Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: neutronflux

People don’t trust the truth movement because they don’t believe the “official story.” People don’t believe the truth movement because it’s talking heads lie.

The truth movement has had a tough job with a lot of lies and theories to work through. There where times I was stuck in it and did not know what to believe as well. So i just kept looking for the things that did make sense. When you don't know who or what to trust just keep asking questions and looking at the different sides of the story for which parts add up and which parts don't. People can lie, buildings don't.

a reply to: kwakakev

The truth movement has had a tough job with a lot of lies and theories to work through.

The truth movement is the source of several lies.

There where times I was stuck in it and did not know what to believe as well.

No. You have faith.

So i just kept looking for the things that did make sense.

So you trust your perception over actual fact.

When you don't know who or what to trust just keep asking questions and looking at the different sides of the story for which parts add up and which parts don't.

What doesn’t add up about fire / thermal stress related failures that weakened a building to the point where gravity could pull it down.

The goal of implosion is not to blow up a building. It’s to weaken it to the point gravity pulls it down.

Gravity doesn’t care if charges of thermal stress weakens a structure to the point where gravity can pull it down. It’s all the same to gravity.

a reply to: kwakakev

The truth movements blew whatever chances it had at building public support by its bizarre claims
(Holograms, Controlled demolition, nukes in basement, etc), by disrespect it showed to the victims (vic sims) and firest responders

Their behavior convinced most of the public of the image of being tin foil wearing nut cases

If had stuck to such questions as

1) Fire proofing on steel supports was insufficient and quickly knocked off, combined with fact that NY construction industry was heavily "mobbed up" . Did Mafia effect the quality of the fire proofing applied to WTC steel ?

2) Minnesota FBI office could not get FBI HQ to authorize search warrant for Zacharias Moussaoui Many believe
that if Moussaoui's laptop had been searched was good chance that plot could been uncovered (FBI agent in Phoenix had reported that number of foreigners from Saudi Arabia were taking courses in flying large aircraft)


Might have gained some traction with public

a reply to: firerescue

The truth movements blew whatever chances it had at building public support by its bizarre claims (Holograms, Controlled demolition, nukes in basement, etc), by disrespect it showed to the victims (vic sims) and firest responders

In my opinion this is what has strengthened the truth movement. Like any good investigation they looked at all the theories and tried to make sense of all the data. They did not cherry pick the information like NIST did with their investigation, NIST did not even look at explosives in any official capacity. NIST did not even look at how the towers fell, only how it started. Lets say some trusses did break, it does not explain the rest of the collapse.

a reply to: neutronflux

No. You have faith.

I have questions.

So you trust your perception over actual fact.

I trust the evidence. The videos and pictures of the events that where broadcast live around the world that day. I have looked at many different theories seeing which ones add up and which ones don't. I have reviewed and discussed this with many other people to get there perspective and what makes sense to them.

I have looked at both NIST and AE9/11 amongst others. Richard Gage has answered a lot more of my questions than NIST has.

a reply to: kwakakev

I have looked at both NIST and AE9/11 amongst others. Richard Gage has answered a lot more of my questions than NIST has.

No. Richard Gauge created his own mythology that you buy into that has nothing to do with facts.

WTC 7 did not fall straight down. Or Fiterman hall and the Verizon Building would have not been damaged.



WTC 7 was not a symmetrical collapse.

The collapse started as an internal collapse that traveled from one side of the building to the other side. Proof of this is the way structures disappear from the roofline before collapse. The action the of windows as the penthouse collapsed. The way the building kinked. The way the floors where mixed up in the pile of WTC7. The way WTC 7 had to lean out to damage Fiterman hall.

Claim Three:
“Tower 7, which wasn’t hit by a plane, collapsed neatly into its own footprint.”

skepticalinquirer.org...

The other half of the equation is that WTC 7 resembles a “classic controlled demolition” because it supposedly “imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint” (Gage 2011). In actuality, it twisted and tilted over to one side as it fell, and parts of the building severely damaged two neighboring buildings (the Verizon and Fiterman Hall structures). When challenged with the obvious fact that Tower 7 spilled far outside its footprint, however, Truthers will often change their tune and start saying that any resemblance to a natural collapse is part of the cover-up.

Richard Gages lie the Twin Towers fell through the path of greatest resistance.

9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...

3WHAT ABOUT THE ALMOST FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS? The key is the “almost” modifier. If I told you I was making almost $100,000 and you found out I was making only $67,000, you’d say I was exaggerating. So stop exaggerating the collapse speed of the WTC Towers! The 80,000 tons of structural steel slowed down the collapses of the Twin Towers to about ⅔ (two-thirds) of free-fall.3 And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.4 According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.

Just Incase you missed it, “According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.”

Funny. The cores came down last.




