Merged Core-led collapse and explosive demolition

[NoahFence]

The reality is, even if the fires had reached 2800F, the melting point of steel. causing the upper part of the building to collapse on to the lower part, there would still not be enough mass or energy for it to crush the lower, much stronger part of the building in to a fine dust at near free-fall acceleration.

Wrong.

The temps, by the way, didn't need to get anywhere near the melting point of steel. They only had to weaken it. It has been shown so many times it's almost funny that those temps were present.

As for collapsing the entire building below, that's not what happened, either. The top block crushed ONE floor below it. Just one. Then it did it again, and again, and again.

Pathetic.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Truthers actually put their own reputation and safety at risk for the betterment of society when they stand up to the government's official conspiracy theory of 911.
I'm a truther, but I'm not trying to exploit anyone. I just want to get to the truth about how those 3 buildings fell. And my major motivating factor is the tragic fate of the victims. So please, don't hate truthers for simply digging in to the science for the sake of justice.

Like Dave Rogers above, I had to chuckle at this one. All you brave Truther boys hiding behind your anonymous usernames from the super-secret global government and their ruthless servants on forums like the JREF..wow...that takes some balls. You're a hero for this age. Stand tall Truther friend, without you, there would be no freedom.

David, Truthers are being disparaged on this forum. I think it is important to point out that we not only have good intentions but we also have good science. The implications of controlled demolition create cognitive dissonance that results in denial, ridicule and confrontation. But people need to get past all that and take a hard look at the science and the implication of ignoring it.

Do you actually know what cognitive dissonance is? Or is it just one of those top-schooled, high-powered words that only the smart folk can use. So the Truthers, well they gotta be using it too. By the way, it doesn't result in denial, ridicule or confrontation. Get a grip and stop making up crap. It only makes you look stupid.

 

[NoahFence]

Truthers actually put their own reputation and safety at risk for the betterment of society when they stand up to the government's official conspiracy theory of 911.

Reputation and safety? Can you please elaborate?

I'm a truther, but I'm not trying to exploit anyone. I just want to get to the truth about how those 3 buildings fell.

Oh, is that it? Cool.

WTCs 1 and 2 were struck by HUGE aircraft going pretty much as fast as they could. This resulted in an incredible amount of damage, and a massive fire. Because of the damage, the buildings collapsed. One of them struck WTC 7 which then burned out of control for 7(ish) hours until finally that building couldn't stand any longer.


Fire is pretty amazing stuff. Especially if you just sit there and let it do its thing, as in the case of WTC 7.

Did you know that more than 3 buildings collapsed on 9/11? Why aren't you interested in them? Are they not part of the conspiracy?

And my major motivating factor is the tragic fate of the victims. So please, don't hate truthers for simply digging in to the science for the sake of justice.

I call *******

You're a truther. By definition you use the suffering of others as a hobby.

 

[thedopefishlives]

Wrong.

The temps, by the way, didn't need to get anywhere near the melting point of steel. They only had to weaken it. It has been shown so many times it's almost funny that those temps were present.

As for collapsing the entire building below, that's not what happened, either. The top block crushed ONE floor below it. Just one. Then it did it again, and again, and again.
Pathetic.

It's interesting to note that no Twoofer I know of, either on this forum or elsewhere, has addressed this notion. Their entire worldview is built around the idea that the upper block was too small to crush the mass of the lower tower, and if it was a single massive block of steel, I would agree. However, it was not; it was a series of steel columns and steel and concrete floors, with a lot of air in between. Once the upper block tore loose and began to fall, all it had to do was break the floor below (by whatever means, the precise details are still debatable). The rest is simple physics.

 

[tntruther]

Well, here are some aspects of the truth about how those three buildings fell:
(1) They didn't fall at near free-fall acceleration. One of them, for a small part of its collapse, fell at near free-fall.
(2) It's extremely well understood that the temperature of the steel didn't need to get anywhere near its melting point to cause the buildings to collapse.
(3) The steel in the buildings was not turned to dust.
(4) No reputable structural engineer is in any doubt that the collapses were entirely caused by the airliner impacts, the resulting fires, and in the case of WTC7 the impact damage and fires resulting from the collapses.

Now, if you choose to ignore these aspects of the truth, what does that say about your claim that you "just want to get to the truth"? And if you choose not to ignore them, what significant details are actually left to uncover?

Dave

(1) The top part of both Twin towers were actually clocked at 2/3 free fall. (See Davis Chandler)
There is video evidence that explosions were racing down the face of the TTs almost as fast as some of the falling debris.
WTC7 reached free-fall for the first 100 feet. NIST has admitted this.
(2) No hi-rise has ever collapsed symmetrically due to fire and some have burned much longer. On 911, 3 did.
And, there was melted steel, molten iron in the basements and iron microspheres in the dust.
(3) No, but the concrete was. All of the floors and the steel decking was pulverized in to dust in mid air.
There was no large pile of floors at the bottom of the collapse.
(4) 1700 Architects and Engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation.

(5) And explosives were found in the dust, even though NIST refused to test for them. "Military grade, state of the art, nano-thermite".

