The last WTC column, Column No. 1,001 B of 2 World Trade Center

So, molten rivers of steel? But silver and gold was recovered from the WTC? While no proof the pile was ever hot enough to support molten steel. With no frozen pools of steel at the WTC recovered, or sent for recycling?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

Indeed I saw pictures and read claims for many years on many sites, yet when I did a search to find that particular picture, minutes ago, it now says “done after”. That wasn’t always the case. So, in light of this new found information, I should probably eat my words, but seeing that this is a conspiracy site, I may be forgiven for thinking that perhaps this is just a cover story? Having said that, my experience with ATS is that there are some very clever and informed people residing here, so I rather state that “I must be misinformed”, until I see, read or hear evidence to the contrary.

Does that change my opinion about 9/11, not really. There are still a lot of strange anomaly’s, and expert opinions, like pilots- and engineers for 911 for instance.

Thanks for putting me straight!

a reply to: 2Faced

You mean like engineers like Richard Gauge from AE claiming cut columns by charges at the WTC? After being prove the columns he cited were cut during cleanup?

www.metabunk.org...

debunked-the-wtc-9-11-angle-cut-column-not-thermite-cut-later.t9469/

“and expert opinions, like pilots- and engineers”. Like at metabunk, Skeptics International, Eskeptic, Popular Science, implosion world, The scientists of LEDO that show there is no seismic record of CD, or the engineer that completed the study that is a signed deposition WTC 7 was brought down by fire related causes?

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 & 7 FROM AN EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT
By Brent Blanchard
August 8, 2006
c-2006 www.implosionworld.com
www.implosionworld.com...

9/11 and the Science
of Controlled Demolitions

www.skeptic.com...

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: fusiondoe
So how did WTC 7 fall, serious question that I can never find a proper answer for?

There is only best guesses.

But there are three different studies that conclude fire related collapse.

One study is a signed deposition for a lawsuit if you want to read through it.

www.metabunk.org...

other-wtc7-investigations-aegis-insurance-v-7-world-trade-company-expert-reports.t7112/

Boils down to vertical columns of a certain width and length are only stable up to a certain height. Levels of flooring add lateral support. Thermal stress caused floor structures to shift resulting in floor connections to breaking. Parts of the floor structures separated from the vertical columns. The loss of lateral support caused the vertical columns to buckle. Once the columns buckled, they offered negligible resistance. The thermal stress may have been from damaged or deficient fire insulation. The odd angles of floor connections in WTC 7 my have added to the problems of stress.

Thanks for this.

I am curious though, how did a fire even start at WTC 7?... the planes only hit the towers so the fire could not have been caused by the towers falling surely? Genuine question, not sarcasm. I am an Englishmen therefore never saw the towers fall in person, only on TV.... Will feel pretty stupid if somebody tells me WTC 7 was right underneath the towers

a reply to: neutronflux

Doubtful....would it pancake into dust?

originally posted by: dojozen
a reply to: neutronflux

Doubtful....would it pancake into dust?

Innuendo much.

Like the last column pulled from the WTC?

Why would there not be dust? There is dust from buildings brought down by earthquakes?

Would you like to quantify your innuendo. Steel in the WTC Vs the amount hauled off? Or the amount of building materials used in the WTC vs the amount actually hauled off. The amounts are available if you care to cite them, or would actual amounts and facts get in the way of your implied innuendo?

a reply to: dojozen

Anyway. What do you think would happen to floors covered in 4” of concrete and walls of drywall hit by 29 falling floors falling into them? With the falling mass growing with each floor it consumes?

Do you have video, audio, seismic evidence of detentions with the force to cut steel columns when there is video of columns buckling from bowing. Not evidence of columns being cut?

a reply to: dojozen

What is the little stop sign for? Stop using actual facts and examples that debunk the fantasy of planted charges at the WTC? Or stop asking for actual facts and evidence of CD when all you have is Innuendo.