Richard Gage used pictures of columns cut during cleanup as proof of thermite.

www.metabunk.org/debunked-the-wtc-9-11-angle-cut-column-not-thermite-cut-later.t9469/

www.metabunk.org...

The column in the center of the photo (by Sam Hollenshead) has been cut at an angle, presumably during the cleanup process. Yet Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911) still insist it was cut before the building fell, and looks nothing like a normal cut, and hence is evidence of thermite. Here's an AE911 slide they used just a few weeks ago:

The above post was Jan 2018. Metabunk has throughly debunked AE’s cut column photos.

And Richard Gauge has never came up with a credible explanation how a CD system would survive jet impacts that took out core columns or being struck by falling debris, and hours of fires.

a reply to: kwakakev

So? What are Richard Gages credible claims. Especially after showing Gage will use blatant falsehoods.

Why do you keep going on about the last of the core columns taking a little bit longer to fall than the rest to disprove Richard Gage? That is even if what you claim is a core column, it looks like one of the outer corners from what I can gather. There was way too much dust and debris to see what was happening in the center of the building. On one of the corners where the wind was blowing there may of been a chance to see some of it before it all came to rest.

I fail to see the connection and how this disproves the thermite and explosive theory. What happened to the rest of the core columns? How do you explain the dust clouds expanding from the building starting at a centralized spots? It looks like 100's if not 1000's of charges placed all throughout the building. The plane strike would of taken some of them out or detonated a few of them on impact. With a building the size of WTC it takes a lot more than a few explosive charges going off to bring it down, it takes a lot of them.

I already pointed out 3 of the explosive charges with the red lines.


How does NIST explain these dust clouds? How do you explain these dust clouds?

a reply to: kwakakev

Why do you keep going on about the last of the core columns taking a little bit longer to fall than the rest to disprove Richard Gage? That is even if what you claim is a core column, it looks like one of the outer corners from what I can gather.

Really?



The bulk of the core is there. Not just “one of the outer corners”

The physical evidence support the floor connections where hit, sheared, bent while the the core columns where still standing.

Failure of Welded Floor Truss Connections from the Exterior Wall during Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers

app.aws.org...

Summary

Analysis of the connections supporting the composite floor system of the WTC towers showed that at and below the im- pact floors, the greater majority (above 90%) of the floor truss connections were either bent downward or completely re- moved from the exterior column. This was probably related to the overloading of the floors below the impact region after col- lapse initiation. Depending upon weld joint geometry, detachment of the main load-bearing seats was a result of either fracture in the heat affected zone of the base material (standoff plate detached from spandrel) or through the weld metal (seat angle detached from standoff plate). Failure in both cases was assumed to be a result of a shear mechanism as a result of overloading from floors above impacting those below. There did not appear to be a significant change in distribution of failure modes of the floor truss connections when comparing those connections inside vs. outside of the impact region or those ex- posed to pre-collapse fires and those that were not.

For the floor connections to be sheared or bent down, that means they had to be overloaded while connected to still standing columns. The floor connections were striped from core columns before the core columns fell.

How do you explain the dust clouds expanding from the building starting at a centralized spots?

The falling upper portion of the building pushed out hot gasses and air as the mass fell into the building as it pulverized drywall and light weight concrete.

It looks like 100's if not 1000's of charges placed all throughout the building.

Does Richard Gage make such a claim of placed explosives. Please quote Gage.

Then there would 100’s to 1000’s of detentions on the audio evidence if they had the power to cut steel columns. Detonations that would be obvious, echo about the city, and be on the seismic data.

All the physical evidence points to floor connections sheared or bent from overloading. Not cut by explosives.

Fires do make combustible gasses that flash when they hit fresh air that can be pushed out by a collapsing building.

For you three lines, where is the evidence is demolitions shrapnel. If they were detonations cutting steal columns, they would be clearly heard in the collapse audio with echoes.

Noticed the large mass above your red arrows falling into the building below? Crushing drywall, lightweight concrete from the floors, pushing out air, and hot gasses. Hot gasses from the fires being pushed out by the falling mass, igniting as the hot gasses reach fresh air.

a reply to: neutronflux

The falling upper portion of the building pushed out hot gasses and air as the mass fell into the building as it pulverized drywall and light weight concrete.

HA HA, there is some hot gasses coming from somewhere. Got an experiment showing such? I have one with explosives.

Does Richard Gage make such a claim of placed explosives. Please quote Gage.

No. You have to go listen to him some more. He does show where you can see all the timed charges going off quite well. It does take a little to know what to look for with each charge puffing out, but when you see it, it all adds ups. The three lines are to help point out what to look for when seeing all the charges go off in other videos of the event.

It sounds like you have not even heard the buildings for before? How could you of possibly made it this far without hearing it before? What was that ROARRR?

a reply to: kwakakev

How does NIST explain these dust clouds? How do you explain these dust clouds?

Below puncture of gravity collapse.


