RARE 911 WTC VIDEO - Multiple Explosions Heard Before and During Collapse.

a reply to: samkent

I'm not talking about Gage. I never mentioned Gage. You're just assuming I believe Gage and his experts because I don't believe NIST.

What I am saying is that there is something seriously wrong about the official "scientific" investigation into a matter as important as 9/11 refusing to release the most pertinent part of their analysis. The part that everything else is based on.

You cannot refute that. You cannot deny that. The lack of transparency is a glaring issue that must be rectified, even and especially if NIST is actually correct.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

We can take a look here.

The Structural Engineering Community Rejects the Controlled-Demolition Conspiracy Theory

The structural engineering community rejects the controlled-demolition conspiracy theory. Its consensus is that the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings was a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.


Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns.

The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Critical analysis of the collapse of wtc towers 1, 2 & 7

www.jod911.com...

a reply to: wildb

Its not up to me to provide you with anything,...

Then you cannot claim that 9/11 was an inside job since you are unable to backup what you say with evidence..

What have we learned from 9-11 that can be used to prevent future large-scale terrorist attacks in the U.S.A.?

a reply to: skyeagle409

Whatever it is they're saying, what I am saying is that it's ridiculous that NIST not releasing their modelling data is somehow acceptable.

@carewemust

"Listen to your intelligence reports" is probably one of those.

a reply to: carewemust

What have we learned from 9-11 that can be used to prevent future large-scale terrorist attacks in the U.S.A.?

Security measures in airliners and on the ground have been undertaken after 9/11 and attempted terrorist attacks have been stopped in their tracks. In addition, lessons were learned and corrective measures were implemented in new building designs. That, in reference to studies on how the WTC buildings collapsed.

Evolution of Building Code Requirements in a Post 9/11 World

www.ctbuh.org...

In addition, changes in coordination and intelligence sharing between our intelligence services have been implemented as well. There is never a 100% guarantee that such measures will stop a full-scale terrorist attack, but we have to do the best we can.

Shortly after the Pearl Harbor attack, American forces were placed on alert in the Philippines, Wake Island, Guam, and Midway Island but that didn't stop the Japanese from attacking those locations.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Whatever it is they're saying, what I am saying is that it's ridiculous that NIST not releasing their modelling data is somehow acceptable.

Other experts with no ties to the government have already released their reports and found nothing to indicate that 9/11 was an inside job and the RJ Lee Group found no evidence of thermite nor explosives in their dust samples.

(NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

www.webcitation.org...

a reply to: skyeagle409

Thank-you SkyEagle! It's refreshing to see a factual positive message in a forum full of dueling over-inflated egos.

a reply to: carewemust

You're very welcome!

Do they actually publish their data publicly and have it peer-reviewed, unlike NIST?

I've done more digging into it, and there doesn't seem to be "overwhelming support" for the NIST theory coming from anywhere that isn't NIST.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Do they actually publish their data publicly and have it peer-reviewed, unlike NIST?

There has been no 'unified' alternative theory concerning 911.
The OS is a unified explanation that covers all the various events.

Many have said that this or that is wrong but have never shown any proof as to their alternative events.

No Planes? But they cannot show proof as to why people saw planes.
Explosives? But they cannot show positive proof of explosives or how they got there.
Pentagon? But they cannot show proof as to why people saw planes.

The most common response the truther community gives is . . .
"It can't be xxxxxxx. Everybody knows that!"

Can any truther show us a unified theory covering the timeline and all the events we saw?
Who did what at what time and how they did it undercover?
Start with the 19 patsies taking flight lessons.
End with the clean up cover up.

a reply to: samkent

Ohh no you don't, that's not how you get to argue about this. That's not how an investigation works, and I'm not offering an alternative anyway. What I am saying is that NIST's explanation and the OS is a fallacious and obfuscating piece of crap. What are they hiding? No idea. Might be that the WTC7 was taken down intentionally. Might be that the buildings were constructed really poorly. What I can say is that they are hiding something. NIST drylabbed, they didn't work from the ground up, they worked from the top down. Start with the official story, then justify it.
Of course, they've never actually released their numbers.

