Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: turbonium1

You

For example, one tower shows the upper section separating from the lower section, right?

For the twin towers, the video shows portions of the outer vertical columns buckling, and then the building above the buckling falling in to the building below.

Provide evidence that contradicts this.

You

It is your claim, among others, that the upper section fell almost directly straight down, through the lower section, is it not?

Gravity pulls straight down. The top of each tower starts to lean once the buckling initiated. But once the buckled columns could not support the upper portion of the building, gravity pulled the leaning mass straight down.

I know it’s hard to understand a mass can tilt about its center of gravity, and have its center of gravity move down at the same time.


You

With one small block as the upper section, and a second, much longer object, with the same outer dimensions, placed directly below the small block.

Meaningless. False argument by you. The towers were not “solid blocks”. The falling masses fell into the buildings breaking floor connections. The vertical columns toppled from loss of lateral support.


You

You are trying to claim a smaller object will be able to drive through a larger object below it.

When the falling mass is sufficient to overload and shear floor connections.

Your claim is defying every law of physics. Do you even realize how ridiculous that is? Obviously not.

You deny physics if you don’t understand floor connections have a static and dynamic load ratings. Ratings that are not infinite. Ratings for the design load for a specific floor loading, and are not designed to support a whole building. Again, the vertical columns only toppled after the complete collapse of the floor system from loss of lateral support. The twin towers did not collapse through the path of greatest resistance.



You

It's like a child trying to cram a square block into a round hole. It doesn't work. You are trying to cram a small block right through a massive block, and that doesn't work either.

No. Your arguing a false mythology created by the truth movement, and ignoring the actual physical and video evidence.

a reply to: kwakakev

Yes. Thrown in with a known flat earth that doesn’t believe in gravity. 🤪

a reply to: turbonium1

a reply to: kwakakev

I think the question was....

Good luck to your beliefs on physics

Now then, what truth movement theory should I find more credible than contracting floor trusses pulled in on the outer vertical columns to the point they buckled causing the upper portion of the twin towers to fall into the buildings below? The falling masses broke floor connections. Then the vertical columns toppled after losing their vertical support.

Which should I find more credible:

Fizzle no flash bombs as pushed by Richard Gauge?

Thermite paint and ceiling tiles as pushed by Dr. Jones?

Jet holograms with missiles and lasers?

WTC nukes?

WTC fire extinguisher bombs?

Dr Wood’s dustification?

Plasma attack?

THE CONTENTS PROBLEM

All the filing cabinets from two giant office buildings are completely missing. Not all bent up, not all crushed, not even all melted, but ALL MISSING.



They were there when the towers were standing and gone when the towers 'collapsed' that's why there's paper all over Manhattan, get it? Where was the paper before? In filing cabinets. You see any filing cabinets in the streets? No right? Only paper, paper and dust. Did they find any filing cabinets in the rubble? NO. Just one remnant of one filing cabinet in a basement store location.



So what does 'all the filing cabinets are missing' mean?

It means it wasn't a fire induced gravity collapse, that's what it means.

Now what caused all the filing cabinets to all go MISSING?

That needs to be determined because by all accounts IT HAPPENED. I mean I can't say it's impossible because IT HAPPENED. But I am saying "How could such an impossible thing HAPPEN?"

And SO it's clear evidence of *something* causing literally thousands of steel filing cabinets to go missing.

All the filing cabinets are missing and I'm pretty sure the so called terrorists didn't take them because they were all supposedly dead before the towers even fell.

Now if you're reading this you might be thinking is this guy trying to use lowly filing cabinets as crucial 9/11 evidence?

Well the answer to that is YES.

What does 'all the filing cabinets are missing' PROVE?

1. The towers weren't fire induced gravity collapses nor conventional explosives for if they were there'd still be, say it with me, "filing cabinets", that's right.

2. *Something* caused all the filing cabinets to go missing. How do I know this? Because they were all there in the buildings and when the buildings were gone, so were the filing cabinets. 9/11 is not rocket science people.

Let’s break it down.

The paper is in the filing cabinets.

