One Problem I have with Controlled Demo

I used to sit back and deny out of hand. But when you open your mind for a second, you have to answer some tough questions. Most of the kerosene from the planes goes up in the fireballs. Whatever is left is oxygen starved, thus the smoke. No steel building comes down from an oxygen starved fire after that short a period. Matter of fact, I don't think there's any steel building that's ever come down from fire for that matter.

Then, I need to know how a building "pancakes" at the speed of gravity. Floors do not simply disappear in front of other floors falling towards earth. There is a certain amount of resistance involved.

And beyond that, I really don't see the core coming down at all. The steel core should be relieved of stress if the structure were to fall away, and it gets stronger the closer you get to ground. A downward force should have little effect on spires of steel built to withstand side loads of 140 mph hurricane force winds and direct hits from 707's.

Originally posted by svenglezz
I see this "controlled" demo theory just won't die....

Man people should come to grips with what happened.

The buildings w'r taken down by the plains it's simple and
people are trying so hard to twist this into more...guess to sell
books.

Yep, and there are people out there that bit so hard on the content of those books, and have become so stone-clad in their belief of the the erronious, fallacy laden content of those books and vids that they are more brain-numb than the people they accuse of being "asleep' and "mindless sheeple."

Cause if it is someone else they can point a finger at--it sure couldn't be them...now could it? heh

Controlled Demo:



The above referenced building was much smaller than any of the WTC buildings that fell.... This demo was performed without the Hushaboom technology that was (allegedly) unveiled on 9/11.

I know this topic has gon' on and on in other threads and always
comes down to the proof?

Even some have claimed they even had pre-installed panels in the WTC 1 and 2 for this TNT just in case.....and there was no proof....just like most of the ideas that have come up of HOW the towers came down.

All I got'a say is thank god they had video of the planes crashing into the towers otherwise people would be saying the plains never hit the buildings.

There is a whole faction of 9/11 deniers that think the planes were actually holograms, and the towers were brought down by "death rays from outter space." -- I truly believe the uber-complex theories that evolved from this tragedy are a direct result of people's inability to cope with serious and shocking issues effectively. They are stuck in a rut-- stuck in time.. Six years of sifting through the past with fine-toothed combs--looking for something, ANYTHING. While the rest of the world passes them by.



It will not be long until the world is once again flat. And the playing field level across the board. Are you ready?

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver

There is a whole faction of 9/11 deniers that think the planes were actually holograms, and the towers were brought down by "death rays from outter space." -- I truly believe the uber-complex theories that evolved from this tragedy are a direct result of people's inability to cope with serious and shocking issues effectively. They are stuck in a rut-- stuck in time.. Six years of sifting through the past with fine-toothed combs--looking for something, ANYTHING. While the rest of the world passes them by.

Your confusing completely stupid theories like the no plane theory and "death rays from outer space" with sound physical arguments that make the official story of what happened look like a block of Swiss cheese. don't confuse the two please. there are many people out there working to try and hurt the truth movement by seemingly supporting it with totally outlandish theories. We who support the real truth movement are trying to show the world that all is not right and that we have been tricked into a war we can never hope to win wile 1000's die to make rich politicians richer. don't get hung up on one aspect of 911, look at the bigger picture and you will see massive problems with the official story everywhere in every aspect of the event. No one pretends to know every answer of what happened but the evidence supports the claims made that this was indeed an inside job and a pretext to invade the Middle East.

If you cant see that there is something very wrong here and there isn't need to properly investigate the events and facts and people involvement within the American government then there is something wrong with you.

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Six years of sifting through the past with fine-toothed combs--looking for something, ANYTHING.

That's more than I can say about the so-called "investigation". But, I guess that you don't find it strange that they are taking more time and resources to investigate a bridge collapse than they did for the worst "accident" in history? I say accident in an engineering standpoint.

^Great posts HimWhoHathAnEar, Matthew and Griff.

Why? because they all demand that logic and critical thought be brought to bear on the basics of the WTC collapses. All three of them.

Sadly, critical thinking and logical deduction are simply beyond the capacity of some, and understanding the bases of the collapse of the WTC buildings also requires a certain basic understanding of the structures and physics involved.

Actually, no single element is too difficult to grasp in and of itself; in fact, most of it you can simply deduce from common sense, but it does require a certain application and an ability to comprehend these various forces at work. So it escapes many.

Educate yourself enough on the events and the video and witness testimony and, with an open mind, you will come to understand the simple impossibility of a gravity-driven collapse creating the observed destruction.

Then you go from there, through the looking glass.

[edit on 14-8-2007 by gottago]

What does 100,000lbs plus of burning fuel look like from outside as it runs down a main elevator shaft /main support reaching temps that liquefies the metal of the support structure?