 

[Bell]

As for collapsing the entire building below, that's not what happened, either. The top block crushed ONE floor below it. Just one. Then it did it again, and again, and again.

It's interesting to note that no Twoofer I know of, either on this forum or elsewhere, has addressed this notion. Their entire worldview is built around the idea that the upper block was too small to crush the mass of the lower tower, and if it was a single massive block of steel, I would agree. However, it was not; it was a series of steel columns and steel and concrete floors, with a lot of air in between. Once the upper block tore loose and began to fall, all it had to do was break the floor below (by whatever means, the precise details are still debatable). The rest is simple physics.

I posted this a few times before:

How can this floor...

... stop this...

 

[thedopefishlives]

(1) The top part of both Twin towers were actually clocked at 2/3 free fall. (See Davis Chandler)
There is video evidence that explosions were racing down the face of the TTs almost as fast as some of the falling debris.
WTC7 reached free-fall for the first 100 feet. NIST has admitted this.
(2) No hi-rise has ever collapsed symmetrically due to fire and some have burned much longer. On 911, 3 did.
And, there was melted steel, molten iron in the basements and iron microspheres in the dust.
(3) No, but the concrete was. All of the floors and the steel decking was pulverized in to dust in mid air.
There was no large pile of floors at the bottom of the collapse.
(4) 1700 Architects and Engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation.

(5) And explosives were found in the dust, even though NIST refused to test for them. "Military grade, state of the art, nano-thermite".

1) David Chandler, really? That's what you're going with? He calculated the average acceleration of the upper block, which has nothing at all to do with how fast it actually fell. See Dave Thomas's signature on this forum.

2) You're going with the "first time in history" argument? Fine, how about, if you're right, this would be: a) First time in history buildings this big were demolished; b) First time in history buildings were demolished after having a plane flown into them; c) First time in history a building that was on fire for 7 hours was demolished by explosives; and that's just to start.

3) They weren't all pulverized; there are photographs of concrete and steel "sandwiches" that are the remains of multiple floor decks smashed together.

4) 1700 architects and engineers are irrelevant because a) the vast majority of them have exactly zero expertise in the correct area (highrise architecture or structural engineering, respectively) and b) 1700 is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall population of architects and engineers, who DO agree with the fell-by-fire hypothesis.

5) No thermite was found in the dust. Harrit et al.'s paper has been debunked in this forum; their own results show that the chips they burned in the DSC test were conclusively not thermite of any flavor.

 

[NoahFence]

(1) The top part of both Twin towers were actually clocked at 2/3 free fall. (See Davis Chandler)
There is video evidence that explosions were racing down the face of the TTs almost as fast as some of the falling debris.
WTC7 reached free-fall for the first 100 feet. NIST has admitted this.
(2) No hi-rise has ever collapsed symmetrically due to fire and some have burned much longer. On 911, 3 did.
And, there was melted steel, molten iron in the basements and iron microspheres in the dust.
(3) No, but the concrete was. All of the floors and the steel decking was pulverized in to dust in mid air.
There was no large pile of floors at the bottom of the collapse.
(4) 1700 Architects and Engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation.

(5) And explosives were found in the dust, even though NIST refused to test for them. "Military grade, state of the art, nano-thermite".

....and here we go.



Yawn. You don't want answers. You're not here to discuss. You're here to regurgitate long debunked talking points, and minutae that doesn't matter.

Why don't the other buildings that collapsed matter to you?

How does Flight 93 and the Pentagon fit into your AE911twoof talking point flyer?

 

[tntruther]

A progressive collapse would have slowed, not accelerated.

Cognitive dissonance is a feeling you get when you find yourself faced with the possibility that what you have rested your security on (your world view) is or could be flawed. That feeling much like being abandoned or cast out.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

(1) The top part of both Twin towers were actually clocked at 2/3 free fall. (See Davis Chandler)
There is video evidence that explosions were racing down the face of the TTs almost as fast as some of the falling debris.
WTC7 reached free-fall for the first 100 feet. NIST has admitted this.

So? Please explain in detail why you find this evidence of CD. List your assumptions and show your working.....

(2) No hi-rise has ever collapsed symmetrically due to fire and some have burned much longer. On 911, 3 did.
And, there was melted steel, molten iron in the basements and iron microspheres in the dust.

So? Please explain in detail why you find this evidence of CD. List your assumptions and show your working...

(3) No, but the concrete was. All of the floors and the steel decking was pulverized in to dust in mid air.
There was no large pile of floors at the bottom of the collapse.

So? Please explain in detail why you find this evidence of CD. List your assumptions and show your working...

(4) 1700 Architects and Engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation.

And several million did not, including me You are ten times more likely to be insane than have signed it and almost none of those you signed are in a field that is relevant.

(5) And explosives were found in the dust, even though NIST refused to test for them. "Military grade, state of the art, nano-thermite".

except there wasn't.

 

[Bell]

A progressive collapse would have slowed, not accelerated.

Cognitive dissonance is a feeling you get when you find yourself faced with the possibility that what you have rested your security on (your world view) is or could be flawed. That feeling much like being abandoned or cast out.

