Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: WhatItIs

Congrats you posted literally every single thing that the narrative pushed

Why are you posting stills? That first picture looks to be the very top of the building after the rest of it fell. How does that change how the rest of the tower fell?

And the other ones look to be from the outside mesh that was designed to withstand a passenger aircraft. I would imagine some of the mesh would splinter off like that because there would be no reason to demo that.. These stills prove nothing..



As you can see it fell at free fall speed and you can clearly hear rapid explosions from squibs as it fell..

It's 2023 i'm sure you're more then capable to Google quotes please do so and then find a way to twist their literal words as im sure you will..

Yes some pictures of the cuts were taken weeks after but there also was many still frames that showed the cuts directly after the smoke cleared before the work crews stared to cut.

Here i'll even make it easy for yall



Do not reply to me unless you watch this video in its entirety

Why are you posting stills?

It is how they live with the psychological trauma of it. A lot of the stills from the scene are ones they claim is the core columns of the building. I have been over that before, there is just a hole in the ground where the core columns use to be, most of these just look like the outer edges that where last to fall.

As for the other images, I guess nothing would make sense from that perspective if all there was to work with was images of the event. To be fair, I have relied on other images at times to help try and relay some concept. For the most part, If images of the event or subsequent evidence cannot do it, nothing will.

originally posted by: tacoman101
a reply to: WhatItIs

Congrats you posted literally every single thing that the narrative pushed

Why are you posting stills? That first picture looks to be the very top of the building after the rest of it fell. How does that change how the rest of the tower fell?

And the other ones look to be from the outside mesh that was designed to withstand a passenger aircraft. I would imagine some of the mesh would splinter off like that because there would be no reason to demo that.. These stills prove nothing..

As you can see it fell at free fall speed and you can clearly hear rapid explosions from squibs as it fell..

It's 2023 i'm sure you're more then capable to Google quotes please do so and then find a way to twist their literal words as im sure you will..

Yes some pictures of the cuts were taken weeks after but there also was many still frames that showed the cuts directly after the smoke cleared before the work crews stared to cut.

Well. Look at that name calling. You can’t actually dispute a thing I actually posted. And you have to run to the cover of truth movement propaganda.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Screenshot, circle where all the active thermite is working on the still standing core, and post…

originally posted by: WhatItIs

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: tacoman101

Why do some still believe what they are told rather than finding their own common sense in the matter?

You mean people believe in what they are told by the talking heads of the truth movement. People marketing to a biased and un-discerning audience. An audience actually ignoring the actual physical evidence and sequence of collapse…

I was not told to believe anything. The moment i watched this happen live i thought it looks like a demolition and then i spent hundreds of hours going though videos and re watching everything and i came to my own conclusion..

How old are you? Were you even alive when this happened? If not then your "evidence" comes from 20 year old pushed disinformation websites pushed to the top of google.. It bears no weight to me.

a reply to: WhatItIs

What are you talking about? Where did i call you names?

Are you seriously asking me to know where possible thermite might of been placed on blurry 22 year old stills that show nothing? You have to be trolling..

originally posted by:

I was not told to believe anything.

What am I “believing” by referring to direct evidence relating to the WTC 1 and 2 cores. While you try to change the subject.

You can take your false “authority” of how old you are and put it with truth movement lies. Old enough to be in the military during 9/11. And had basic training with explosives.

a reply to: WhatItIs

DUDE what are you even talking about? That comment was in response to yours

"You mean people believe in what they are told by the talking heads of the truth movement. People marketing to a biased and un-discerning audience. An audience actually ignoring the actual physical evidence and sequence of collapse…"

Are you ok? seriously..

Not once have i changed any subject.. I've replied to every single one of your questions that i can.

Your proof are stills of the very top of one of the towers that fell into it self after the rest of the tower fell and pictures of the splintered outside mesh.. Hardly direct...

And i do not believe that you were in the military.. No respectful man would act as you currently are.

Good day sir.

originally posted by: tacoman101
The moment i watched this happen live i thought it looks like a demolition . . .

If only more people could believe their own eyes.

originally posted by: tacoman101

The moment i watched this happen live i thought it looks like a demolition .

Well. There is no evidence it was a controlled demolition.