Originally posted by Xtrozero
What does 100,000lbs plus of burning fuel look like from outside as it runs down a main elevator shaft /main support reaching temps that liquefies the metal of the support structure?

What are you talking about?

Are we back to jet fuel liquefying metal?
Are we ignoring the fact that those jet liners WOULD NOT have been fully fueled?
Are we ignoring the fact that only ONE elevator shaft (52a) traversed the height of the structure and that SURVIVORS were in it at the time of impact?

Or is this sarcasm?

Originally posted by Xtrozero
What does 100,000lbs plus of burning fuel look like from outside as it runs down a main elevator shaft /main support reaching temps that liquefies the metal of the support structure?

It looks like a fantasy.

Most importantly, because kerosene does not burn anywhere near a temperature hot enough to deform, let alone melt, structural steel.

That would require the constant application, for a great deal of time, of temperatures and conditions achieved in a foundry. An open-air kerosene fire is nothing in comparison. Moreover, the steel core was a massive heatsink and would act wick away the heat and disperse it through the columns.

Most kerosene was consumed in the massive fireballs upon impact. Some of what was left went down the elevator shafts, but most of them only went down to the upper skylobbies, of which were there two, and almost none reached the bottom because almost no elevators ran the length of the buildings. This sectioning the buildings into thirds was done to maximize service, mechanical and HVAC efficiency in such huge buildings, and to avoid just the sort of fire scenario you paint.

Originally posted by Xtrozero
What does 100,000lbs plus of burning fuel look like from outside as it runs down a main elevator shaft /main support reaching temps that liquefies the metal of the support structure?

It would have to be pretty damned hot to be melting the steel only as it touches them running downwards.

what about 1-2 van bombs planted in the basement by someone with a maintenance badge..that wasnt supposed to have one...and the person who was to testify against him...died in a tragic car accident the day before the trial?

and what of the middle eastener that was being arrested in the ground floor lobby as firefighters were evacuating building 1, as reported by Lt. B. Becker?

the van bombs are my pet theory...it happened once...it would happen again...the only proven facts above are...:
1. an explosion reported in the basement before the plane struck
2. a link griff gave me about how that middle easterner was arrested for being here illeagly but obtained a valid ID
3. this interview right here on page 15


and griff...there was only 1 plant in the '93 bombing...and he came forward...with every conversation he ever had with the FBI taped....

So you're saying that the basement detonations were cooridinated with the plane hits by terrorists? Okay, I'll bite on that. But that's only 2 parts of a demo. Removing the Resistance of the floors as the buildings come down, so that it falls at the speed of gravity in a gravitational line, is the final piece.

How did the Terrorists pull that off under the watchful eye of GW's little brother? Securacom is it called or some such? Anyway, I'm still watching those little puffs of smoke on the building that go 'in front' of the collapsing structure, and thinking that's weakening of structure if I've ever seen it.

The really odd thing about this thread is that the nay-sayers don't seem to have answers to the physics and math, they deal in personal attacks rather than facts.

two man operation....have one watching for the planes....calls it in when you get the view of the jet.....

the reports also claim that if the van in the bottom had been positioned better it woulda dropped the entire tower....

i cant battle what physics are noticable what needs to have happend....because i prolly cant even quote the three laws of physics without looking it up....so i cant tell on my own what was missing....what shoulda happend, etc....

Im still unable to make my mind up on what bought the towers down.
On one hand, we have structures IE Bridge collapse recently
Where engineer's, structural people claim things...
then, the miraculous happens... they turn out to be wrong.
For example, the Mars rover.
Had a live expectancy of what, 30 days?
The thing lasted 6+ months...

The smartest people on the planet can be wrong, so when one guy says
'' That fire, couldnt of brought those buildings down because of structural aspects, heat aspects, and rah rah rah... ''

doesnt mean he's wrong, but at the same time doesnt mean he's right.
point is, things in the past that were meant to be known, turned out to be completely flawed.

Also,

Can you imagine the amount of people needed to wire 'both' towers, place explosives, set charges, setup detonation panels etc etc...
why hasn't 1 single person come forward? leaking something?

Also,

Using charges, and so forth leaves far to much devestating RISK, that something along the lines could go wrong and BLOW open the whole conspiracy.

I mean the government would look pretty damn guilty, if det cord was severd some where, and half a building remained in tact with explosives throughout....

This event needed to happen flawlessly, with no room for mistakes to expose them.
Bringing both towers down, leaves to much 'chance'

Also,

You've just slammed two hijacked passenger airliners into the tallest buildings in NYC.
Isnt that enough of a 'shock' factor to really freak the public out?
youve just crashed one into the pentagon, and another in pittsburg... surely.. surely... this could be counted as the worst terror attack in history, thus provoking outrage in the public and congress... giving them their authorisation to wage war?