After the top block crushed the *one* floor below, it continued down. Then the top block + 1 floor crushed the next floor below. After that, the top block + 2 floors crushed the next floor below. All the way down.

 

[thedopefishlives]

A progressive collapse would have slowed, not accelerated.

No, it wouldn't. This is basic physics, which I would recommend you spend some time understanding rather than regurgitating talking points that have been debunked for at least 6 years.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

A progressive collapse would have slowed, not accelerated.

Really? why? list your assumptions and show your working.........

Cognitive dissonance is a feeling you get when you find yourself faced with the possibility that what you have rested your security on (your world view) is or could be flawed. That feeling much like being abandoned or cast out.

Lol, my college football team sometimes makes me feel like that but nothing about 911 does.....

 

[NoahFence]

A progressive collapse would have slowed, not accelerated.

Cognitive dissonance is a feeling you get when you find yourself faced with the possibility that what you have rested your security on (your world view) is or could be flawed. That feeling much like being abandoned or cast out.

You're wrong.

Probably. I'm not an engineer but there are many here who will gladly correct you on progressive collapse.

What I am is an arbiter of common f'n sense.

I don't use the speed of the collapse to prove/disprove Controlled Demo. I use the fact that it wasn't a Controlled Demo. Nothing points to it. No explosions, no evidence, nothing. You people have nothing.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Cognitive dissonance is a feeling you get when you find yourself faced with the possibility that what you have rested your security on (your world view) is or could be flawed. That feeling much like being abandoned or cast out.

Sorry, this is a retarded answer based on a misunderstanding of something you learned in first-year psych. I wrote a whole post about this, but I doubt your're interested because...because...you're a Truther...and that's what Truthers do to get attention...act retarded.

This is one of the stupidest answers I've seen.

 

[NoahFence]

..."New" guy shows up
... regurgitates old thread, pretends to be interested in honest discussion
... old, tired arguments are shot down with minimal effort
... "honest" discussion turns into "Truther knows all you people are dumb-dumbs"
... "honest" discussion turns into truther completely ignoring points that he can't BS his way around.
... "New" guy gets fed up and Suicides by Mod or simply runs away.

Rinse and repeat.

Seriously. THIS is the truth movement?

 

[thedopefishlives]

..."New" guy shows up
... regurgitates old thread, pretends to be interested in honest discussion
... old, tired arguments are shot down with minimal effort
... "honest" discussion turns into "Truther knows all you people are dumb-dumbs"
... "honest" discussion turns into truther completely ignoring points that he can't BS his way around.
... "New" guy gets fed up and Suicides by Mod or simply runs away.

Rinse and repeat.

Seriously. THIS is the truth movement?

Honestly, I think a lot of it is that people who are just discovering the Twoof Movement for the first time have all the fervor of a religious zealot. They want to get out there and get the word out, convert the non-believers, and make a difference. Why they decide to do that here is beyond me, but it's kind of fun to apply a pin to the balloon of their misguided beliefs and watch them slowly deflate into "But it must be twoo, I read it on the Internet!"

 

[TJM]

..."New" guy shows up
... regurgitates old thread, pretends to be interested in honest discussion
... old, tired arguments are shot down with minimal effort
... "honest" discussion turns into "Truther knows all you people are dumb-dumbs"
... "honest" discussion turns into truther completely ignoring points that he can't BS his way around.
... "New" guy gets fed up and Suicides by Mod or simply runs away.

Rinse and repeat.

Seriously. THIS is the truth movement?

Kiddies are on Summer break and gearing up for 9/11 season - it's their busy time, so they usually double up on stupid.

 

[tntruther]

Bell,
Remember, what you see above the impact zone is equal or weaker than the structure below. The floor you are showing here is impacted only by the floors above. Those floors are not stronger. If there are 15 floor above, then at best, they would only crush 15 floor below. Nor are the columns above stronger than the columns below.
And, if the upper 15 floor did crush the lower 15 floors, it would have to slow down before it stopped at that 15th lower floor.
Actually what you see in the video footage is that the top part of the TTs collapse in to the lower floors before the lower floors start to disintegrate. So by the time the upper floors collapse, there is no power driver left to crush the rest of the building.

And on that note, where is the pile of 110 floors that should be at the bottom of the pile.

And what do you say about the molten Iron and the iron microspheres?

And thank you for the respectful discussion.

 

[NoahFence]

And what do you say about the molten Iron and the iron microspheres?

Molten Iron (steel) = Not existent. It wasn't there. Explosives don't melt steel, and the amount of thermite required to keep steel melted for days or weeks on end is simply not possible to get at the site. Thermite burns for seconds. DO NOT put "nano" in front of it, either. That doesn't help your case.

Iron Microspheres = A lot present. This is totally expected in a 16 acre site covered in collapsed steel structures. Rebar. I-Beams. Girders. Floor pans. The list of common building materials present at the site that could create Iron Microspheres is virtually endless.

You have been HAD. Do you know what that means? Do you know what a snake oil salesman is?

And on that note, where is the pile of 110 floors that should be at the bottom of the pile.

Please think before you answer this question.

WTCs 1 and 2 were 95% air.

How big do you think the pile should have been?