You know why it's impossible to show proof of explosives? Because almost all of the wreckage was shipped to India or China and melted down. Pretty much no one was allowed to look at it. Not even FEMA. All the trucks carrying the wreckage from G-0 were expensively outfitted with GPS tracking devices. The US government really wanted to sell that steel to China at... Er, below average prices.

I'm not saying "It can't be X", I'm saying we don't know it's X, because they won't let us verify it.

Can you show me a theory of the beginning of the universe and all the events that have transpired until this current day?
Guess the universe doesn't really exist then...

Who said the hijackers were patsies? They might have really been terrorists, and the government gave them a 'helping hand.'

Can you truly in good conscience say that it's acceptable for NIST to withhold the modelling data for its explanation of how the collapse occurred?
As I said, NIST releases their data, it gets peer-reviewed and confirmed as correct, all my worries go out the window. But they haven't released it. And they won't. Because their investigation was drylabbed and their results faked.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

You know why it's impossible to show proof of explosives? Because almost all of the wreckage was shipped to India or China and melted down.

Some of the WTC steel was used in the construction of the USS New York.

WTC Steel Used in the Construction of the USS New York

I once posed with WTC steel on display at the Rio Vista Airport, Rio Vista, CA. a few years ago.

Pretty much no one was allowed to look at it. Not even FEMA. All the trucks carrying the wreckage from G-0 were expensively outfitted with GPS tracking devices. The US government really wanted to sell that steel to China at... Er, below average prices.

There was no need to examine every piece of structural steel, and there were better ways to examine the evidence according to New York City Mayor, Mike Bloomingfield. However, we can take a look here because some of the WTC steel was examined.

WTC Steel Data Collection

Let's read here.

THE COLLAPSE

Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down.

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.

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.

www.tms.org...

There was no way that explosives could have been planted in a way in order to bring down the WTC buildings without drawing a lot of attention. People get the wrong impression that detonating explosives inside a steel frame building will be enough to bring down the building but that is not accurate. For an example, if 1000 pounds of explosives were placed on each floor level and detonated, the explosions will blow out walls and windows and the blast waves will flow around steel beams like wind flowing around a flag pole leaving a result something like the results of these buildings where explosives failed to bring down those buildings.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Photo 3

To bring down a steel building, its structure must be weakened before explosives are attached and that is a dirty and noisy operation, a process that takes many months and would not have gone unnoticed by occupants of the WTC buildings.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Not even FEMA.

FEMA doesn't investigate building collapses.
Where did you get the idea that they did?

FEMA doesn't investigate building collapses. Where did you get the idea that they did?

a reply to: samkent

I've already told you about this.. they were involved in some ways.


www.fema.gov...

a reply to: wildb

Pretty much no one was allowed to look at it. Not even FEMA.

That is what you said.
Implying that FEMA investigates building collapses.

I don't remember where I read it but The steel and trusses from the impact zone were set aside so that investigators could examine them closely.
I'm certain you could google the pictures I saw of investigators and the steel.

If that's not enough almost every major city in the US has recieved steel to be used in 911 memorial displays.
Even in NYC they have a very large display of the steel.
So the statement "All the steel was whisked away." is a flat out lie.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia

and

analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests, and created sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

So 125 experts from the private sector and academia analyzed 236 pieces of steel.
What more can you ask for?
Are you ready to call these non NIST experts lairs?

a reply to: samkent

That is what you said. Implying that FEMA investigates building collapses.

NO I did not say that, the new girl did... your post is misdirected..

a reply to: samkent

analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests, and created sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Everyone misses the point here, UNTIL THEY BEGAN TO COLLAPSE, that where the investigation stopped, the collapse itself was never looked at..

a reply to: samkent

So the statement "All the steel was whisked away." is a flat out lie.

All but 0.03% was shipped away, close enough for all the steel..