Where Did the Towers Go?

a reply to: hellobruce

Hence the part that you didn't quote...

Again, the best example of what happens when a plane going 500 mph hits a building that contains steel and concrete.
As it happened twice that morning and in both cases the planes left a "looney tune" outline of the plane.

originally posted by: zatara

originally posted by: WaterBottle
They collapsed into a big pile of rubble

And then there was dust...and a lot of it. No matter what, it is undenible that much of the concrete turned into dust. Watch this and be amazed how much dust...

Why do you people only ever mention concrete when talking about the dust what about all the SHEETROCK,SPRAYED ON FIRE PROTECTION, VERMICULITE INSULATION , PAINT, CEILING TILES, DUST from uncleaned areas even GLASS which all showed up in samples!!!

There was thousands of sq mtrs of sheetrock, sprayed on fire protection,insulation,ceiling tiles & paint common sense and a little construction knowledge would be handy before jumping to conclusions.

a reply to: wmd_2008

You forgot that the builings also had copper pipes but without spliting hairs the build was concrent, steel and glass construction and no build like that has ever fell down like the towers did because it would involve braking the laws of physics and the dead give away even if your not good at physics is to look at building seven that didn't even get hit by a plane.

Yes it's hard when you work out that your government does not love you and is only concerned in milking your earnings but thats the way it is.

originally posted by: WaterBottle
They collapsed into a big pile of rubble

110 stories collapsing in to a pile not over 3 stories tall isn't a big pile of rubble. That was the fundamental question that led Dr. Wood to do her research. Too much material simply vanished that day to make the OS possibly true in any way. Neither fire, thermite or HE explain the lack of debris in that pile. Only Dr. Wood is brave and intelligent enough to begin to explore answers to that question.
Anyone who thinks the public knows about every weapon in the US arsenal is a fool. Trillions of missing dollars can develop many amazing things, harmful to people and property.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Matter doesn't go away without an awfully big bang. At some point saying 'maybe it 's something secret' requires such a huge violation of physics that you might as well argue Harry Potter instead.

I cant even find the video on JV's site O_O

This thread was posted on the 22nd and the OTG lineup for the 22nd-25th is

Tuesday: Bailout-Busters! Find out what General Motors has been up to - including intentionally sending out defective cars.
Wednesday: William Shatner - the modern Renaissance Man - goes #OffTheGrid
Thursday: What's the official word with Obamacare? Is it a success? Or has the original plan been hijacked? Jesse Ventura answers viewer questions.
Friday: Jesse Ventura answers viewers #AskJesse questions during "From The People."

So does anyone have a link to it?

Well even if the planes were the only cause of the towers falling, i cant get my head round building 7.

originally posted by: Biigs
Well even if the planes were the only cause of the towers falling, i cant get my head round building 7.

How about fires burning for 6 hours.

WTC 7 Fires

Structural damage to a main elevation and to a corner of the building when the towers fell.

but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good

Also it didn't fall straight down conspiracy sites always show one side of the building to hide what happened.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

originally posted by: WaterBottle
They collapsed into a big pile of rubble

110 stories collapsing in to a pile not over 3 stories tall isn't a big pile of rubble.

You will of course have a picture of this 3 storey pile!!!

originally posted by: VirusGuard
a reply to: wmd_2008

You forgot that the builings also had copper pipes but without spliting hairs the build was concrent, steel and glass construction and no build like that has ever fell down like the towers did because it would involve braking the laws of physics and the dead give away even if your not good at physics is to look at building seven that didn't even get hit by a plane.

Yes it's hard when you work out that your government does not love you and is only concerned in milking your earnings but thats the way it is.

First it ain't my government I am not from the USA, second if you had any REAL understanding of the construction of the towers YOU would understand how they could collapse like they did.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

originally posted by: WaterBottle
They collapsed into a big pile of rubble

110 stories collapsing in to a pile not over 3 stories tall isn't a big pile of rubble. That was the fundamental question that led Dr. Wood to do her research. Too much material simply vanished that day to make the OS possibly true in any way. Neither fire, thermite or HE explain the lack of debris in that pile. Only Dr. Wood is brave and intelligent enough to begin to explore answers to that question.
Anyone who thinks the public knows about every weapon in the US arsenal is a fool. Trillions of missing dollars can develop many amazing things, harmful to people and property.

am I correct that the towers both had some 10 stories below street level... that is a whole lot of volume to be filled with compacted building material & furniture from the collapsed buildings...along with the debris fields all around the 'footprint' and the tunnels for the subway which also provided a lot of empty space for WTC Towers 1 & 2


Your best bet, & Dr Wood too...about questioning the tiny, 3 stories of piled up debris... would be to Survey the 'fresh kills' dumping area and compute the volume of building debris with the cubic yards of material it took to fashion the hollow tubes 110+ stories tall

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: hellobruce

and in both cases the planes left a "looney tune" outline of the plane.