The filing cabinets are on the floors of both buildings.

So prior to the collapses both towers are filled with filing cabinets that themselves are filled with paper.

Right? Ok.

After the collapses there aren’t any filing cabinets AT ALL and the paper is now all over the city!

Now somebody might say well maybe the towers were empty. Um, no, I don’t think so, I mean where did all the paper come from then? No there definitely were filing cabinets. There were office workers. There were even office buildings!

People will say “Look at the all the paper it’s everywhere!” Others will reason “Yeah makes sense they were two really big office buildings!”

I say, “Yeah? Well where’s all the filing cabinets then?” (And for years I thought steel was stronger than paper!)

Here is an interview with an office worker who was in his OFFICE on the 82 floor of Tower 1. Think he had a desk, a computer, a filing cabinet or two?

Probably.

Probably more than one because he says They exited the building after the explosion. I presume that 'They' were office workers too. With computers, desks, chairs and filing cabinets all of their own.



So what must be going on?

Well it's inescapable, *somehow* as the towers collapse each floors filing cabinets are being destroyed and consequently releasing all their paper to the city streets.

Destroyed, not crushed, not bent out of shape, not ejected whole from the buildings, not even melted, but obliterated, gone, MISSING, no longer in existence; DISINTEGRATED.

Listen, forget about jet fuel, there's not enough jet fuel at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark to do that. And besides fires weren't engulfing the entirety of both towers and didn't last or burn that long. And regular explosives are out too because the filing cabinets are Completely Missing. They're not just all there and all banged up etc.

No, they're MISSING.

In other words, *something* is destroying steel filing cabinets and I'd wager STEEL ITSELF EVEN, I mean, you can't have it both ways, something is destroying steel filing cabinets COMPLETELY, do you really think whatever that is is going to stop and go "Oh wait, this isn't a steel filing cabinet! It's a steel core column!"

Think again.

That's a lot of missing filing cabinets... like ALL of Them. I wonder what else is missing? Oh yeah, desks, phones, PEOPLE.

Hey maybe EVERYTHING is missing!!

And so I say again, it seems something is destroying steel things utterly, Fully, COMPLETELY, until there is “Nothing left.”

Nothing, that is, but PAPER. Paper is the only thing left!

Well, Paper and DUST. Lots and lots and LOTS of Dust.



All I know is there were filing cabinets when the towers were standing there and none when the towers were gone. And a gravity collapse due to fire and even explosives wouldn’t make them all suddenly go “missing”.

So basically I’m saying THE MISSING FILING CABINETS ARE PROOF that *something* Destroyed Those Towers and they didn’t just ‘collapse’ due to damage and fire and even regular explosives. (It’s not a collapse, stop saying “collapse”!)

Because there's this serious, unexplained, seemingly impossible, Contents Problem, fire induced gravity collapse is not the mechanism of 9/11.

a reply to: NWOwned

And yet, the relatively smaller floor connections, but thicker than filling cabinet steel, were still present to examine.

Failure of Welded Floor Truss Connections from the Exterior Wall during Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers
Failure of connections, as a result of overloading, occurred

app.aws.org...

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.

It’s like the floor systems were ripped Away from the vertical columns. And the filling cabinets were pulverized by 500,000 tons of building falling on them for each twin tower. Then the thinner metal in the WTC pile formed new compounds with lower melting points from the attack of a hot smoldering toxic soup, while things like ID cards and Credit cards were recovered.

a reply to: NWOwned

You missed thermal stress.....

a reply to: NWOwned

Lots of dust.

Like implosions started by hydraulics applying stress, vs thermal stress?

Thermal stress? Is that like sufficient heat to boil iron for 3 months?

originally posted by: Salander
Thermal stress? Is that like sufficient heat to boil iron for 3 months?

Quote where temperatures were hot enough to boil steel? Cite evidence of crystalized iron forming from condensing out after being boiled? And there were no frozen pools of iron at the bases of the WTC when the core columns were cut from the foundations. And no indication of radioactivity that would have kept the pile hot for any amount of time.

