Melting steel?

a reply to: vjr1113

the evidence for planted explosives is zero

DITTO!!!

a reply to: wildb

here was no roof, no pile driver after the start of the collapse, the top block above the crash zone disintegrated in mid air, want to explain how that happened..

Simple! Check out this video. What is the upper block doing to the lower block?

originally posted by: wildb
a reply to: vjr1113

my argument referring to physics as the explanation for debris flying horizontally stands

I'm not so sure, gravity does not have energy to propel a steel beam weighing 18 thousand pounds over 600 feet. That required a lot of energy. Furthermore the buildings did not collapse they disintegrated .. a point which is overlooked .

the dust clouds in your picture looks like just that, dust clouds.

again, i repeat myself. is disintegrated matter weightless?

(no)

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I feel like that the existence of information that hasn't been released is a serious issue.

It shouldn't be. In addition, terrorist could use information that point to certain weaknesses in building construction in planning for future attacks, which brings to mind the old quote: "Loose lips, sink ships."

In the second phot, that is not an explosion, those are squibs of compressed air forced out during the collapse, which is also seen in this photo.

News flash, air is invisible. Your answer does not hold water, not when it was happening 4,5 ,6 and 7 hundred feet below the demolition wave.. further more if it was air it would have happened in a random manor. This was not the case, each squib was uniform in there location. And on top of that there was nothing to compress air since the buildings were coming apart at the seams, as in disintegrating ..

Plus the both of you are ignoring what was going on at ground level.. but whatever, the fact is nothing can be proven one way or the other.. good night.

a reply to: wildb

News flash, air is invisible.

Are these squibs of compressed air invisible?

Photo: Squibs of Compressed Air

Plus the both of you are ignoring what was going on at ground level.. but whatever, the fact is nothing can be proven one way or the other.. good night.

There was nothing going on at ground level other than elevators crashing into the lobby after their lines were cut by the aircraft.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

News flash, air is invisible.

Are these squibs of compressed air invisible?

Photo: Squibs of Compressed Air

Plus the both of you are ignoring what was going on at ground level.. but whatever, the fact is nothing can be proven one way or the other.. good night.

There was nothing going on at ground level other than elevators crashing into the lobby after their lines were cut by the aircraft.

There is a caption on the photo saying "no explosives"....

Really that's it ?...so we are to believe you why ?...care to provide some more information ?...BTW you were late to the party..

a reply to: vjr1113

i repeat myself. is disintegrated matter weightless?

When it is being ejected up, out and away from the remaining structure falling through the air yes it is..

If the OS was true the collapse would have slowed and stopped before it reach ground level.. collapsing into the path of most resistance at near free fall speed defies simple physics..

a reply to: skyeagle409

There was nothing going on at ground level other than elevators crashing into the lobby after their lines were cut by the aircraft.

Well that goes to show you don't know all you think you do....

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

There is a caption on the photo saying "no explosives"....

Really that's it ?...so we are to believe you why ?...care to provide some more information ?...BTW you were late to the party..

Sure thing! Welcome to the party and now, it's time to watch a video that will answer your question. Watch the close-up shots because the Verinage demolition method does not require the use of explosives.

a reply to: wildb

youtube

there is no resistance. you can hear the floors collapsing on each other. there you can see your precious pillars of smoke. the sheer amount of weight eliminates most of the resistance.



just because the outer walls of the building haven't collapsed doesn't mean the center of the building hasn't collapsed yet.

a reply to: wildb

Well that goes to show you don't know all you think you do....

Well, you'd claimed that explosions were heard just before American 11 hit WTC 1 and yet, I posted a video of WTC 1 in the seconds before American 11 struck and there was no sound of explosions before the aircraft hit the building.

here is more

hardly seems controlled to me. i hate having to rewatch all this just to argue a flawed conspiracy that has no backbone.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

Well that goes to show you don't know all you think you do....

Well, you'd claimed that explosions were heard just before American 11 hit WTC 1 and yet, I posted a video of WTC 1 in the seconds before American 11 struck and there was no sound of explosions before the aircraft hit the building.

Memory problems again, how stupid do you think we are.... you get the same reply as last time..

Are you making a joke here or are you grasping for straws, you want me / us to point out explosions in the sub levels from 10 to 15 blocks away ?? Wow, guess you think your dealing with Idiots..

a reply to: skyeagle409

Watching those building fall was a little reminiscent of the twin towers and wt7 falling,so one could assume that the same or similar conditions for the buildings to fall the way they did using the Verinage demolition method is plausible ?

a reply to: wildb

No memory problems here. The challenge for you is to produce evidence because the video depicted no sound of explosions.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Watching those building fall was a little reminiscent of the twin towers and wt7 falling,so one could assume that the same or similar conditions for the buildings to fall the way they did using the Verinage demolition method is plausible ?

In smaller buildings, yes, but not exactly in the same manner. Let's take a look at how WTC 6 was demolished with cables.

a reply to: vjr1113

hardly seems controlled to me. i hate having to rewatch all this just to argue a flawed conspiracy that has no backbone.

You are correct and add to the fact there is absolutely no sound of demolition explosions as the WTC buildings collapsed. I have challenged wildb to provide time lines in the WTC videos where explosions are heard, but he has failed to measure up.

originally posted by: vjr1113
here is more

hardly seems controlled to me. i hate having to rewatch all this just to argue a flawed conspiracy that has no backbone.

That's one of the better angles showing the remaining core standing for some seconds after the rest.

If they were using explosives, wouldn't they have blown the last of the core too?
That's got to be a couple dozen stories left hanging in the air unblown.
Hmmm any explanation from the conspiracy crowd?

a reply to: samkent

That's one of the better angles showing the remaining core standing for some seconds after the rest

Not true, if you look closely you will see the TV tower start to drop before the building itself, the TV tower was tied to the core columns, in order for that tower to fall first the core columns has to be severed first, so much for pancaking.