REALLY



The picture above doesn't look like this



So you have to do one of two things either get your eyes tested or stop quoting conspiracy site cliches!!!

For those that don't know what cliche means..

cliché a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought.

a reply to: wmd_2008

At this point in this thread, you have to be trolling. Why didn't NIST claim the damage was significant to the collapse? Were you an investigator? Quit being deceiving. NIST claimed fire brought down WTC 7 and nothing more.

Also, can you provide any OTHER videos that show WTC 7 falling any other way that doesn't look like a straight down, controlled demo? If not, your claims are BS. But that's your point, right?

It's blatantly obvious you cannot do any thinking for yourself as you constantly parrot official narrative and marginalize everyone else as conspiracy theorists.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Didn't the towers leave a pretty defined outline of the plane? All the way to the tip of the wing on each plane. I would say that is the best example we have of what happens when a plane hits a building, but it does not replicate at the pentagon.

So a light steel structure is the same as a heavily reinforced building......

Your heavily reinforced concrete building was penetrated three (3) times more than towers 1 & 2 & 7.

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: hellobruce

and in both cases the planes left a "looney tune" outline of the plane.

REALLY

The picture above doesn't look like this

So you have to do one of two things either get your eyes tested or stop quoting conspiracy site cliches!!!

For those that don't know what cliche means..

cliché a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought.

Actually, Sremmos is spot on with the point he was trying to make. Are you really taking this to the point of comparing the outline of a jet in a building to a cartoon? Can you post pictures of the puncture holes left by the engines at the pentagon? That's where this discussion originated. Nobody in this thread took the "loony toons" outlines as literally as you obviously did. So I think you're trolling for reasons I can't comprehend.

"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

Nist seems to disagree with the idea that the fire as the damage the tower took from the debris. If you remeber that day, 1,2 and 7 were not the only damged buildings. Plenty of towers almost the same size as WTC 7, the verizon building and the post office was fine and they didn't have command centers built into them...

Oh and what other video do all us conspiracy sites never show?

a reply to: wmd_2008

Well, I see you took the "looney toons" seriously. But to answer your question, no the plane and the coyote don't look alike
What is similar though is how when he went through the wall it left a pretty good out line of his body, just like when the plane entered the tower it left a pretty good out line of the planes body.

I am sorry if you took what I said as the plane would have left the out line of a looney toon, I guess putting quotes around it doesn't work anymore....

a reply to: Sremmos80

The other night, on my business trip I'm currently on, a movie made a profound statement to me regarding the tower's collapses. Pacific Rim has a scene where the giant robot is fighting a huge monster. They both go through a large skyscraper as they are tussling and it doesn't collapse (makes the damage at WTC 7 look like a bug bite). Then the monster grows wings and picks the robot up and takes off. On its way upward to the heavens, the monster slams the robot with tremendous force on the tops of two skyscrapers, smashing the top couple floors -- guess what? No collapse. Now obviously this proves nothing BUT I can't imagine anyone questioning these scenes and the director, whom obviously wanted to make the scenes as real as possible, did not think that these collisions with buildings (that make a 767 tiny) were significant enough to simulate a collapse.

Now don't any of you goofballs take this as me trying to prove anything other than how rationale people question the collapsed buildings of that day.

This is just a thought I had as I watched the movie. Oh, I freaking love that movie!

a reply to: cestrup

That was a pretty good movie, and i know what part you are talking about as when I saw it in theaters I thought the same thing. Reminds me first godzilla remake, there is a part where they shoot missiles that miss the monster and hit the empire state building and the top section just slides off the section that was not damaged.... But hey that is just a movie

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Matter doesn't go away without an awfully big bang. At some point saying 'maybe it 's something secret' requires such a huge violation of physics that you might as well argue Harry Potter instead.

But huge violation of KNOWN physics is the real essence here, in these towers collapsing the way they did and
of course the utter lack of sufficient rubble