Nobody is saying it was just plane impacts. It was the plane impacts and the resultant fire. Why do you keep getting stuff wrong? Is that why your view is wrong? Because it's based on incorrect facts?

 

[Gamolon]

my bad, I should have used 30 stories.

It's still "you're bad". It's not 30 stories. It was 12 and 28.

Again, get your shit straight. You look stupid when backing your claims with incorrect information.

 

[Gamolon]

I've posted this picture a dozen times now, the upper floors are blown to bits, there's nothing remaining of the upper floors, just debris blown outward in every direction....

How much of that was the gypsum planking and ceiling tiles?

 

[Gamolon]

800 lb gorilla doesn't bother you, does it?

better question:

how was any floor of those 105 story vertical trusses changed into debris to begin with?

Do you understand the difference between a CONNECTION and an actual column/beam? a connection is the weakest link. A series of connections are used to support the design weight of the building when at 100% structural integrity. They are not designed to withstand 28 or 12 floors worth of gravity driven force.

Something had to give. It was the connections.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

You think those supports on the walls that were steel stock sticking through the walls and holding up the floor trusses in sheer, were sheared off, don't you? I saw that red circle in your first post, pretending there's something weak about steel bar in sheer with a steel wall; in reality, what you are saying is the steel bar was cut through by what exactly? falling debris? And where did the debris come from? You need explosives to make those cuts, it isn't so easy to shear steel bar. All you have done is returned to the pancake theory except now instead of pancaking resulting in pancaking, it results in demolition; because that's what reduces a steel structure to a bazillion pieces of debris; demolition does that... not pancaking. At any rate, a vertical truss doesn't pancake. And the WTC was built with the highest grade steel known to construction, so it didn't melt from office fires, and the four inch thick steel that was pile driven 80 feet into bedrock never had contact with the office fires, yet that steel was reduced to molten pools of liquid metal, even though it was nine floors below street level (over 100 feet below ground). Obviously they cut the footers with thermitic devices; and they did a thorough job, WTC had a lot of footers and every single one was cut and melted. Demolition always cuts the footers, but they are a tad out of reach of normal office fires. WTC had all the results of demolition; the towers were blown to bits, not just collapsed, the footers were all cut, explosives throughout the structure performed the softening up job prior to pulling the building, and the towers fell at free fall acceleration. This top post was just pointing out that the NIST analysis called for an intact upper floors (tops) to perform both shearing of the walls and pulverization of the core; and that never existed. Again, the core ran from ground level to rooftop, it was seamless, and it was enormously thick, enormously strong, how exactly could it be pulverized by falling debris? Objects falling down do not fall sideways, the most you could hope for would be friction from sliding against the core, there is no shearing from falling debris. How exactly was the first shear performed? The cores were snapped in half BEFORE the towers collapsed; what sheared the cores and kicked the tops out at angles? That's exactly what shape charges on the side of the core would do. Without demolition, how could you possibly snap the core in half and kick the whole top out at an angle at the ONSET of the collapse sequence? (maybe a giant angel swung his sword at WTC?) I don't think God had it in for the towers, which leaves exactly one other possible cause of destruction; explosives. When a building or structure is thoroughly demolished, chances are pretty good that the demolition was probably caused by explosives carefully placed, logistically engineered and timed by experts in the field of demolition.

Fucking sockpuppet.

[/unsubscribe]

 

[Gamolon]

eots answer tells you where it went and also you can look at next day pics of ground zero... these guys claim that the debris fell straight down

Wrong. The perimeter columns were sheared from the floor truss connection and pushed OUTWARD. The the concrete, core columns, elevator motors, electrical panels, etc., fell downward. What about the hat truss? Are you familiar with that?

and managed to pulverized steel concrete structures and shred thick steel beams from the structure,

It's SHEAR, not SHRED.

so where is this pile of debris that weighs so much? Roughly one story of it actually landed on the WTC tower footprints, that's about 1/15th of what fell down. So when I say most of it was thrown outward, I'm actually making an understatement, damn near all of it was either thrown outward or pulverized into dust... by the demolition.

One story??? You mean only 12 feet of debris was present at the footprints of ground zero??? Goes this look like 12 feet, one story to you? The debris is up the the bottom of the "forked" perimeter columns. Do you know what floor the "forks" started Days? Between the 5th and 6th floors. That's about 56'! Again, you keep getting shit wrong. Not to mention that some of the debris fell into the 5 sublevels below.

 

[Gamolon]

and the towers fell at free fall acceleration.

Then why did total collapse times take almost double the time for something to fall at free fall?

