Any evidence of pre setup?

a reply to: Jesushere

neutronflux depends on what they used. Explosions can be set to go off wirelessly. This 2001, not the 1970's.

Wireless explosives where? The jet impacts cut into the core of the building to cut services like firewater. Fuel spilled down the elevator shafts, resulting in fire balls, and fires. Wireless detonators would not have survived the jet impacts and fires to start the collapse initiation in the areas of jet impacts which is clearly caused by buckling in the video in the link below.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

www.metabunk.org...

You still have no proof of columns being cut from the video or photo evidence. Still no evidence of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel by video, audio, seismic, physical evidence? Much less a supposed floor by floor removal of resistance? Which was pushed by the truth movement to support a false narrative for the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2.

a reply to: Jesushere

You have access to the steel core through the shafts in the elevator.

With no guarantee that walls and insulation would have to be removed. That knocking out walls and insulation would invade office space to place charges around core columns. Or make services like elevators inoperable.

Not all core columns where accessible by elevator shafts, if at all by the way the elevator shafts might be walled off by block, where the collapse of the Towers’ where initiated. How many elevators went to the 80th and 90th floors?

Remember, the truth movement claim is the resistance of each floor had to be removed? How many charges would that take for a 110 story building? 4 charges per floor? 10? 20? Multiplied by at least 70?

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Jesushere

We don't know how far the planes penetrated inside the building and how deep was the fires. Smoke from outside doesn't reveal much about the extent of the fires inside the twin towers.

But the helicopters did see inside and reported the extent of the fires.

Helicopter see as much as we do on TV. Firefighters made up to the top floors where the fire was and they even reported back in one audio recording they could put it out with two lines.

originally posted by: Jesushere

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Jesushere

We don't know how far the planes penetrated inside the building and how deep was the fires. Smoke from outside doesn't reveal much about the extent of the fires inside the twin towers.

But the helicopters did see inside and reported the extent of the fires.

Helicopter see as much as we do on TV. Firefighters made up to the top floors where the fire was and they even reported back in one audio recording they could put it out with two lines.

For a fire on multiple floors? Can you cite context and source?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere

neutronflux depends on what they used. Explosions can be set to go off wirelessly. This 2001, not the 1970's.

Wireless explosives where? The jet impacts cut into the core of the building to cut services like firewater. Fuel spilled down the elevator shafts, resulting in fire balls, and fires. Wireless detonators would not have survived the jet impacts and fires to start the collapse initiation in the areas of jet impacts which is clearly caused by buckling in the video in the link below.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/

www.metabunk.org...

You still have no proof of columns being cut from the video or photo evidence. Still no evidence of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel by video, audio, seismic, physical evidence? Much less a supposed floor by floor removal of resistance? Which was pushed by the truth movement to support a false narrative for the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2.

You have no evidence the plane got anywhere near the steel core in the middle. The plane actually vapourised upon impact it made of Aluminium.

The initiation event could be anywhere in the building near the top. Why do you assume the initiation event occurred on the floors where the plane impacted? You clearly see the north tower plane only impacted a few floors at the top.

Inward bowing was caused by the steel hat truss collapsing down and failing. You can clearly see the antenna failed first.

neutronflux Elevators are placed inside the steel core. You have full access. By the way lighting system is also connected through there. If the planes had made it all the way in the lighting would have gone offline. You clearly see firefighters in the lobby and lights were still on.

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux Elevators are placed inside the steel core. You have full access. By the way lighting system is also connected through there. If the planes had made it all the way in the lighting would have gone offline. You clearly see firefighters in the lobby and lights were still on.

What does the lobby have to do with jet impacts cutting services off at and above the points of impacts?

a reply to: Jesushere

Elevators are placed inside the steel core.

And elevator shafts for fire protection are often walled off from the steel members by concrete or by block walls. Hence the name elevator shaft?

Not all the elevator shafts when’re to the 70th, 80th, and 90th floors.

So all sections of core columns where adjacent to elevator shafts.

en.wikisource.org...

Battalion 7 (South tower) radioed in he reached the 78 and 79 floors and found small pockets of fire and they radioed in they could deal with two lines.

The plane impacted on the 77th floor and some floors above it got damaged.

a reply to: Jesushere

You

You have no evidence the plane got anywhere near the steel core in the middle. The plane actually vapourised upon impact it made of Aluminium.

Another shameless blatantly false argument by you.

At least one wheel / landing gear made it to the street, at least one engine, part of a jet fuselage landed on top of a building, and large amounts of wreckage debris littered the streets.

originally posted by: Jesushere
en.wikisource.org...

Battalion 7 (South tower) radioed in he reached the 78 and 79 floors and found small pockets of fire and they radioed in they could deal with two lines.

The plane impacted on the 77th floor and some floors above it got damaged.

Ok, and there was not more fires throughout the building? What is your point? There was fires that were present that would destroy electronics like wireless detonators?

The point is could it have been done and the answer is yes. Work was ongoing in the building during 2001. It could have got done at night security is not going to be watching them if they have security passes to carry out work.

a reply to: Jesushere

Simulation showing the damage that most likely occurred from the jet impact of one of the towers.

Scientists simulate jet colliding with World Trade Center
m.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Jesushere
The point is could it have been done and the answer is yes. Work was ongoing in the building during 2001. It could have got done at night security is not going to be watching them if they have security passes to carry out work.

And how does that answer any of this...

And elevator shafts for fire protection are often walled off from the steel members by concrete or by block walls. Hence the name elevator shaft?

Not all the elevator shafts went to the 70th, 80th, and 90th floors.

So all sections of core columns where not adjacent to elevator shafts.

With no guarantee that walls and insulation would have to be removed. That knocking out walls and insulation would invade office space to place charges around core columns. Or make services like elevators inoperable.

Not all core columns where accessible by elevator shafts, if at all by the way the elevator shafts might be walled off by block, where the collapse of the Towers’ where initiated. How many elevators went to the 80th and 90th floors?

Remember, the truth movement claim is the resistance of each floor had to be removed? How many charges would that take for a 110 story building? 4 charges per floor? 10? 20? Multiplied by at least 70?

a reply to: Jesushere

Then cite video, audio, or seismic proof of vertical columns being cut.

What do you not get there is zero evidence of planted charges curing tower columns.

You assuming fires were near the explosives? And you're assuming the planes directly impacted the explosives.

I can see the failure occurred in floors above the impact zone. The antenna on the roof failed first. You clearly see it slids down only then did the walls starting breaking apart.

originally posted by: Jesushere
You assuming fires were near the explosives? And you're assuming the planes directly impacted the explosives.

I can see the failure occurred in floors above the impact zone. The antenna on the roof failed first. You clearly see it slids down only then did the walls starting breaking apart.

What explosives? The explosives there is no is no proof of that would not have survived the jet impacts or the resulting fireball, and fires.

NIST admitted in a letter that they could not explain the full collapse of the twin towers. They have a theory of how it started, but why the top of the building exploding in the air they have no explanation for that.

a reply to: Jesushere

You have no evidence the plane got anywhere near the steel core in the middle. The plane actually vapourised upon impact it made of Aluminium.

Again

Another shameless blatantly false argument by you.

At least one wheel / landing gear made it to the street, at least one engine, part of a jet fuselage landed on top of a building, and large amounts of wreckage debris littered the streets.

Another blatantly false argument by you that we should ignore.....,,

neutronflux This is false unless you know for certain the impact plane affected the explosives. I would think whoever did this knew where the planes would likely impact that day. It was a co-ordinated operation between the Saudis and Blackwater and dirty American politicians.