• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Why Did WTC Collapse?

A

Anonymous

Guest
Where do I begin with this bunch of lies. It is hard to deal with folks that want to believe the official story when it is so blatantly a lie.

First of all, how did fires cause a global collapse. We know the WTC towers were made to withstand a crash by a jetliner when built. They did withstand it.

What happened to cause all resistance to be removed in less than 56 minutes in the first WTC tower?

The jet fuel could not have gotten the steel hot enough to cause a global collapse. And even if it chemically was possible, it would not have come down in a controlled manner. It would have leaned and fell.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
shaumei said:
It would have leaned and fell.

Says who? You?

Watch the video of the collapse. Don´t recall which tower it was, but the section above the jet´s impact did lean as it began to fall. From there I suspect something like gravity took over.

Then again, that gravity thing could be just a plot on the part of the Israelis to frame those poor innocent jihadist muslims. They´re ruthless those Israelis.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
shaumei said:
Where do I begin with this bunch of lies. It is hard to deal with folks that want to believe the official story when it is so blatantly a lie.

First of all, how did fires cause a global collapse. We know the WTC towers were made to withstand a crash by a jetliner when built. They did withstand it.

What happened to cause all resistance to be removed in less than 56 minutes in the first WTC tower?

The jet fuel could not have gotten the steel hot enough to cause a global collapse. And even if it chemically was possible, it would not have come down in a controlled manner. It would have leaned and fell.

OK Shamwow....Evidently you didnt' take time to even read the article:

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TexasBred said:
shaumei said:
Where do I begin with this bunch of lies. It is hard to deal with folks that want to believe the official story when it is so blatantly a lie.

First of all, how did fires cause a global collapse. We know the WTC towers were made to withstand a crash by a jetliner when built. They did withstand it.

What happened to cause all resistance to be removed in less than 56 minutes in the first WTC tower?

The jet fuel could not have gotten the steel hot enough to cause a global collapse. And even if it chemically was possible, it would not have come down in a controlled manner. It would have leaned and fell.

OK Shamwow....Evidently you didnt' take time to even read the article:

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

i read all of this. it is just ridiculous.

the building came down thru the path of most resistance at FREEFALL SPEED MEANING ALL RESISTANCE WAS REMOVED AT ONE MOMENT IN TIME. no one hear can find any link that explains how the beams were removed in this process.

no one hear can explain how the Military grade Nano thermate was found in the debris. this is why the epa said the air was ok to breath to workers as they did not want anyone testing it. but we did test it and it had thermate in it proving demolition.

i know you want to believe this government that has stole trillions from you. you also wanted to believe in santa claus at one time. sorry, they both are a lie.

we have two buildings hit by planes that come down at freefall speed.

we have a third building not hit by plane come down at freefall speed.

we have controlled demolitions.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Larrry said:
I looked on loose change and did not find any actual proof of the thermate. Do you have an actual test report?

yes,

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf
 

Steve

Well-known member
form the "paper" page 18..
The very next day after reading the NIST fact sheet in August 2006, a colleague and I
performed experiments with aluminum mixed with organic materials, mostly wood chips. The flow
was silvery and simply did not resemble the orange liquid which poured from the south tower. The
organics burned quickly when added to the molten aluminum. The ash floated on top of the aluminum
liquid.

is this guy real? his suppositions border on the level of a kindergartner..

the "scale" of the experiment, and lack of controls would get him laughed out of any reputable lab..

equating a large airplane (with multiple burnable metals) and a complex office environment) to a pan of Aluminum and wood chips?

Steven Earl Jones is an American physicist. For most of his career, Jones was known mainly for his work on muon-catalyzed fusion. In the fall of 2006, amid controversy surrounding his work, he was relieved of his teaching duties and placed on leave from Brigham Young University

"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" was his first paper on the topic and was considered controversial both for its content and its claims to scientific rigor.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Steve said:
form the "paper" page 18..
The very next day after reading the NIST fact sheet in August 2006, a colleague and I
performed experiments with aluminum mixed with organic materials, mostly wood chips. The flow
was silvery and simply did not resemble the orange liquid which poured from the south tower. The
organics burned quickly when added to the molten aluminum. The ash floated on top of the aluminum
liquid.

is this guy real? his suppositions border on the level of a kindergartner..

the "scale" of the experiment, and lack of controls would get him laughed out of any reputable lab..

equating a large airplane (with multiple burnable metals) and a complex office environment) to a pan of Aluminum and wood chips?

Steven Earl Jones is an American physicist. For most of his career, Jones was known mainly for his work on muon-catalyzed fusion. In the fall of 2006, amid controversy surrounding his work, he was relieved of his teaching duties and placed on leave from Brigham Young University

"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" was his first paper on the topic and was considered controversial both for its content andits claims to scientific rigor.[

And the shamoos of the world believe this guy?? :wink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
in Jones paper he is unable to explain the molten orange in the photo of the tower..

MoltenCloseup1.JPG


notice it in the above photo to the right of the 80, as it appears to be flowing down the side of the building..

he limited his choices and picked one to suit his needs.... designed limited experiments that backed his results, ignoring all other material present such as..
Magnesium alloy developments have traditionally been driven by aerospace industry requirements for lightweight materials to operate under increasingly demanding conditions. Magnesium alloys have always been attractive to designers due to their low density, only two thirds that of aluminum. This has been a major factor in the widespread use of magnesium alloy castings and wrought products.

ever seen it burn... pretty spectacular..

an experiment by a bunch of guys, on about the "same" level as Jones experiments..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rogZBXNqaMo


if that doesn't convince you.. some real science.
wtcchemfig2new11-5.small.gif

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/chem1/index.html

Results

WD-XRF results show that silicon, calcium, sulfur, magnesium, aluminum, iron, and carbon are the predominant elemental components of the dusts. The contents of volatile compounds in the dusts approach nearly 20% by weight.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
the molten metal you see flowing is from the Military Grade Nano Thermate that was found in the debris.