More garbage information from you. You debunk yourself.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You think those supports on the walls that were steel stock sticking through the walls and holding up the floor trusses in sheer, were sheared off, don't you? I saw that red circle in your first post, pretending there's something weak about steel bar in sheer with a steel wall; in reality, what you are saying is the steel bar was cut through by what exactly? falling debris? And where did the debris come from? You need explosives to make those cuts, it isn't so easy to shear steel bar. All you have done is returned to the pancake theory except now instead of pancaking resulting in pancaking, it results in demolition; because that's what reduces a steel structure to a bazillion pieces of debris; demolition does that... not pancaking. At any rate, a vertical truss doesn't pancake. And the WTC was built with the highest grade steel known to construction, so it didn't melt from office fires, and the four inch thick steel that was pile driven 80 feet into bedrock never had contact with the office fires, yet that steel was reduced to molten pools of liquid metal, even though it was nine floors below street level (over 100 feet below ground). Obviously they cut the footers with thermitic devices; and they did a thorough job, WTC had a lot of footers and every single one was cut and melted. Demolition always cuts the footers, but they are a tad out of reach of normal office fires. WTC had all the results of demolition; the towers were blown to bits, not just collapsed, the footers were all cut, explosives throughout the structure performed the softening up job prior to pulling the building, and the towers fell at free fall acceleration. This top post was just pointing out that the NIST analysis called for an intact upper floors (tops) to perform both shearing of the walls and pulverization of the core; and that never existed. Again, the core ran from ground level to rooftop, it was seamless, and it was enormously thick, enormously strong, how exactly could it be pulverized by falling debris? Objects falling down do not fall sideways, the most you could hope for would be friction from sliding against the core, there is no shearing from falling debris. How exactly was the first shear performed? The cores were snapped in half BEFORE the towers collapsed; what sheared the cores and kicked the tops out at angles? That's exactly what shape charges on the side of the core would do. Without demolition, how could you possibly snap the core in half and kick the whole top out at an angle at the ONSET of the collapse sequence? (maybe a giant angel swung his sword at WTC?) I don't think God had it in for the towers, which leaves exactly one other possible cause of destruction; explosives. When a building or structure is thoroughly demolished, chances are pretty good that the demolition was probably caused by explosives carefully placed, logistically engineered and timed by experts in the field of demolition.

All of these questions can be answered WITHOUT the need for any demolition.

"How exactly was the first shear performed?"

The initial shearing of the floor supports were caused by the impacts. The 767's have a dry weight of 124 tons and a 156' wingspan. The images of the impact sites clearly show that they outer curtain walls have been massively compromised which means that there are no outer supports for the floors at that level and all of the upper floors are bearing down on those wide gaps.

Close up of one of the impact points.

" The cores were snapped in half BEFORE the towers collapsed; what sheared the cores "

Concrete can bear massive VERTICAL loads but it is brittle. The impact of 140 tons traveling at 400+ mph would be like an axe hitting a tree. The concrete core would have been forced to "flex" at the point of impact. The near side would have compressed while the far side would have "stretched". Under those stresses the integrity of the concrete core would have been destroyed. It would have developed shearing stress cracks from the impacts. The reinforcement bars (rebar) would have kept the basic shape but the integrity was gone. The impact would also have torn away the floor supports that were anchored to the concrete core on the impact side. On the far side the concrete they were in would be compromised by the "flexing"

So with up to 40% of the floor supports destroyed and/or compromised by the initial impact we then have the fire. The damage to the core probably took out the water pipes too. The images of the fire show an intensity that would have been more than enough to soften the steel floor trusses enough to make them sag and pull away from the core and curtain supports.

The same fires would have been weakening the remaining curtain wall supports that had not already been compromised by the impact but which were now having to carry the entire weight of the upper floors. At this point they are at the limit of their own point of failure.

"and kicked the tops out at angles?"

The inner core has stress fractures, the outer curtain wall is severely damaged and there is a raging out of control fire that is weakening the inside floor trusses. All it would take at that point is for a single additional factor for it start the collapse. When the floor immediately above the fire sagged to the point where the remaining supports failed it would have dropped onto the floor below and this relatively small shift in the load bearing down on the remaining supports would have been enough to trigger the entire collapse.

Granted it is impossible to prove following the utter destruction that followed but it fits all of the known damage and does not require any explosives or demolition.

The major problem with the "thermite/demolition" conspiracy is that the explosives had to be on the exact floors that were impacted and still functional after spending an hour or so in a raging fire.

 

[Days]

In theory, this is possible, if the jet's impact got lucky. But in reality, both cores survived the jet impacts. Which was pretty easy for Tower Two since the jet flew the corner of Tower Two and missed the core. And while there's little doubt that the jet impacts took out floor supports where the jet punched holes in the steel curtain wall (they took out the entire wall) yet those holes did not result in any floor collapses.

The buildings were designed to withstand jet impacts and they held up beautifully. It took demolition to bring them down.