But AE said too much dust.
But AE said fell to fast.
But AE couldn’t knock down there big box model with a small box model.
But AE had pictures they said cuts by thermite.
But AE is working on a WTC 7 study that is no two years late.

a reply to: fusiondoe

This aerial pic of the WTC might help in terms of seeing the proximity of WTC7 to the main towers.
The 3 main buildings get all the publicity but don't overlook the fact that the entire complex was wiped out that day.



Taking into account the '93 bombing, I get the gut feeling that the 9/11 attack's intent was to hit the towers with sufficient force to snap them at ground level causing them to fall like felled trees across the city causing unimaginable devastation and loss of life. Fortunately the buildings proved to be tougher than estimated.

Strong but not invincible.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
All the same old crap arguments. Until you can explain scientifically how the building could have fell so fast it doesn't matter what is the cause. People simply do not except demolition in spite of what the video evidence. We have no other video evidence, computer model, or experiments showing how a building could fall from fire. Buildings have never fell this way before. And never since.

The real crime is without proven good scientific explanations on how a fire can bring down a steel cement building then it will happen again. The building codes need to be updated. The cheesy superstitious explanations put forth by NIST are not good science. The basis of their conclusion was never given to the public for scrutiny. What NIST is promoting is delusional.

Drop forty five thousand tons onto a floor that can only support thirteen hundred tons of static load and what do you think is going to happen? This isn't rocket science. Sheesh

a reply to: neutronflux



if you cannot look at the footage and what remained...and tell it was a CD... ?

then you might want to see a doctor or stop seeing your current doctors...fantasy land.

where did all the bodies go and how did it all turn into dust?

Pancake theory, sounds good for breakfast, if you wash it down with some koolaid.

a reply to: 2Faced

Indeed I saw pictures and read claims for many years on many sites, yet when I did a search to find that particular picture, minutes ago, it now says “done after”. That wasn’t always the case.

and it still isn't.

you can still find that pic with captions along the lines as how can planes or office fires cut steel beams like this.

I may be forgiven for thinking that perhaps this is just a cover story?

Why not research and trace where the photo comes from, who took it and when it was taken and find accompanying pics from the same place and time an same photographer showing the beams being cut by workers cleaning the site.

Does that change my opinion about 9/11, not really. There are still a lot of strange anomaly’s, and expert opinions, like pilots- and engineers for 911 for instance.

Yes that is all nonsense to steer as many as possible away from asking and looking into why all the obfuscation from the Bush Admin.


Bush made a few speeches about be with us or the terrorists and one really interesting thing about conspiracy theories.

Yet, you have officials like Condi Rice saying they never imagined planes being used as weapons then leaked is scenarios drawn up about the Pentagon being attacked by hijacked airliners.

Bush and whats his name, Darth Vader...... Dick Cheney sitting together when questioned by the commission.

To many things that the Bush admin did to push confusion which eventually leads to questions of conspiracy all while Bush says not to listen conspiracy theories when its the actions and comments of the Admin in the days after that made sure conspiracies would run wild.

Once someone realized everything said and all the actions will point straight to the Admin having way more knowledge than they did, being warned from numerous sources in the years to months to weeks prior the event something had to be done to snow ball the conspiracy efforts.

So in come ideas like holograms, demolitions, etc.

I believe a documentary called In Plane Site was one of the first documentaries to make the rounds and make many that viewed it question 9/11.

Even to this day some of the disinfo/ misinfo is still parroted.

Dylan Avery I think is the guys name who created it with a few mates.

They say the formed the ideas from online forums But I have gut feeling they were lead or guided to make such conclusions.


Same goes for other conspiracies surrounding 9/11.

Old ATS member John Lear could have been a victim as well being lead to believe in holograms planes and pushing that.

there a quite a few.


Even controlled demolition is really stupid when one can watch an compare controlled demolitions to how the towers fell and where the point of collapse starts.

Its a truther saying that 3 buildings fell with only 2 plane impacts in New York that day so that points to demolition.


Yet, viewing controlled demolitions it becomes clear where the demolitions starts and with a bit of logical thoughts it makes sense.