Lots of personal items recovered from what you falsely claim was a pile hot enough to boil iron for three months.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

originally posted by: neutronflux
Gravity pulls straight down. The top of each tower starts to lean once the buckling initiated. But once the buckled columns could not support the upper portion of the building, gravity pulled the leaning mass straight down.


Meaningless. False argument by you. The towers were not “solid blocks”. The falling masses fell into the buildings breaking floor connections. The vertical columns toppled from loss of lateral support.


When the falling mass is sufficient to overload and shear floor connections.


You deny physics if you don’t understand floor connections have a static and dynamic load ratings. Ratings that are not infinite. Ratings for the design load for a specific floor loading, and are not designed to support a whole building. Again, the vertical columns only toppled after the complete collapse of the floor system from loss of lateral support. The twin towers did not collapse through the path of greatest resistance.

Your arguing a false mythology created by the truth movement, and ignoring the actual physical and video evidence.

You're ignoring the fact that nobody can replicate such a collapse, in any way, with any materials, in any scale!

It cannot be dismissed, or ignored. It proves such a collapse is totally impossible to accomplish, and the only conclusion to make, is that they demolished the structures.

How can you even claim such a collapse is possible, when you cannot duplicate it in any way? This is complete nonsense.

And I didn't say it was a 'solid block', you did. You can try to duplicate the collapse with ANY two objects, solid or not, it's not going to matter. You're trying to make any excuse for your flimsy, absurd argument.

Physics doesn't need excuses, it doesn't work that way. ANY collapse is either based on physics, and will/can always be replicated, or, if it CANNOT be replicated, then an alternate explanation must account for it. Which you cannot deal with, obviously. But it's true, and nothing changes that fact.

originally posted by: neutronflux

Gravity pulls straight down. The top of each tower starts to lean once the buckling initiated. But once the buckled columns could not support the upper portion of the building, gravity pulled the leaning mass straight down.

The twin towers did not collapse through the path of greatest resistance.

You're arguing two entirely conflicting things.

First you claim the mass came 'straight down'. And second, you claim they didn't collapse through the path of greatest resistance.

A mass going 'straight down' IS the path of greatest resistance!!

It is not possible for an object to go 'straight down', because it IS the path of greatest resistance. The only way this is possible, is if the resistance below the falling object is REMOVED first, allowing the object to fall straight down, WITHOUT any resistance below it.

Even a schoolchild knows that is a fact, so why don't you understand it? I'm sure you do, but simply deny the fact, and pretend it doesn't really work that way! Physics proves it does, all the time, no exceptions, no excuses.


That's why you cannot prove your claim by replicating it, and never will, because you cannot defy physics.

The evidence was always there the towers were demolished. Either by some sort of chemical or explosives.

Fire does not cause this.



Pictures I screenshotted from a video. They are all taken at the dumpsite Oct 2001

Holes in the steel


Fractures and tears of the steel.


Chemical reaction on the surface of the steel. Did anyone at the site take samples of this?


Steel lifted off it's welding


A hole in the steel. Missing part or result of a blast?


Steel split in half- odd angle cuts


Smoking gun evidence- fire causing this unlikely. Three photographs from long piece.




Steel from the floors on fire- black damage.


Another angle cut piece. Three photographs same columns. Fractures and tears. Amazingly the bolts are still there.



- fireproofing still there though NIST claims it got removed.

More fractures and tears.

a reply to: turbonium1

False argument by. I said the mass of falling floors fell straight down. The columns that remained in the wake of the falling mass tumbled outward as in video.



So. Keep posting blatant falsehoods. Keep ignoring the actual collapse video. Keep ignoring the stages of the twin towers collapse.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

False argument by. I said the mass of falling floors fell straight down. The columns that remained in the wake of the falling mass tumbled outward as in video.

So. Keep posting blatant falsehoods. Keep ignoring the actual collapse video. Keep ignoring the stages of the twin towers collapse.

The mass of falling floors went through the path of greatest resistance, and that sure sounds a lot better, somehow, to you!!

