WTC Towers - Controlled Demolition Evidence

This is an experiment of sorts. I do not wish to use this as a debate thread. Those that believe the official
story is a lie, please link your sources to support controlled demolition for Towers 1, 2, & 7

Your evidence may include published papers, video/audio testimony, scientific fact, etc.

Please do not state your opinion without providing a source to back it up.

For those who support a the official story, please refrain from commenting. I will link a thread for your
side to post evidence. Here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thank you in advance for your co-operation with this experiment.

example...

if your house is burned down..and you had to go to a court to proof someone bring it down with demolition explosives...it wouldnt take long and you would win..quick..cause of al the evidence (how it came down,chemicals found,video evidence of explosives etc) maybe you just need the half of all the evidence to win but..well..this is WTC...so...


seriously....

when you saw these buildings come down...who can rly think thats was from a fire????

but well...its 10 years now..and the people still believe in that

I will begin with a few points:

1. Angle cut core columns. Photo evidence.
www.rense.com...
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

2. FEMA study of sulphized steel
wtc.nist.gov...

3. USGS Thermal Images
pubs.usgs.gov...

4. Energetic material found in WTC Dust
www.bentham.org...

5. Witness reports of explosions in sub levels before aircraft impact
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...



6. Debris out accelerating gravity and/or changing direction due to impluse
www.layscience.net...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

7. Free Fall acceleration / Science against Gravity Driven Collapse
www.youtube.com...
www.journalof911studies.com...

8. Flashes
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

9. Sounds of explosions (audio)
www.youtube.com...
[ur]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECrssqc-1oo[/url]

10. Testimony of explosions
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

11. Visual of explosions
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

12. FEA and CFD Analysis
www.youtube.com.../a/u/0/Xry3wSYcVlY


13. Molten Metal Visual and Testimonial
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

14. Dust/ Mid Air Pulverization
www.layscience.net...
www.traviskelly.com...
911research.com...

15. "Cauliflower" Type clouds, like "Pyroclastic Flow" as found in volcanic erruptions and CD's
www.youtube.com...

16. Foreknowledge / "Pull It" Claim
www.youtube.com...

17. Ejection Speed of Debris / Debris Field Radius
www.journalof911studies.com...

On the contrary, I'm looking forward to seeing what evidence you people actually have, because up until now all I've seen is "witnesses heard explosions" claims, a guy dropping cardboard boxes onto tables, and a pretty tacky stunt claiming torch-cut beams were really cut by thermite. Complete rubbish.

If you can present testimony from someone who wired the controlled demolitions and who's now spillign the beans, by all means, it's what I've been waiting to see.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

dave, i look forward to your posts in the other thread. but since you are posting here... you finally coming around to the good side?

dave, you brighten my day

Please continue to link sources of evidence for any/all of the points listed above.

If you have another category for your support, please add it.

The more unique links for each topic, the better. This will serve as a great resource for researchers
and help with the experiment I'm proposing to those who believe the official story.

Once again, if you could refrain from commenting, or stating opinion without sources I'd apprecaite it.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
If you can present testimony from someone who wired the controlled demolitions and who's now spillign the beans, by all means, it's what I've been waiting to see.

In which case you'll do everything in your power to attack that person's character and somehow dismiss their testimony. You, as most other trusters, are driven by denial and don't really care about facts and truth.


For the OP:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
In which case you'll do everything in your power to attack that person's character and somehow dismiss their testimony. You, as most other trusters, are driven by denial and don't really care about facts and truth.

This is of course ridiculous. If memory serves, *I* posted testimony from a deputy NYFD fire chief reporting that fires were burning out of control in WTC 7 and caused bulging in the side of the structure, while *you* accused the man of being a secret gov't disinformation agent lying to cover up the conspiracy. It's one thing to slander a gov't official or even a taxi driver, but really, you've now even taken slandering a fire fighter who watched 343 of his brothers die?

As I've pointed out previously, I'm not the truster here- you are. You conspiracy people explicitly trust everything that Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin, and Richard Gage tells you regardless of whatever evidence is presented here that shows it's rubbish. You can post whatever flowery prose you want to foist these absurd conspiracy stories onto others, but in the end your own words do come back to haunt you.

That reminds me...when is this war that Alex Jones predicted Bush would instigate against Iran going to start? I'm still waiting.

I can only think of 1 website, (www.drjudywood.com) that will shed some light on what really happened that day...and EVERYTHING 'truthers' think they know, was designed to keep them distracted from the truth.

We all know the governments 'official' version....but now, let's talk about the 'truthers' official version:
Explosions
Thermite
Puffs of smoke
Pull it
Firemen testimonies
Hologram tech
The ball
Norad Standing Down
What else???

After spending YEARS studying and looking for FACTS...dr Judy Wood seems to be the only 'theory' that makes SENSE. All the other 'theories' are meant to keep us distracted, guessing, fighting and arguing; all in the name of 'truth'. Meanwhile..........tick tock, tick tock! Soon, 911 will be like JFK, MLK, OK City, etc...All of which are unsolved mysteries shrouded in FACTS, hidden with lies.