 

[Days]

No, that's your false information, all three buildings fell at free fall speeds and that's widely available on the internet, someone has it posted in this thread. You are posting Lies, that's all. And you are labeling the truth I'm posting as "garbage information". So, you have an agenda, you are out to push, which is to smear the truth with disinformation. You aren't discussing anything, neither are you engaged in discussion, you are just attacking the truth with your own bag of Lies and disinformation. I've patiently answered as many of your false posts as I could and you respond by calling the truth a bunch of garbage. So you have an agenda to discredit the truth in this area. I've noticed a couple of your cohorts are busy tossing negative reputation at my posts in this thread, so they are attacking like jackals while you are attacking with false debate, but the group of you obviously came here to attack the thread, not discuss it.

 

[Montrovant]

No, that's your false information, all three buildings fell at free fall speeds and that's widely available on the internet, someone has it posted in this thread. You are posting Lies, that's all. And you are labeling the truth I'm posting as "garbage information". So, you have an agenda, you are out to push, which is to smear the truth with disinformation. You aren't discussing anything, neither are you engaged in discussion, you are just attacking the truth with your own bag of Lies and disinformation. I've patiently answered as many of your false posts as I could and you respond by calling the truth a bunch of garbage. So you have an agenda to discredit the truth in this area. I've noticed a couple of your cohorts are busy tossing negative reputation at my posts in this thread, so they are attacking like jackals while you are attacking with false debate, but the group of you obviously came here to attack the thread, not discuss it.

From what I remember of the various 9/11 threads I've participated in here, even most of the inside job theorists don't claim the buildings fell at free fall speed for the entirety of their collapses. I think it's usually a claim of free fall speed for a portion of the collapse.

 

[Derideo_Te]

In theory, this is possible, if the jet's impact got lucky. But in reality, both cores survived the jet impacts. Which was pretty easy for Tower Two since the jet flew the corner of Tower Two and missed the core. And while there's little doubt that the jet impacts took out floor supports where the jet punched holes in the steel curtain wall (they took out the entire wall) yet those holes did not result in any floor collapses.

The buildings were designed to withstand jet impacts and they held up beautifully. It took demolition to bring them down.

Your "demolition theory" has no credibility because it requires far too many things to happen without anyone being aware of them. We have the hard evidence of exactly how much damage a 140 ton aircraft flying at 400+ mph can do when it hits a MASSIVELY REINFORCED CONCRETE structure and blows a hole all the way through it.

The concrete cores of the WTC towers were not reinforced in the same way that the Pentagon had been recently upgraded to withstand. If the impact could make a hole that huge in the Pentagon wall the WTC concrete cores would have been damaged just as severely if not even more so.

I have provided a completely plausible scenario based upon all of the available evidence that demonstrates how the impacts followed by the fires were able to bring down the buildings. You have provided no credible evidence of any demolition or explosives.

The onus is on you to explain how the explosives ended up on the exact impact floors, how they were not damaged by the impacts, how they survived the raging fires and then how they were set off in an area crawling with police and firefighters with thousands of witness and cameras rolling non stop.

 

[Gamolon]

No, that's your false information, all three buildings fell at free fall speeds and that's widely available on the internet, someone has it posted in this thread.

MY false information? LMAO! No, it's YOUR false information. It is PROVEN that the towers totally collapsed in almost DOUBLE the time it would have taken in free fall.

You are posting Lies, that's all. And you are labeling the truth I'm posting as "garbage information".

I'm posting lies? Let's see what lies you've posted so far.

1. 40 stories worth of the upper section was destroyed. Wrong, it was 28 and 12.
2. The towers fell at free fall acceleration. Wrong, the collapsed in almost DOUBLE the time for free fall.
3. There was one story (12 feet) worth of debris within the tower footprints. Wrong, there was almost 56' worth of debris in the footprints, proven by photos. That's more than four times what you claim.

What other garbage do you have to provide us?

So, you have an agenda, you are out to push, which is to smear the truth with disinformation. You aren't discussing anything, neither are you engaged in discussion, you are just attacking the truth with your own bag of Lies and disinformation. I've patiently answered as many of your false posts as I could and you respond by calling the truth a bunch of garbage. So you have an agenda to discredit the truth in this area. I've noticed a couple of your cohorts are busy tossing negative reputation at my posts in this thread, so they are attacking like jackals while you are attacking with false debate, but the group of you obviously came here to attack the thread, not discuss it.

Right. You post bullcrap information that we prove wrong, and WE'RE the ones with agendas.

 

[Gamolon]

The buildings were designed to withstand jet impacts and they held up beautifully. It took demolition to bring them down.

Correct. They DID hold up to the jet impacts. It was the fire that further weakened the reaming components to fail.