Who knew the mass would ever take the path of greatest resistance - please explain the physics behind your fairy-tale, if you would....

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Oh. Look. The truth movement game of “Look, Random Picture.” With no context and no links to cited sources. Or what dump cite you are even referring to?

How intellectually honest and in accordance with citing other people’s work. And, all the steel went straight to China? I hope you can see the sarcasm.

You

Fire does not cause this.

Twenty stories of a building above buckling at the floors of jet impacts, induced by contracting floor trusses resulting in collapsing into the building below does.

You

Pictures I screenshotted from a video. They are all taken at the dumpsite Oct 2001

Holes in the steel

What do you expect from from steel that was in a hot toxic smoldering soup sprayed with water for three months to look like. When the collapsed buildings contained things like a battery room full of batteries that contained battery acid. The battery acid from crushed batteries went so someplace. Looks like you found it.

You

Fractures and tears of the steel.

Wow. From steel that sat in a hot smoldering toxic soup for three that resented from a 500,00 ton building collapse, and then cut and handled by heavy machinery. Looks good for what it went through.

Do you know the structural steel of the twin towers had ID marks? So what does this piece of steel represent. You know the twin towers were built in that the vertical columns used thinner and thinner steel from bottom to top?


You

Chemical reaction on the surface of the steel. Did anyone at the site take samples of this?

You don’t say for a piece of steel that sat in a hot smoldering toxic soup for three months with no signs of buckling or structural failure at collapse.

You

Steel lifted off it's welding

From buildings that we know that jet impacts and collapse broke welds. With no signs of being worked on by explosives? Say it’s not so?

You

A hole in the steel. Missing part or result of a blast?

Nope. Edges are too clean with no erosion from an explosive working on it. With mechanical tearing.

Examples from Myth Busters


You

Smoking gun evidence- fire causing this unlikely. Three photographs from long piece.

Again, what do you expect from steel that sat in a hot smoldering toxic soup for three months? From pictures that you cannot see what part of the structure the steel was part of? Care to post and cite what this piece of steel was located in the structure! You seemed to have oddly zoom and cut away imagine that may have helped identify the piece?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Another angle cut piece. Three photographs same columns. Fractures and tears. Amazingly the bolts are still there.

Angle cut with no rust on it, and very little signs of weathering. I think it’s were a sample was taken after the steel was moved to the lay down area. Recent to when the video was filmed.

You still might want to read through this Metabunk thread?

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

You

- fireproofing still there though NIST claims it got removed.

At the areas of jet impacts were thermal stress failures resulting in buckling on those floors.

Now quote were NIST claims the hundreds, if not thousands, pieces of structural steel had all its insulation removed?

Your claim conflicts with the very fundamental principles of all known physics, you do realize that, I hope.

This is much more than a claim about two buildings here. It is about all structural engineering, and design, which all use actual physics. Not cartoon physics, hatched up to excuse it away, like a magical potion.


You are trying to claim a structure like this can actually fall through the intact structure below, within seconds, and that is simply ridiculous, and is not based on physics, nor based on any reality. Nobody can replicate your fantasy claim, and never will, because it is impossible. No examples of it to show the fantasy happened ever before or after, because it is not possible to find any examples of cartoon physics, which occur within the real world.


All you have is a hopeless, worthless fantasy story, and nothing else.

a reply to: turbonium1

Pictures from the actual collapse.

Collapse initiation


More on collapse initiation at:

www.metabunk.org/the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

When you want to have an intellectually honest debate, quote from the linked to thread at Metabunk with what you find untrue with supporting evidence.

Any who
The vertical columns did tumble in the wake of the falling floor masses that fell straight through the twin towers.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You do know fire related stress caused these failures in WTC 5

a reply to: turbonium1

I claimed the falling masses broke the weakest link, the floor connections.

Richard Gage of AE 9/11 Truth is the one who claims the twin towers fell through the path of greatest resistance, which is false. The core columns stood whole seconds after the 9 second collapse of the entire floors systems.

The still standing vertical columns is right there in the video record.

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.