Oh, and here's what i wanted to ask, as well: How come we don't associate the 1st WTC bombing to 911? Is it possible, the 'attack' in 93, (en.wikipedia.org...) under Clintons watch, was designed to allow work to be done, in the basement, without people asking questions? Is it possible, the WTC was rigged with explosives when repairs were being made from the 1st bombing, which happened in the basement? What better way to be able to set up everything, without suspicion? Same thing goes for the pentagon. Pretty convenient that the alleged 'plane' would hit a part of the pentagon, that was being newly renovated. No???

Another theory that i heard about, was that the towers were in such bad shape, they had to come down. I read somewhere on the net, that the maintenance required to fix the towers, was more than the towers were worth...so, it was better for them, financially, to bring them down. Only question is: why the coverups and lies? If that were the case, why not make it a pay per view event or something like that? Did they HAVE to go about it the way the did it? Were they trying to kill 2 birds with one stone? And, how much money was made from souveniers and stuff?

I lived directly in front of the towers...in jersey, my entire life, and i'll say this...if you never saw those building up close, you have NO IDEA the size of those towers. 1 tower, was 1 NYC block in size, so, to bring them down, with little significant damage to other nearby structures, was pretty AMAZING.

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

dave, i look forward to your posts in the other thread. but since you are posting here... you finally coming around to the good side?

dave, you brighten my day

I'm already on the good side- the side that doesn't need to rely on lies and distortions to trick people into believing something they wouldn't normally otherwise believe. Take THIS example-



This is one of the more commonly posted photos used by the truthers in an attempt to get people to believe in this controlled demilitions scenario, and I already saw one person trying to pass this off here again...but what they *don't* show you is THIS-



...or THIS...


...or THIS...


Or even THIS...


Hiding the fact that there were workmen actively cutting up the steel at ground zero in order to get people to think they're looking at somethign suspicious is patently dishonest. So, if any of you actually have any new information that doesn't need to rely on three card monty games like this, by all means I'd like to know what it is. As it stands now, the truther movement has been caught circulating so many lies and distortions exactly like this that I'd even ask them to back up the claim that night is dark and water is wet.

Please do not use this as a debate thread. List your support for evidence in the other supplied thread linked
in the original post.

"Truthers" also follow the request by refraining from posting opinions without a source to back it up.

I'd like to complile a set of data from both sides and then present it in a following thread/paper.

Thanks again.

Here are more links for evidence of CD:
files.abovetopsecret.com...
Oxide/Smoke from a piece of steel falling in a known CD
files.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't support the official story or the CD story.

I'd honestly like to know, if it was a CD, how did "they" arrange to have the collapse of towers 1 and 2 start at the area that the planes hit?

As a followup, I'd like to know how "they" knew that the debris field would hit building 7 creating enough damage to allow plausibly denial-ability for the collapse of building 7.

reply to post by Wildbob77


See my thread in this forum titled, "Jones' Dust Analysis - Common Arguments Addressed"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also see: "Igniting Nano Energetic Material without DetCord"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by GoodOlDave

You conspiracy people explicitly trust everything that Dylan Avery, David Ray Griffin, and Richard Gage tells you regardless of whatever evidence is presented here that shows it's rubbish.

And what makes you think anyone who is skeptical of the official story 'explicitly trusts everything' Richard Gage, Ray Griffin or Dylan Avery says?

Anyway, Gordon Ross has done some good papers that are available to see online from the journal of 9/11 studies on momentum transfer here: www.journalof911studies.com...

reply to post by turbofan


Although goodoldave's posts are seriously off-topic to the point where I question his comprehension, I would add the Bentham 14 points of agreement paper which can be found on google and some links to it 911blogger.com...

Other than that I don't think I could add to the OP any more than have a really good look on the net, history commons, David Ray Griffin's books and such but I know you've done a lot of research already, the hard part is when people say eyewitnesses do not count, they want the receipt from the contractors and then they tell us to live in the real world lol.

Peace

reply to post by turbofan


I would also add the NIST documents to the truther side because it gives so many quality tid-bits like WTC7 freefall, lack of investigation, recently released FOIA packets which contradict their statements and of course the classic 'we did not model the collapse cause it was obvious Al-Qaeda did it' flawed argument, plus Enron files in 7 ect ect.

This is pointles, its like throwing color at the a wall and see the color fall in place to form the mona lisa? An act of god? Unlikely. Chance? Only theoretically possible. Some kinda trick? Most likely.

I found this in a new thread .....911 Truth, Crown Agents, City of London, Twisted Sisters, Field McConnell Part 4 and it has info I have never heard of ....www.youtube.com...

reply to post by turbofan


Shouldn't, we all be a little more correct when discussing 9/11,it wasn't just buildings 1,2,and 7, now was it?

And this, Really is the most amazing thing to me , is the fact that all of MR. silverstiens, buildings AND only his building,
where destroyed completely , beyond repair.

Mind you, out of all the many many buildings in the area of the WTC complex , with all of that debris, crashing around,

ONLY his buildings where destroyed completely, all of them PEOPLE not just 1,2 and 7.......

1,2,3,4,5,6,7 ALL destroyed that day only his ........WTF

reply to post by turbofan

Please do not use this as a debate thread. List your support for evidence in the other supplied thread linked in the original post.

What is your point? If you would like to compile a set of data from both sides and then present it in a following thread-paper.
Then do so without the flame.WTC Towers - Controlled Demolition Evidence