It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

South tower, impossible symmetrical downward progression

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I'm posting a new thread based on this incredible video information I saw last week.

9/11 blue print

While watching this, some irrefutable evidence has come to light which I haven't considered before. How can the upper section of a building, off center by 22 degrees, cause complete symmetrical collapse of the floors below it? How can this section of building with it's angular momentum continue to crush the floors below @ free fall speed. Where is the distributed weight?

Answer: Controlled demolition

Think about it.





posted on May, 31 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   

While watching this, some irrefutable evidence has come to light which I haven't considered before. How can the upper section of a building, off center by 22 degrees, cause complete symmetrical collapse of the floors below it? How can this section of building with it's angular momentum continue to crush the floors below @ free fall speed.


Why wouldn't it? Gravity is straight down.

Collapse straight down is what actually happens in real physics, not movie physics. Something as huge as a building, once it starts moving it will
1) go down, straight down
2) not be much bothered

Once structural integrity has been breached (and this happens at the speed of sound in steel, i.e. fast) then all parts of the building collapse. A structural overload from dynamic forces will break interior elements all the way up and down the building even before the full collapse wave has hit it.

At the moment of the picture, lots of steel columns and reinforcements the whole length up and down have already failed.

There was plenty of forces and destruction to collapse the building everywhere.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by mbkennel]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Collapses fall straight down? You've never played Jinga, have you?


I don't know anything about architecture and demolitions but I did find it awfully lucky that both buildings--two of the tallest in the world--fell in on themselves without one or both falling over. Especially the second building that was hit right in the middle and was really burning. I thought the top part was so badly damaged it might lean and fall effective many other structures, and leave the less damaged bottom have standing. I thought the first tower would have remained standing. That's a long way to fall to fall in on itself without leaning. I've seen one local demolition of two much smaller highrises and it did fall like it.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Starred and flagged. Very good point.

Watching the collapse, as officially believed, makes zero sense. When i watched the second tower collapse, I was expecting the top damaged section to fall off. I certainly would not have expected it to take the whole thing down.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

A structural overload from dynamic forces will break interior elements all the way up and down the building even before the full collapse wave has hit it.

At the moment of the picture, lots of steel columns and reinforcements the whole length up and down have already failed.

There was plenty of forces and destruction to collapse the building everywhere.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by mbkennel]


Ahh, but is this your version of how the structural failure occurred or NIST's version?

Out of their mouth:




(1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

Let's assume the picture is from the north. Obviously the building is going to fall in the direction of least resistance. According to NIST, the perimeter columns led to inward bowing which resulted in the collapse. This is their answer for all floors. Can you show me how any of the floors below the break will achieve the same perimeter column bowing without anything pulling on it ?


Originally posted by mbkennel

Once structural integrity has been breached (and this happens at the speed of sound in steel, i.e. fast) then all parts of the building collapse.


Structural integrity breach where? The whole building? All parts? since when do entire buildings collapse from some structural damage?

[edit on 31-5-2009 by FlySolo]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel
Why wouldn't it? Gravity is straight down.

Because the top of the south tower starting tipping over at an angle, it should've kept going, right off the side of the building. But instead it was blown in mid air as was the rest of the building underneath it.

But, Mark Loizeaux, CEO of Controlled Demolition, Inc. said it best:


"If the 110-story Twin Towers had fallen over, they would have caused an enormous amount of damage to buildings covering many city blocks. But the towers came straight down. Accordingly, the official theory, by implying that fire-produced collapses that perfectly mimicked the collapses that have otherwise been produced only by precisely placed explosives, requires a miracle."

Source:
Newscientist.com

Article: Baltimore blasters
* 24 July 2004
* Liz Else
* Magazine issue 2457

On-line reading requires a subscription.



new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join