There is no obvious awe inspiring sounds of explosions before WTC 1 and 2 move down. When you watch the close up of WTC 2 bow inward at the perimeter columns. There is no evidence of shrapnel being thrown out, no evidence shockwaves indicative of explosives working on steel columns.

originally posted by: neutronflux

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

Is it false there was measurable inward bowing of WTC 1 and WTC 2 perimeter columns before collapse?

Making dust can happen without explosives. Like a hydraulic demolition.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

NIST claims the floor trusses sagged and dragged in the perimeter walls.

No claim. It’s part of the video / photo graphic record.

With this scenario, the drag will be all inward. There is no great momentum force here to accelerate the material outwards 100's of feet from the destruction zone.

One. The columns tumbled outwards. Look at the lower left of the picture below.

Two. So how do billiard ball collisions result in change of directions?

Three. Please explain how a Newton’s cradle works.

The below was a hydraulic jack actuated collapse. Shows air pressure can push out stuff.

Why use stills. Because you can’t take screenshots of the video, circle evidence of explosives/the thermite. Then post the results.

You can only inject your option about evidence that doesn’t exist.

originally posted by: WhatItIs
Well. There is no evidence it was a controlled demolition.

Yes, there is.

Destruction of the World Trade Center North
Tower and Fundamental Physics

By David Chandler

B.S., physics, Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA
M.A., education, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA
M.S., mathematics, California Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA

Running Title: Downward Acceleration of WTC 1

Abstract . . .

www.journalof911studies.com...

originally posted by: tacoman101
a reply to: WhatItIs

And i do not believe that you were in the military.. No respectful man would act as you currently are.

Good day sir.

You mean when it comes to the truth movement making false allegations who murdered innocent civilians on 9/11. I always thought the US government was grossly neglectful concerning 9/11.

But…


Why wouldn’t any person be outraged by something like the cuts made on the WTC columns by construction workers during cleanup as being passed off by the the truth movement as evidence of thermite? Stating columns cut by construction workers as evidence of thermite is a blatant truth movement lie.

Has the truth movement ever acknowledged this and apologized?


Any normal person with understanding would call out the truth movement for such a lie. And acknowledge how the truth movement has killed its own credibility.

originally posted by: DevotedResearcher

originally posted by: WhatItIs
Well. There is no evidence it was a controlled demolition.

Yes, there is.

Destruction of the World Trade Center North
Tower and Fundamental Physics

By David Chandler

B.S., physics, Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA
M.A., education, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA
M.S., mathematics, California Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA

Running Title: Downward Acceleration of WTC 1

Abstract . . .

www.journalof911studies.com...

The study that stated that it might be thermite in a “journal” that was caught in pay to play scandals. Where the person that should have “refereed” the papers peer review was bypassed. And said the paper was crap. And the publishing of the paper was “peer” reviewed by individuals with ties to the truth movement and were consulted during the papers writing. With the people testing the dust never burned the dust in an inert atmosphere to show the chips could support a thermite reaction. But the chips were always burn during the experiment with supplied oxygen. While ignoring iron spheres are produced in other processes. Like welding, cutting during construction. And hydrocarbon fires like when jet fuel burns in a rust building with iron oxide based paint primer?

And that was from memory…

originally posted by: DevotedResearcher

originally posted by: WhatItIs
Well. There is no evidence it was a controlled demolition.

Yes, there is.

Destruction of the World Trade Center North
Tower and Fundamental Physics

By David Chandler

B.S., physics, Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA
M.A., education, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA
M.S., mathematics, California Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA

Running Title: Downward Acceleration of WTC 1

Abstract . . .

www.journalof911studies.com...

Sorry. Wrong paper. Where was this 17 page no computer modeling wonder published? And peer reviewed by whom?

a reply to: DevotedResearcher

The roof line of the North Tower of the World Trade Center is shown to have been in constant downward acceleration until it disappeared. A downward acceleration of the falling upper block implies a downward net force, which requires that the upward resistive force was less than the weight of the block.

www.journalof911studies.com...

Does the paper say anything about the core?

Added to clarify. Did the paper say anything about the center core columns. And did the paper try to make an effort to clarify when it was addressing the outside/perimeter cores. Vs the interior center core columns that were left standing after the floor system completely collapsed?

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.

originally posted by: WhatItIs
Sorry. Wrong paper.

You shoot from the hip, don't you?