Why Did the EXTERIOR of WTC 1 & 2 Fail?

Not the interior core.
Not building 7.
Just the exterior we all seen on 1 & 2.

If you firmly believe in your version of events then you must have an explanation as to why the exterior we all seen in videos, fail.

The exterior held up about 40% of the total load.

If you believe in a conspiracy then those exterior panels must have been taken out by some force other than fire.
Was it explosives? boom boom
Was it thermite? Psssss burn
Was it hacksaw blades?
Just what caused all those panels to fail at the same time?

a reply to: samkent

Panels?

The exterior was hoisted up in panelized sections.

a reply to: samkent

They didn't all fail at the same time, rather they were turned to dust and crumbled one at a time.

Two planes, flown by Al-Qaeda operatives, flew into the buildings weakening their structure.....fires caused by these incidents further weakened the structure....and they fell down.

ETA: And Gravity, as Heff so rightly pointed out below.....

a reply to: samkent

Gravity.

a reply to: samkent

Oh okay, not to often is it the case where the aluminum
capture CURTAIN WALL ( for the glass ) is prefabed on
the ground because the specs call for the iron to run
thru out the center of the aluminum extrusions for the
length/hieght of the building. This is for wind load
and had to be a fairly new concept in 67.

Anyway the towers stood from what, 68 to 01?
Hardly call that a fail.

A few office fires from the 78 floor made all the panels in the lobbies and basement just fall, all by themselves.
All the steel beams that had fire proofing on them below the fires, just fell down. That is what we are told on true TV.

Apparently Engineers have not found a way to build buildings that can with stand fires. That is what we are to believe.
I had no idea office fires could melt steel but according to the NIST Report they can.

If anyone believes something else brought down the WTC they better be careful, or they will be labeled a "conspiracy theorist".
or anti-government.

not this again.

ok if you look online and see how the buildings were built.

You'll see that the buildings were not built traditionally. They were framed tube structures. basically a hollow tube. The support structure of the building were the inner core and outside walls. Which the floors of the building were anchored to by truss.

Read more here.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Informer1958

Steel melts at 1370c

Now high up there with winds helping the flames, all that jet fuel and whatever else.....

...Yeah, I can easily see how an "office fire" could melt it.

a reply to: woogleuk

I know, right. And the fires on the 78 floors melted the steel in the lobbies to.

a reply to: Informer1958

It collapses from the top down, the weight of all that falling, of course it's going to take out whatever is below it. Plus I think they designed them to collapse like that to make demolition easier....but don't quote me on that.

a reply to: woogleuk

I'm sorry but did you just say the buildings were designed to collapse?

a reply to: randyvs

Good luck, I am not even going to try.

Why did they fail?
Couldn't be because jet airliners crashed into them, could it?

a reply to: randyvs

I'm sorry but did you just say the buildings were designed to collapse?

It must have, to fall they way they did. The Engineers had to build every floor with very week support columns to make the building fall in it's own foot print. If the WTC were built to stand up to office firers they would have never fell. I know this sounds stupid, but I don't want to think some insiders planted explosives on every floor because that would defy common sense and critical thinking.

Yep, the WTC fell because the office firers on the 78 floors weakened the steel on the bottom floors and that is what the government said, and I know they would never lie to us because 3,000 people died that day. If we are to believe something different happened to the WTC than what the NIST or government told us, we might be labeled a terrorist.

So yeah, the WTC just fell down due to several floors above the 78 floors burning from office and jet fuel firers. And that weakened the WTC steel on the bottom floors where there were no firers. I know it sounds like some kind of magic trick, but the NIST Report explains it that way. There is no reason for them to lie, would they?

you guys don't know structures....concrete core, men....the stair wells.....or were there none?
let's tell the truth, we have to start at the concrete shear cores,maybe at the elevators.... might not have been any made of concrete?...some I guess have coreboard and metal " I " studs....coreboard is one inch thick sheetrock....

a reply to: Informer1958

Another case solved! Buy ya a beer?

a reply to: randyvs

No, they were designed to collapse in a certain way if needed, ie during controlled demolition when they were no longer needed, I'm sure I heard / read that somewhere.

a reply to: Informer1958

It must have, to fall they way they did. The Engineers had to build every floor with very week support columns to make the building fall in it's own foot print. If the WTC were built to stand up to office firers they would have never fell.

Ever wondered why fire protection is applied to structural steel?

I know this sounds stupid, but I don't want to think some insiders planted explosives on every floor because that would defy common sense and critical thinking.

It is an accepted fact that the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 began at the impact points. When the aircraft struck those buildings, were there secondary explosions? If not, then that indicates there were no explosives planted at the point of impact.

Yep, the WTC fell because the office firers on the 78 floors weakened the steel on the bottom floors and that is what the government said, and I know they would never lie to us because 3,000 people died that day. If we are to believe something different happened to the WTC than what the NIST or government told us, we might be labeled a terrorist.

Actually, international warnings issued to the United States from around the world in the months and weeks prior to the 9/11 attack were pointing their fingers at Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group, al-Qaeda. I might add that some of those warnings came from Muslim countries, Russia and even from the Taliban in Afghanistan. Check it out.

Taliban Warning of Osama bin laden's Intentions to Attack America

In late July 2001, Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil learned that Osama bin Laden was planning a “huge attack” on targets inside America. The attack was imminent, and would kill thousands, he learned from the leader of the rebel Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, which was closely allied with al-Qaeda at the time.

Muttawakil sent an emissary to pass this information on to the US Consul General, and another US official, “possibly from the intelligence services.” Sources confirmed that this message was received, but supposedly not taken very seriously, because of “warning fatigue” arising from too many terror warnings. [Independent, 9/7/02, Reuters, 9/7/02]

www.historycommons.org...


Taliban 'warned US of huge attack

An aide to the former Taleban foreign minister, Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil, has revealed that he was sent to warn American diplomats and the United Nations that Osama bin Laden was due to launch a huge attack on American soil.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Nothing in those international warnings indicating an American false flag operation.

So yeah, the WTC just fell down due to several floors above the 78 floors burning from office and jet fuel firers. And that weakened the WTC steel on the bottom floors where there were no firers. I know it sounds like some kind of magic trick, but the NIST Report explains it that way. There is no reason for them to lie, would they?

Well, that is also what structural and civil engineers, architects, demolition experts firefighters,and other investigators have been saying as well.

Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns.

The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

As one eyewitness told us, "We were all standing around helpless...we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn't know if another plane was coming...but I never heard explosions like demo charges.

We knew with the damage to the building and how hot the fire was, that building was gonna go, so we just waited, and a little later it went."

sites.google.com...


ARCHITECT Magazine
The Magazine of the American Institute of Architects

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.


Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee.

That finding is significant, said W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., team lead for the ASCE/FEMA Building Performance Study Team, because extreme events of this type, resulting in such substantial damage, are generally not considered in building design, and the fact that these structures were able to successfully withstand such damage is noteworthy.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

When the jet liners crashed into the towers based upon knowledge of the tower construction and high-rise firefighting experience the following happened: First the plane broke through the tubular steel-bearing wall. This started the building failure. Next the exploding, disintegrating, 185-ton jet plane slid across an open office floor area and severed many of the steel interior columns in the center core area. Plane parts also crashed through the plasterboard-enclosed stairways, cutting off the exits from the upper floors.

The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and the center steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.

vincentdunn.com...

Nothing in those reports about demolition explosives as responsible for the destruction of the WTC buildings.