This will answer 99% of your questions about 9/11.

a reply to: nOraKat

Why use a model when you have the video?

The twin towers fell at the rate of free fall?

I bet you also think the towers fell through the path of greatest resistance?

You could never be more wrong.......

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.

The other columns buckled in areas relative to the jet impacts. Depending on with tower, 11 or 28 floors of building felling in to the building below the buckling. The falling mass stripped and sheared floor connections, leaving vertical columns in its wake. The vertical columns fell after losing the lateral support of the floor systems.

Any more false agreements by you?

a reply to: soulwaxer

Very accurate breakdown and follow up interview.

This is what I believe happened.

a reply to: nOraKat

Making iron spheres is not always dependent on a flame reaching the melting point of iron.

debunked-iron-microspheres-in-9-11-wtc-dust-as-evidence-for-thermite.t2523/

www.metabunk.org...

By Mick West
If you ignite some steel wool with a hydrocarbon flame, then you get lots of iron spheres, some of the same size as these microspheres. Note this is not from the flame melting the steel, but from the steel itself burning, and melting itself. This is only possible with a sufficiently large surface area to mass ratio - i.e. with very small or very thin particles.

Then add in the WTC was contaminated with iron spheres from welding and grinding.

So, please explain how iron spheres are the sole property of thermite. Iron spheres are just evidence of a process like welding, grinding, and the burning of industrial coatings containing iron oxide pigments.

More at

Why were there small iron spheres in the dust found on 9/11?
www.quora.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

How do you maintain your patience to deal with these people after 17 years?

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: neutronflux

How do you maintain your patience to deal with these people after 17 years?

If I had true patience, I wouldn’t bother.

But it is funny to watch the conspiracists rant over what they think should be their safe space to post BS unchallenged?

What is that list again?

The towers were brought down by fizzle no flash explosives with absolutely no evidence of cut columns? But buckling columns are visible in the video evidence.

Or painted on thermite? When mythbusters could not cut a 4000 pound suv in half, and barely cut through the roof with 1,000 pounds of thermite laying horizontal on the roof being channeled by bricks?

Or lasers and missiles with holograms that doesn’t explain the actual impact damage, jet wreckage, fireballs, and DNA left at the towers?

Or nukes that caused no detectable shockwaves, explosions, seismic activity, no contamination, and no detectable radiation above background.

Or the dustification of massive steel columns that some how left the less massive broken and bent floor trusses and floor connections behind?

Click here to learn more about this warning.

a reply to: Bernardo1871

What are you rambling about?

Again molten material can be lead, plastics, silver, solder, aluminum etc.....

There would be no pure molten anything.

Again. The pile was kept hot by a combustion process. Like how charcoal was made by burying burning wood.

If the temperatures was from nuclear reactions, people would have became ill on the spot. They would have died in hours. There would have been contamination everywhere. The items could be cooled because the combustion process could be stopped with water. Water cannot stop nuclear reactions. It can only shield radiation, and dilute contamination.

What do you not get about

Again, a mini nuke that is the size of a large suitcase is not going to keep over 1,000,000 tons of rubble hot for three months. It would take the amount and nuclear fuel concentration found in the Fukushima reactor by fission of a nuclear fuel. People would have literally turn violently ill and died working the pile in hours.

The spread thin fission products from a nuclear bomb detonation undergoing radioactive decay would not have the energy and concentration to heat the 1,000,000 tons of rubble period.

Why would the temperatures be from thermite. The thermite would have consumed itself during the collapse. Water would have not contol thermite reactions. Please show by thermal imaging and or by metallurgical evidence the steel was ever exposed to temperatures that thermite burns at. Or exposed to temperatures witnessed during a nuclear detonation.

a reply to: Bernardo1871

They must be using them mini nukes everywhere...

If firefighters cannot putout fires with water....

It’s no accident they use the term hotspot.

See how ridiculous the innuendo game is. And all the “evidence” you have is innuendo and falsehoods.

Norfolk Fire responds to hot spots at site of commercial fire

wtkr.com...

NORFOLK, Va. – Smoke was reported Thursday morning from a structure on 23rd Street that originally caught fire Wednesday afternoon.

Dispatchers reported that units responded to hot spots at The Desk Doctor, which was reported on fire at 3:15 p.m. Wednesday. Firefighters were pulled out of the building while working the fire.

Authorities called the fire under control around 4:41 p.m.