Or do you want to say that the jet fuel burned for 6 weeks and left molten metal that could not be extinguished.

what is amazing is you claim to know something about architecture or chemistry yet you refuse to explain the free fall collapse of three buildings due to fire for the first time in history all on one day. you cannot do it. how did all resistance get removed in 56 minutes as it may be a new way to demolish buildings that we have never thought of till you Steve came along.

I am all ears.

I have never run across anyone so determined to believe the government story. I bet your parents had a tough time with you over Santa right?
 

Steve

Well-known member
the molten metal you see flowing is from the Military Grade Nano Thermate that was found in the debris.


wow your really in deep.. but if you can be patient.. I could explain it all..

since you refuse to try to understand structural and architectural theory, let me try another approach..

try this as a starter..

http://www.highlightskids.com/Science/TryThis/h3TT1004_ironBurns.asp?subTitleID=159

now lets look back in time

Iron smiths (Blacksmiths) modern and ancient are aware that with a source of oxygen, glowing Iron Burns:

"With bellows blowing additional air through the fire, it can reach temperatures of about 3,000° Fahrenheit. Iron burns at 2,800°F,

The smith's fire contains too much oxygen to allow iron to melt; as it approaches its melting point the iron burns instead."

Blacksmiths work by heating pieces of wrought iron or steel until the metal becomes soft enough to be shaped with hand tools, such as a hammer, anvil and chisel. Heating is accomplished by the use of a forge fueled by propane, natural gas, coal, charcoal,

did you learned something ?

Iron burns... and violently... over 3000°F

BTW Wood air 3596 Tad (°F)

check out this hot info???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_flame_temperature
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve,

none of this explains freefall global collapse. you can explain how elements can melt steel over time theoretically, but it does not explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.

you simply cannot explain that.

NIST had to revise their theories multiple times all the while trying to avoid freefall speeds. they eventually admitted freefall collapse and there is only one logical way that happened with 3 steel buildings on one day. it had never happened before in history....
 

hopalong

Well-known member
You have a DEGREE in what?
Or are you just like a lemming believing what abunch of kooks want you to believe

tin foil more tin foil for shamooooooo'
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hopalong said:
You have a DEGREE in what?
Or are you just like a lemming believing what abunch of kooks want you to believe

tin foil more tin foil for shamooooooo'

I follow the evidence. Not what I am told to believe. I am only presenting the evidence here. Do not get angry at the messenger.

You do not attack the evidence, although Steve has tried, but you attack me.
 

Steve

Well-known member
explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.

you simply cannot explain that.

first it was not free fall...

the collapse started about seven minutes before the dramatic "freefall" of the outer concrete facade every kook likes to quote..

when the molten metal you keep whining about started pouring out the 80th floor, that floor soon dropped to the 79th floor, and then a few minutes later the internal collapse started, followed by the dramatic collapse of the external concrete facing, then the internal collapse accelerates in the last few seconds,..

during the ten minutes before the final collapse it was evident by the flames engulfing entire floors that the building internal structure was collapsing..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.

you simply cannot explain that.

first it was not free fall...

the collapse started about seven minutes before the dramatic "freefall" of the outer concrete facade every kook likes to quote..

when the molten metal you keep whining about started pouring out the 80th floor, that floor soon dropped to the 79th floor, and then a few minutes later the internal collapse started, followed by the dramatic collapse of the external concrete facing, then the internal collapse accelerates in the last few seconds,..

during the ten minutes before the final collapse it was evident by the flames engulfing entire floors that the building internal structure was collapsing..

Steve,

are we talking about the same building? I am talking about a STEEL BUILDING. ACTUALLY 3 OF THEM. Not a concrete building. The steel had to be removed. once the collapse began, all of the steel was removed to acquire freefall.

The steel was cut neatly by the way so it could be put on the trucks to haul it away to china so no one would examine it like a real crime scene. no tests were run for how it happened as they govt knew HOW it happened.
 

Steve

Well-known member
shaumei said:
Steve said:
explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.

you simply cannot explain that.

first it was not free fall...

the collapse started about seven minutes before the dramatic "freefall" of the outer concrete facade every kook likes to quote..

when the molten metal you keep whining about started pouring out the 80th floor, that floor soon dropped to the 79th floor, and then a few minutes later the internal collapse started, followed by the dramatic collapse of the external concrete facing, then the internal collapse accelerates in the last few seconds,..

during the ten minutes before the final collapse it was evident by the flames engulfing entire floors that the building internal structure was collapsing..

Steve,

are we talking about the same building? I am talking about a STEEL BUILDING. ACTUALLY 3 OF THEM. Not a concrete building. The steel had to be removed. once the collapse began, all of the steel was removed to acquire freefall.

The steel was cut neatly by the way so it could be put on the trucks to haul it away to china so no one would examine it like a real crime scene. no tests were run for how it happened as they govt knew HOW it happened.
a few questions come to mind after reading your comment


do you need to be spoon fed?

are you really that ill-informed?

the towers had a steel or iron frame.. with concrete floors and exterior

# 200,000 tons of steel
# 425,000 cubic yards of concrete
# 43,600 windows
# 12,000 miles of electric cables

each floor was basically an acre of 4inch concrete..
208 ft by 208 ft at base

I thought you said you do your own research?

no one who looked would be this un-informed...
 
Top