Collapsing buildings make dust

www.skeptic.com...

4WHAT ABOUT THOSE EXPLOSIVE SQUIBS TWENTY STORIES BELOW THE COLLAPSE POINT, AND THOSE HEAVY METAL OBJECTS FLYING HUNDREDS OF FEET THROUGH THE AIR? During the collapse, one half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second, creating a “hurricane wind” in the building as reported by survivors, and blowing out windows, and with them the smoke from the fires and other objects.5

Where does one expect “half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second,“ to go during the collapse.

a reply to: neutronflux

Those squibs are occurring at or near the floors where the collapse is initiated. Even if there was a possibility of reaching air pressures enough to pulverize concrete, how could that happen when there are holes in the building big enough to fly a plane through?

My dad believed the air pressure story too, he did not want to face the implications. The answer to how the building fell is in those squibs. It is where the concrete started to turn to dust. What caused them and why the symmetry in how they progress?

a reply to: kwakakev

Those squibs are occurring at or near the floors where the collapse is initiated.

So? The falling mass is already falling onto the building?

Any seismic or audio evidence those “squibs” were from detentions with the force to cut steel columns?

Any evidence of detonations shrapnel? Recovered from the injured or from the human remains?

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

. Seconds after the explosion on that Sunday afternoon, Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h.

Canberra Hospital Implosion 1997
m.youtube.com...

Flying Demolition Debris Nearly Hits Spectators
m.youtube.com...

Even if there was a possibility of reaching air pressures enough to pulverize concrete, how could that happen when there are holes in the building big enough to fly a plane through?

The building floor slabs crushing the dry wall, insulation, and the floors below. Crushing and making dust. The speed the air was expelled. What did you not get about “ half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second“ carrying out the dust created by mechanical means.

It is where the concrete started to turn to dust.

Floor pans lined with lightweight concrete hitting floor pans lined with lightweight concrete makes dust. Lots of it when 110 floors slam into each other. I know it’s hard to imagine concrete hitting concrete makes dust.. what are the odds... now if concrete slamming into concrete mage pixie dust, that be something.

a reply to: kwakakev

It’s common knowledge that fires make flammable gas that ignite when the gas finds fresh air. Is that false.

Why must conspiracists spend so much to reinventing the wheel?

FLASHOVER AND BACKDRAFT: A Primer

www.fireengineering.com...

The truth movement survived by mystifying well understand mechanisms.

a reply to: kwakakev

No. You have to go listen to him some more. He does show where you can see all the timed charges going off quite well. It does take a little to know what to look for with each charge puffing out, but when you see it, it all adds ups. The three lines are to help point out what to look for when seeing all the charges go off in other videos of the event.

If their setting off are not discernible on the audio and seismic evidence, then they are not any events with the force to cut steel columns. Sorry.

a reply to: kwakakev

But there is nothing before or during collapse initiation.



While the outer columns are bowing in.

Richard Gage is falsely using the wrong mechanism to explain what pushed the air out of the collapsing towers.

a reply to: kwakakev

So Gage’s only evidence is expelled air which can solely be contributed to air being forced out by a building collapsing in on its self?

a reply to: neutronflux

So Gage’s only evidence is expelled air which can solely be contributed to air being forced out by a building collapsing in on its self?

No. I am very disappointed that you do not even know Richard Gage's evidence. Why are you here?

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: neutronflux

So Gage’s only evidence is expelled air which can solely be contributed to air being forced out by a building collapsing in on its self?

No. I am very disappointed that you do not even know Richard Gage's evidence. Why are you here?

What evidence do you have of explosions with the force to cut steel columns.

It’s ok. It’s a trick question. There is zero evidence planted pyrotechnics brought down the twin towers.

Nothing indicating charges setting off before or during collapse initiation. No audio, video, shrapnel, or seismic evidence.

No evidence during collapse.

Just your bewildered that a collapsing building full of light concrete, drywall, and insulation makes dust. Just your bewilderment a collapsing building forces out air, smoke, dust. Just your bewildered a building on fire making flammable gas? And the collapse of the building would push the flames out, and flammable gas igniting when it reaches fresh air.

So. Do you have any evidence of cut steel columns, or explosions with the force to cut steel columns for the twin towers?

Or just Gage falsely characterizing the air pushed out by “half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second“ carrying out the dust created by mechanical means.

I am very disappointed that you do not even know Richard Gage's evidence.

Because there is no evidence. Just blatantly false arguments from Gage.

a reply to: kwakakev

Below account on par for the truth movement...

Eyewitness Philip Morell talked of explosive sounds like bombs in a 9/11 Mysteries video clip, but I went back to the complete original interview. The director cut out the part where he then explained that he ran over to the noise and discovered that the explosive sounds were actually from a crashing freight elevator, which did indeed create a tremendous crashing thud felt throughout the basement.

www.skeptic.com...