The you look at the the twin towers, both initially collapse at different levels from each other and both are initiate collapse from way way higher up than all other controlled demolitions.

a reply to: dojozen

if you cannot look at the footage and what remained...and tell it was a CD... ? then you might want to see a doctor or stop seeing your current doctors...fantasy land.

the pics are there in your post.

what other controlled demolition ever, and I do mean ever, has started from the middle of the building?

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: dojozen

if you cannot look at the footage and what remained...and tell it was a CD... ? then you might want to see a doctor or stop seeing your current doctors...fantasy land.

the pics are there in your post.
what other controlled demolition ever, and I do mean ever, has started from the middle of the building?

It started in the basement, is my understanding or recollection of events, by witnesses...

For a building to disintegrate and for everything in it to be turned to dust, including, people, concrete/cement reinforced with mesh wire, all that glass, all the furnishings, ...talking everything essentially pulverized and then we have all that the steel material.

One thing, that did not get turned into dust, was one of the alleged hijackers passport...something that should be clue #1, that the investigation is also being staged.

The demolition technique was not standard, with exception of WTC 7 being standard CD.

The implosions of the the twin towers, can watch floor by floor...being CD...

The floor or sections initiated at, can be anywhere, could have been done all at th same time and not in sequence.

a reply to: dojozen

It started in the basement, is my understanding or recollection of events, by witnesses...

you have the pics in the post I am replying to that shows where the collapse starts.

There are numerous videos of the collapse of both buildings.

For a building to disintegrate and for everything in it to be turned to dust, including, people, concrete/cement reinforced with mesh wire, all that glass, all the furnishings, ...talking everything essentially pulverized and then we have all that the steel material.

Ah so have a tell others about fantasy land because you want them to join you?


How did everything turn to dust?

You have a photo showing a lot of dust but no where near everything turning to dust in that post as well.

Are you a child that cannot speak properly and need to over exaggerate everything?

I guess that would explain why you go from being confident about demolition then in reply you say its your recollection of events which when read means you are not sure.

One thing, that did not get turned into dust, was one of the alleged hijackers passport...something that should be clue #1, that the investigation is also being staged.

One thing?

IN the photo in your post there is millions of things, billions of things that haven't turned to dust.

The demolition technique was not standard

and you know this how?

Before you said it was almost impossible not to see its a controlled demolition and one must be in fabtasy land if they cannot see it.


Then you lose confidence and say its your recollection

to now saying its wasn't a standard demolition.


Can you get your lies and delusions to match, please?

It helps you look less like a fool.

a reply to: dojozen

It started in the basement, is my understanding or recollection of events, by witnesses...

Your whole premise is wrong.

The collapse of WTC 1 started 11 floors down from the top. The collapse of WTC 2 started 29 floors down from the top. The collapse was initiated in the areas of the jet impacts and fires making it impossible for a CD system to maintain is integrity to initiate.

This is the collapse initiation of WTC 2 in the video in the link below.

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

No evidence of detonations with the force to cut steel columns. No evidence of a shockwave to cut steel columns. No seismic evidence of detonations with the force to cut steel columns.

Below is an actual CD in the link

Second Tallest Building ever imploded
m.youtube.com...

Notice the loud and echoing detonations that are missing from the collapse of the towers?
Notice the detentions are so loud it made the camera person jump. Notice the flashing. Notice how the echoes are heard over the noise of collapse.

Now, please post evidence of detonations with the force to cut steel columns at the WTC.

I can cite video of columns buckling. Where is the video of cut columns?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

one pic was wtc7 being CD.

Video above might help you view more of what happened.

Do you work for NIST by chance?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

Notice how conspiracists want to talk about dust, cellphones, pile temperature, but avoid the video and audio of the actual collapse initiation of the towers. Then they want modeling, when the collapse is on actual video / pictures from multiple angles?

a reply to: dojozen

I thought you wanted to talk about the towers? Now you want to change the topic? Typical conspiracist. Always demanding answers that “debunkers” always answer, but blatantly ignores the questions asked of them.

a reply to: dojozen

Where did the collapse of the towers initiate?