Top-Down Building Collapse Videos May Ruin Your Day, page 1

I discovered these videos in searches for other evidence regarding a 9/11 project video I am working on.

Now before you all go disowning me as friends, and calling me a truther turned Government Loyalist, beware that to be a true researcher means starting with the evidence, and looking objectively at the evidence- and not with a preconceived notion, and then finding selective evidence to support that notion. So in the spirit of neutrality I present these videos, for better or for worse.

What, did you want me to hide them, just because I have strong suspicions 9/11 was not what we were told? Sorry. I respect myself more than that.

These videos basically show that a top down pancake type collapse is possible, and can be initiated through failing floors. It is an actual technique used in France, as these videos will show, using a hydraulic system to collapse as little as one floor. And you will be surprised at the similarities to the WTC collapses.





So clearly the parallel here is that when the floors of the WTC failed on their own due to the damage of the planes and fires weakening the steel, a similar collapse occurred.

And considering the much larger scale of the WTC towers compared to these videos, it could be entirely possible the towers fell for the similar reasons provided by NIST.

I am merely stating here that it is possible. Do I believe it? No. For one, there is still evidence of explosives that we don't see in these videos. And the lateral ejection of extremely heavy material goes beyond what I consider to be acceptable.

Presented for discussion- so please don't shoot the messenger. Kinda ruined my day- maybe I got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

[edit on Mon Oct 12th 2009 by TrueAmerican]

reply to post by TrueAmerican

---

Interesting Videos.
Just a few questions.
In the first video, there is no trail of squib like explosions visible preceding the top down collapse in Video 1. There are multiple video images showing these in the 9/11 videos etc. I understand that the argument is that it is shock waves or pressure, so- should these not be visible in these collapse too, even though no explosives were used in these videos.

In the second video. It is a partial collapse, due to a specific weakening of a section.

Anyone can take from these that there is now another method of collapsing the two towers. Hydraulic weakening of specific section of the towers to create a top down collapse.

Has there ever been a universal top down collapse inspired by structural weaken due to fire? As opposed to a deliberate and intentional collapse due to hydraulic pressure or weakening of sections?

I ask this because there were 3 universal top down collapses on 9/11.
Given this rate of collapse on just one day, caused by Fire, we should be seeing others, should we not?

[edit on 12/10/09 by atlasastro]

reply to post by TrueAmerican

---

This post may ruin your day. Were the buildings in the above videos steel-structure constructions? I don't think so. Makes a huge difference.

"... Some people still try to make the incorrect case that there was only a relatively weak hollow core structure, or that it had concrete columns, or none at all. Here is a diagram showing what they wanted us to believe about the structure: ... (see link).
The towers had a strong core structure and perimeter columns all around the outside. The 47 core columns held up approximately 60% of the vertical load, and the 244 perimeter columns distributed the remaining 40% across the four walls, 10% per wall.

Source: 911physicstruth.wetpaint.com...

[edit on 12-10-2009 by DeepSea]

WTC1 & WTC2 steel-structure:





[edit on 12-10-2009 by DeepSea]

I'm not intending to derail the thread. I'm glad the OP posted his video finds, as I said above. But on the subject of demolitions and hydrolics, I thought some might not have seen this technique being carried out in Japan.

You might call it "Dealing From the Bottom of the Deck".



On the main topic, I'm sure the OP realizes, but some may not, that critics of the pancake collapse theory are not saying that such collapses are not possible. They are possible. There are photos on the web from different collapses where it is obvious a pancake collapse occured. The stack of pancakes is right there in front of you.

We just think that the WTC was not an example of a pancake collapse.

reply to post by Dermo

---

According to NIST it was fire that brought down WTC 7....





Fire my arse

[edit on 12-10-2009 by Solomons]

(sorry to Bspiracy above, you posted just before I did)
Folks, nobody is looking at the big picture here.

IF (a BIG if) in fact this did happen at WTC, it solves many problems and further contributes to the ease at which a covert operation could have been carried out.

The biggest problem is the time it would have taken to place that many explosives without anyone noticing.
THIS TECHNIQUE solves that problem, don't you folks get it?

We all know the architects had built such precautions into the design of the towers in case the towers were hit, just like the empire state building was before in the 1940's.

We also all know that Mossad agents were in the towers the day before as "art students" with construction permits working on abandoned floors in the towers and the office workers could hear large machinery being moved above them the day before the collapse.

If that is new to you, then read this thread:
14 Art Students with Construction Passes were in WTC before attacks

So do you now see how easy it would have been to carry out this operation?
My god, it all makes sense.

But remember: you can't just stop at the mossad agents because *somebody* authorized them to be there and pushed for this initiative. For all we know, these mossad/art students could have been planted there to deflect the true origins of the initiative.

Therefore, we now need to be probing deeply into those behind authorizing those construction permits.



[edit on 12-10-2009 by SpookHunter]

reply to post by Bspiracy

---

Then maybe take another look at the explosive destruction of the north tower on 9/11.

reply to post by OmegaPoint

---

Good point. I forgot to mention the explosive nature of the collapse, that there isn't anything driving the collapse downward, but something is driving it "outward."

9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 15 days ago with 14 member flags

9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 8 days ago with 13 member flags

An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
  Posted 17 days ago with 12 member flags

Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 15 days ago with 6 member flags

new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags

Final Decision: Court sanctions lawyers behind September 11 conspiracy case
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags

Remains of 9/11 victim identified
  Posted 1 days ago with 5 member flags

you must try this youre self ????
  Posted 15 days ago with 4 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: