Question for 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists

Do you think you're more qualified in determining the speed of those collapses than the head investigator at NIST, who was actually in charge of it?

If you don't even agree with NIST's own conclusions on the collapse speeds, don't try and act like you know what happened, and don't bleat on and on about how we made it all up...

originally posted by: turbonium1
Do you think you're more qualified in determining the speed of those collapses than the head investigator at NIST, who was actually in charge of it?

If you don't even agree with NIST's own conclusions on the collapse speeds, don't try and act like you know what happened, and don't bleat on and on about how we made it all up...

Why is it your arguments uses the lies of the truth movement?

Is it false video clearly shows WTC debris falling past the zone of collapse, and hitting the ground while the towers are still several stories tall.

Is it false video shows large lengths of core columns still standing after the complete collapse of the floor system.

WTC Collapses - Cores Visible

the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com...

It is difficult to see properly, but these pictures appear to show the remnants of WTC2's core still standing for a little while, after the rest of the towers had collapsed. It's obscured by dust, of course.

Showing the core was still present after the collapses, shows that the core was not demolished to initiate collapse, as conspiracy theorists argue. So....are these the cores?

WTC2 Core
m.youtube.com...


WTC1 Core #5
m.youtube.com...

originally posted by: turbonium1
Do you think you're more qualified in determining the speed of those collapses than the head investigator at NIST, who was actually in charge of it?

If you don't even agree with NIST's own conclusions on the collapse speeds, don't try and act like you know what happened, and don't bleat on and on about how we made it all up...

If you think NIST is lying, why would I use NIST when I can use actual collapse video to support my arguments.

a reply to: turbonium1

I have presented arguments to explain the actual video evidence and physical evidence at the towers. I have presented an argument backed by video and physical evidence why there is no proof of CD at the towers.

By your own admittance, the core columns failed after the complete collapse of the floor system. Richard Gage’s statements on a symmetrical collapse had to go through the path of greatest resistance is false. I am not sure the towers collapse was truly symmetrical. Another truth movement lie?

Video clearly shows the towers did not fall at the rate of free fall, so the original cry of the truth movement that the towers fell at the rate of free fall is false.

You have not explained what caused inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse as seen in the video in this link:
the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

You have not proven there was too much dust.

You have not proven the floor trusses and floor connections to the vertical columns should have withstood being hit by a dynamic load equal to or greater than being hit by 6 falling stories.

You have not proven your false claims I violated the laws of physics.

You ignore the example of a building that had a portion of its structure steel under go a complete collapse, only saved by a concrete core the WTC buildings did not have.

You ignore a high rise building underwent a complete collapse because of fire related failures. A building not even struck by an outside force.

You ignore the provided examples of buildings undergoing spontaneous collapse from being overloaded.

You have not provided a credible cause of collapse to supersede impact damage and fire related inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: turbonium1
Do you think you're more qualified in determining the speed of those collapses than the head investigator at NIST, who was actually in charge of it?

If you don't even agree with NIST's own conclusions on the collapse speeds, don't try and act like you know what happened, and don't bleat on and on about how we made it all up...

Why is it your arguments uses the lies of the truth movement?

Is it false video clearly shows WTC debris falling past the zone of collapse, and hitting the ground while the towers are still several stories tall.

Is it false video shows large lengths of core columns still standing after the complete collapse of the floor system.

WTC Collapses - Cores Visible

the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com...

It is difficult to see properly, but these pictures appear to show the remnants of WTC2's core still standing for a little while, after the rest of the towers had collapsed. It's obscured by dust, of course.

Showing the core was still present after the collapses, shows that the core was not demolished to initiate collapse, as conspiracy theorists argue. So....are these the cores?

WTC2 Core
m.youtube.com...


WTC1 Core #5
m.youtube.com...

You really believe these were the cores?

Not even close.

Try and compare it with the real core, when first built, so you'll grasp the point ...

A bit of the exterior frame holds up, and that's all you see here.

Not even close to the immense inner core columns.



The debris explodes outward from the structure in all directions, with massive force....

Some steel was later found atop other buildings, up to 10 blocks away, iirc...


Debris falls at free-fall speed, except the debris that landed miles away, on rooftops...

Since debris was being blown in all directions, then some debris was being blown in a downward trajectory, as well.


Basic physics

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

I have presented arguments to explain the actual video evidence and physical evidence at the towers. I have presented an argument backed by video and physical evidence why there is no proof of CD at the towers.

By your own admittance, the core columns failed after the complete collapse of the floor system. Richard Gage’s statements on a symmetrical collapse had to go through the path of greatest resistance is false. I am not sure the towers collapse was truly symmetrical. Another truth movement lie?

Video clearly shows the towers did not fall at the rate of free fall, so the original cry of the truth movement that the towers fell at the rate of free fall is false.

You have not explained what caused inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse as seen in the video in this link:
the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

You have not proven there was too much dust.

You have not proven the floor trusses and floor connections to the vertical columns should have withstood being hit by a dynamic load equal to or greater than being hit by 6 falling stories.

You have not proven your false claims I violated the laws of physics.

You ignore the example of a building that had a portion of its structure steel under go a complete collapse, only saved by a concrete core the WTC buildings did not have.

You ignore a high rise building underwent a complete collapse because of fire related failures. A building not even struck by an outside force.

You ignore the provided examples of buildings undergoing spontaneous collapse from being overloaded.

You have not provided a credible cause of collapse to supersede impact damage and fire related inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse.

The sky is purple polka dots, with flying goats, and nobody can prove it isn't true...


Same as this claim you have - it doesn't work, and it never will

A collapse that will never happen, which cannot happen, which doesn't exist, which cannot be explained in scientific terms, which no scientist has even mentioned, and never will.

All of these scientists know that a collapse has numerous possible causes to consider. Not like these geniuses, who knew it was fire and impact damage that caused the collapse, before the collapse, it's 'inevitable' after that point, so why bother??


The collapse is so 'inevitable', therefore, why should they bother to prove something which is quite obviously 'inevitable'??


They speak about collapses being 'inevitable', while nobody has a clue about it. Nobody had seen one, yet they try to pretend to be such 'experts' about it!



I find the whole assertion to be an outright insult to everyone's basic intellect.

By: turbonium1

You really believe these were the cores?

Not even close.

Try and compare it with the real core, when first built, so you'll grasp the point

Why does your points use intellectual dishonesty.

What “other” vertical columns were used in the tower’s construction that spanned floor after floor? None, the only vertical columns was the core columns.

And what does that have to do with video and cited sources attesting to the columns fell after the complete collapse of the floor system.

When you mean “debris” miles away, you referring to papers, dust and ash?

If converting potential energy to kinetic energy cannot cause upward and lateral ejection, how does a Newton’s cradle work?
m.youtube.com...

The thing where balls hit each other and swing up and out from converting potential energy to kinetic energy.

The buildings weighted 500,000 tons? What do you think would happen if a 30,000 ton chunk of building hit a one ton piece of building?

Please produce video of the collapse that has audio of any demolitions explosions capable of producing any significant lateral ejection? Much less cut columns. Or spread “debris” miles about.

So? AE 9/11 Truth’s false narrative of fizzle no flash explosives spread “debris” for miles, caused significant lateral ejection?

Why do you think the charlatan Richard Gage concocted the fizzle no flash narrative. BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

Note: The truth movement has never said one or two well placed charges could cause the witnessed collapse speeds. One, the claim the towers fell at the rate of free mall is a lie. Two, the truth movement claims the resistance of each floor had to be removed. There is no evidence of either. Religiously claiming false rates of collapse, “Fizzle no flash explosives”, and the resistance of each floor had to be removed killed the truth movement.

originally posted by: neutronflux

By: turbonium1

You really believe these were the cores?

Not even close.

Try and compare it with the real core, when first built, so you'll grasp the point

Why does your points use intellectual dishonesty.

What “other” vertical columns were used in the tower’s construction that spanned floor after floor? None, the only vertical columns was the core columns.

And what does that have to do with video and cited sources attesting to the columns fell after the complete collapse of the floor system.

When you mean “debris” miles away, you referring to papers, dust and ash?

If converting potential energy to kinetic energy cannot cause upward and lateral ejection, how does a Newton’s cradle work?
m.youtube.com...

The thing where balls hit each other and swing up and out from converting potential energy to kinetic energy.

The buildings weighted 500,000 tons? What do you think would happen if a 30,000 ton chunk of building hit a one ton piece of building?

Please produce video of the collapse that has audio of any demolitions explosions capable of producing any significant lateral ejection? Much less cut columns. Or spread “debris” miles about.

So? AE 9/11 Truth’s false narrative of fizzle no flash explosives spread “debris” for miles, caused significant lateral ejection?

Why do you think the charlatan Richard Gage concocted the fizzle no flash narrative. BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

If you have any clue that this 30000 tons of weight was actually being supported by the whole structure, for over 30 years, Not because a single floor entirely supported 30000 tons above it!


That's what you don't grasp here...

This mass was supported by the structure.

That is where you have to start anything else from..


The mass was part of the structure, and was supported as part of the structure. It was not a separate object that dropped from mid-air onto the structure. It was attached to the structure, throughout the time it began to collapse onto the rest of the structure.


There is no point at which the mass would have become separated from the entire structure below, and drop all at once from mid-air. You've watched too many Wile E. Coyote cartoons, methinks!

All of it can be scaled down, and proven, but it will fail, since it is impossible to replicate, in any way.

You'll never be able to prove your claim, because it's nonsense.

a reply to: turbonium1

And you still have, how would a floor by floor sophisticated CD system requiring perfect timing for a never before top down CD of a high rise building survive the fires and jet impacts that severed elevator cables, utility services, and fire water mains.

And according to you logic, never before 9/11 equals impossible.

a reply to: turbonium1

The building was compressed of 110 floors with very specific load ratings. Exceeding the load ratings will cause failure of the floor trusses and floor connections to the core columns.

Again why do you create false narratives.

The inward bowing and buckling caused the large section of the upper floors of the towers to fall into the towers floor system below. Each floor only could support the equivalent dynamic load of six stories falling.

The video evidence shows the the falling mass decimating the floor trusses and the truss connections to vertical columns. The vertical columns which were the core only tumbled down after losing the side to side bracing provide by the floor system.

a reply to: turbonium1

If your argument is not intellectually dishonest, then state what caused the inward bowing and buckling as seen in the video in this linked to thread.

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

No rants, no BS, no false arguments. Just what caused the action as seen in the video that lead to collapse.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

And you still have, how would a floor by floor sophisticated CD system requiring perfect timing for a never before top down CD of a high rise building survive the fires and jet impacts that severed elevator cables, utility services, and fire water mains.

And according to you logic, never before 9/11 equals impossible.

There's nothing left to chance. They don't design the event of the century without redundancies. They knew where to begin the CD's because they knew where the 'planes would impact the towers. So they began on the floors just below the damage/fires. I'm sure they had multiple charges placed throughout the structure, and if any didn't detonate, for some reason, others would.

I find it amusing that you ask how would "a floor by floor sophisticated CD system requiring perfect timing" have survived, the fires/damage, etc....

You are saying that it was a floor by floor collapse requiring perfect timing, yet it somehow is not a CD, which DOES require a perfectly timed, sequential collapse, because the fires/damage would never allow a CD to work. A floor by floor collapse which requires perfect timing is - a totally random damage collapse that REQUIRES perfect timing, so it miraculously HAS perfect timing. Then, another random damage collapse that requires perfect timing, and ONCE MORE has perfect timing!!

Anything else you'd like to say?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

If your argument is not intellectually dishonest, then state what caused the inward bowing and buckling as seen in the video in this linked to thread.

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

No rants, no BS, no false arguments. Just what caused the action as seen in the video that lead to collapse.

This 'inward bowing' and buckling' are seen at initial point of the CD. Same as other features suddenly appear at the same moment, and moments before, and moments after. Nothing is different about the 'inward bowing', it is one of several indications of the CD initiation.


Of course, your clip tried to emphasize that this 'bowing and buckling' happen before anything else. It zooms on the 'bowing', and cuts out the collapse, a split second later. Spinning the desperate idea of 'bowing' causing the initial collapse.

That's why your video cuts out everything but the 'bowing', because it shows other features at the same moment, which are the initial features of the CD.


Here's a better clip, which shows what your clip cuts out...

www.youtube.com...


Let's review your massive 30000 ton block of steel - which drops directly downward, onto the lower floors, smashes everything in its path, directly through the lower structure, all the way to the ground.

Pause the above clip at 1:25

Do you see where this massive block of steel is, at this exact moment?

It is still above the lower structure, at this moment, but it is actually TILTING at a significant angle, dangling on edge, beyond the entire structure below it!

This massive block of steel was tilting at an angle, which means most of it IS NOT EVEN TOUCHING THE LOWER SECTION AT ALL! But nothing will ever stop this incredibly talented block of steel, because even though it is tilting above the lower structure, it suddenly creates a phantom double. Invisible, yet just as powerful, and this phantom block is what was smashing directly down on the lower structure.

Now, pause the clip a few times within the following 2 seconds, frame by frame, if possible.

Where did our amazing block of steel go? It was supposed to stay on top of the lower structure, but it decided to tilt on edge, instead, stops its momentum at once, transform to molecular state, allowing the massive block of steel to mesh within the lower structure at lightning speed, while still at an angle. And it completely vanishes from sight!