Firefighters Dousing Hot Spots at South Street Icon Bridget Foy's as Construction Equipment Digs Through Rubble

www.nbcphiladelphia.com...

Crews continue putting out hot spots from Dayton fire
www.wdtn.com...

Fire consumes commercial building, fells old radio tower on University Av. in Mpls.

m.startribune.com...

A large late-night fire consumed a commercial building along University Avenue SE. in Minneapolis and toppled a radio tower that was tethered to the structure, leaving firefighters to tend to hot spots after daybreak Thursday.

Firefighters Battle Hot Spots From Massive Warehouse Fire Overnight
baltimore.cbslocal.com...

Fire Burns Through Roof of Commercial Building in Downtown L.A.

ktla.com...

As of 8 a.m., firefighters had the upper hand but continued to pour water on the building to douse any stubborn hot spots

a reply to: Bernardo1871

And you got to love how the truth movement operates. Posting photos under false context

a-molten-metal-9-11-photo-is-just-burning-paper.t9982/

www.metabunk.org...


So it looks like AE911Truth has been incorrectly using another photos for many years. I noticed this by accident when looking at a similar photo posted yesterday for the anniversary of 9/11:

I saw the above (right) 9/11 thumbnail image on the NBC News home page, and it immediately reminded me of this image on an AE911 web page. www.ae911truth.org... (archive.is...)

Break

I wonder how many "suspicious" photos might be solved if only we were able to example all the photos that are held in private collections.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

a reply to: Bernardo1871

as for me, i'm just here to make fun of both 9/11 deniers like you, and of 9/11 troofers who deny the nuclear attack! :-)

So I was spot on.

a reply to: Bernardo1871

Sad to see you become unhinged, only have word play as “evidence”

Let’s go through the list again.

You claim nukes were set off at the WTC, but you cannot cite an exact time that should be clear by seismic and EMP data.

You claim a nuclear detonation destroyed other buildings at the WTC from the ground up. But there is so seismic data to support that, no evidence of a nuclear detonation, and the slurry wall / bathtub around the WTC remained intact and unbreached.

Radiation poisoning is very evidence within 24 hours of a radiation catastrophe. There was no cases of radiation poisoning.

You falsely parade WTC cancers as effects from WTC radiation. There was no abnormal radiation above background. The cancers are clearly linked to toxic chemicals from products of the fires. Firefighters across the country already have abnormal high cancer rates when compared to the general population.

It is impossible for the decay of fission products from a mini nuke detonation to cause describable heating of 1,000,000 tons of rubble.

The smoldering at the WTC was from a combination process. Not from a source of radiation as powerful and concentrated as Fukushima that would be needed to keep 1,000,000 tons of rubble hot.

Besides no evidence from surveys of radiation above background at the WTC. No evidence of victims of 9/11 dragging contamination to hospitals. There is no video evidence of a nuclear detonation. No audio evidence of a detonation. No seismic evidence of a nuclear detonation, much less a nuclear detonation that supposedly destroyed multiple buildings.

You claim radiation dustifide steel columns. Yet twin tower columns were identified. Lesser steel trusses and floor connections were not dustifed. Something like over 1,400,000 tons of steel and rubble was removed from the WTC. When asked, you cannot cite which marked columns from the towers were missing.

You have no explanation where the supposed contamination went to that would be on the scale of the Fukushima cleanup to keep 1,000,000 tons of rubble hot. And you don’t have any explanation why the equipment used to remove the rubble was not contaminated. Nor do you have an explanation way there was no observable effects of radiation or heating where the rubble was taken to.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Bernardo1871

as for me, i'm just here to make fun of both 9/11 deniers like you, and of 9/11 troofers who deny the nuclear attack! :-)

So I was spot on.

what do you expect? the videos have already been shared in the first post of the thread!

you have two of the best researches about the nuclear truth in two separate threads.

if you can't accept the nuclear truth, what can anybody do for you? no one can help an already conspiracy nuts to agree that richard gage and steven jones are disinformation agents,

and i sure imagine that none no-911-troofer, so none person who still believes the PsyOp narrative with hijackers, could switch from the PsyOP narrative to the nuclear truth.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

a reply to: soulwaxer

Thanks for the information.

I’ve put a few hours into this but what isn’t conclusive to me is if US Gov believed there was a valid reason to pull the towers (presence of nukes) but there was no planes... then how did they get into the buildings?