Why bring them down, exposing the city to so much hazardous air?

In saying all that, I do believe the government 'allowed' 911 to occur, so they are as guilty, as the arabs flying the planes.
And there is something not right about the way the towers fell.... it just doesnt look right...

But for them to off been brought down through demolitions?... just doesnt seam feasible.

They were brought down with explosives the evidence is overwelming.

The reason they just didnt stop with the planes hitting them is that they would have still needed to be brought down at some point and if you do that in a safe way and remove everyone (within about 3-4miles by the way if not more) the total cost of doing this openly and publicly would have been MASSIVE. far better to make it look like terrorists and blow the building up (and building 7) using it to your advantage so to spk..."two birds one stone"!!

Just look at good old larry and his massive payout and the right to re-build all worked out nicly in july 2001. the whoile thing stinks of inside job, use your brain mate they have done things like this before and your dam stupid if you think they wount do it again.

A few things.............

1. this topic is discussed MANY times before on this web site...and
I think people who believe and have shown' on HERE that the plains
took down WTC 1 and 2 and prob. sick and tired of REPEATING it
over and over again.

2. why sit and "assume" every fact about "WHAT HAPPENED"
unless you w'r in the building at the time....NO ONE know what the gas
did or w'r it went.....it's like the same with the "puffs" of smoke
coming out under the colapse all these items have been discussed
and in my view proven to the best we can on here to be as per what
we all see on the videos of that day.

3. I'm not dissagring with the HOLE picture of this day and what has
happened since, particular these wars the US has engaged in.

Anyway that's my personal view,
Y'r Canadian friend Sven

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
But for them to off been brought down through demolitions?... just doesnt seam feasible.

I agree. If explosives were the only thing used.

I don't pretend to know what exactly was used. What I do pretend to know is the physics of it all just doesn't fit with plane damage and fire.

According to Donald Rumsfeld's Press Conference on the morning of 9/10/01, the Pentagon lost $ 2.3 trillion. Available footage on you-tube. Long vanished from MSM.

Coincidentally, the records area of the Pentagon was exactly where the Global Hawk
missing from the Air Forces' inventory hit. Google 911 Mysteries and Pilots for 911 Truth.

Plenty of money to hush personnel up who probably never cognizant that people would be in the buildings when they were discharged on a weekday and not a weekend.

These funds also were very likely used to fund the Blackwater Mercenaries, at 6 times the rate of sworn to oath patriotic troops. Reports say they started the Civil War in Iraq
by disguising themselves as opposing factions and shooting at both sides,
"let a country destroy itself" is the military adage.

Who really is paying for all this ?
The American Taxpayer, to the tune of $8,000 for every man woman and child in the USA.

Why? To destroy the American Economy and Sovereignty and US Constitution.

Fear will make us accept any terms they offer to us, they think.........
Any one connected to the Council on Foreign Relations and the Federal Reserve,
(privately held corporation) is helping to usher in the North American Union,
The Amero and eventually a one world government. DEBT is the KEY.

What do you really think the "BILDERBERGERS" meet about every year, anyway?

Global Peace or Fleecing the Planet? MegaloManiacs don't think as nice people do.

It's all about Total Control and the NEW WORLD ORDER.

No one Knows? Google FDNY's John Schroeder and then William Rodriguez.

Follow it up with 911 Mysteries due out very soon in the chain bookstores like Borders.

The Buildings didn't pancake at all, they disintegrated in mid-air and fell at 'freefall' speed.

Bone fragments are still being found on rooftops 500 feet away.

Originally posted by mcguyvermanolo
Coincidentally, the records area of the Pentagon was exactly where the Global Hawk
missing from the Air Forces' inventory hit.

not saying your wrong, but could you back this up with an article or something?

Ive never heard that a global hawk was missing.

I cant imagine, one of these 'revolutionary-conceptual-machines of war'
could just go missing.

Originally posted by mcguyvermanolo
According to Donald Rumsfeld's Press Conference on the morning of 9/10/01, the Pentagon lost $ 2.3 trillion. Available footage on you-tube. Long vanished from MSM.

These funds also were very likely used to fund the Blackwater Mercenaries, at 6 times the rate of sworn to oath patriotic troops. Reports say they started the Civil War in Iraq
by disguising themselves as opposing factions and shooting at both sides,
"let a country destroy itself" is the military adage.

Who really is paying for all this ?
The American Taxpayer, to the tune of $8,000 for every man woman and child in the USA.

Fear will make us accept any terms they offer to us, they think.........
Any one connected to the Council on Foreign Relations and the Federal Reserve,
(privately held corporation) is helping to usher in the North American Union,

Pentagon Pays $998,798 for sending two 19-cent washers to Texas

might explain a little why trillion would be missing