Sadly, nobody could see the phantom block, or give thanks to the heroic phantom block, for his great achievement

This massive block did not have anything to do with crushing the lower structure, by going directly through it.


'Ladies and Gentlemen, the Block of Steel has LEFT the building!'


Take a close look at the block, throughout it's passage.

And when the block is last seen, at an angle to the lower structure, nearly half of it had already collapsed. And when the block merged with it at angle, the rest of it collapsed.

This block had nothing to do with the collapse, because we can see - with our own eyes - that the block was not on top of the building, from start, when tilting, to finish, when it merged with the halfway collapsed building at 15-20 deg. angle, and vanished from sight.

It can't be more painfully obvious, right?

a reply to: turbonium1

One, show where AE 9/11 Truth ever retracted that the witnessesed collapse was only possible by the floor by floor rigging of explosives. They have never stood by only one floor rigged to blow.

Two, as explained to you, and proven by cited real world examples of collapse of what happens when a structure’s load rating is exceeded. And I have cited cases of spontaneous collapse. The falling 29 stores and 12 stores falling into the first static floor exceeded the dynamic load rating. The 12 falling stores by at least a factor of 2. The 29 falling stores by a fact of at least four. The falling mass only grew in size through the collapse.

Three, the falling mass was a collection of different sized chuncks of building. The chunks were falling and impacting the floors and crashing in to each other in hundreds of different and random ways. Think billiard balls. Just the balls clipping each sends them at tangents. Also, if the falling mass hit the end of a long horizontal peace, it would react in a possible number of ways. I would say it is false every collision was dead on to each item of mass in the tower and falling mass. Items did clip each other than solid striaght on hits, which cased changes in direction or lateral ejection.

a reply to: turbonium1

Your rambling: let’s go small again.

This is the link to the thread that has video of the inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse.

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

You also claim that explosives caused a huge mass to lateral ejection.

You claim explosives?

I have cited actual physics on load ratings that makes my explanations possible. I used physics to explain lateral ejection. You falsely claimed I violated physics for a intellectual dishonesty argument.

You, in the context that AE 9/11 Truth holds to fizzle no flash explosives:

Have not shown or provided any evidence of explosives. You claim explosives, and gloss over the reality how explosives work.

Back to you invoking lateral ejection. Cite video that has the audio of an explosion powerful enough to cause the lateral ejection. Or how fizzle no flash explosives would be responsible.

In your false narrative that CD invoked inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse:
1) how was the explosives placed to only cause inward bowing and buckling leading to collapse at the circumference of the building at a specific section of floors. Why did ever floor above the buckling not show the same symptoms? A dropped core would have cause an upward chain reaction.

2) there is no evidence of cut columns. No audio of explosives with the strength to cut steel. No signs of shrapnel. No windows being blown out. Thermite would have caused massive sparking and flashing from each column it was placed on. No signs the core was dropped by cutting.


There is no evidence of CD. You arguments are based on the lies of the truth movement. You inability to explain the simplest of the aspects of collapse, and you using false claims shows there is no evidence of CD.
If you keep posting I will just keep posting and citing your false accusations against me. Stop ranting and provide actual proof.

a reply to: turbonium1

Please state the law of physics I violated with actual quotes from my posts.

a reply to: turbonium1

What happen to debris found miles away? Can you cite examples?

a reply to: turbonium1

I watched the clip over and over. All I see is inward bowing and the inward buckling of the outer vertical columns in a specific area. I see the vertical columns pulled in, the buckling, the collapse of the building that was above the buckling into the building below. Then I see the release of potential energy equivalent to at least 200 tons of high energy explosives. The release of energy ripping and pulling floor trusses apart and from vertical columns. Vertical columns that remained standing upright after the collapse of the floor system.

If the core columns were cut. Every floor above the area being cut would have showed signs of collapse. The collapse would ripple visibly up the structure. The video clearly shows the sides of the tower slowly being bowed in. The weight above the bowing caused the buckling (physical bending) of the columns at a specific level in the tower. No explosives would bend the steel as seen in the video.

While the bowing inward is taking place, there is no audio of explosions. Nothing is being blown out. The is no evidence scores of columns were being cut to cause slow bowing.

In fact, cutting the interior columns would cause a visible ripple up the structure. Cutting only the interior floor tress connections to vertical columns would caused the free ends of the floor trusses to drop and pivot where connected to the outer vertical columns.

The contraction of dropping floor trusses is the only credible explanation for the bowing of the outer vertical columns.

There is no evidence that columns were cut to initiate bending.

There is no evidence of CD period.