Trying to resolve 9/11

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Pictures from the actual collapse.

Collapse initiation

More on collapse initiation at:

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

When you want to have an intellectually honest debate, quote from the linked to thread at Metabunk with what you find untrue with supporting evidence.

Any who
The vertical columns did tumble in the wake of the falling floor masses that fell straight through the twin towers.

It's your job to present evidence, and present quotes that support your argument, so YOU can plow through pages of posts debating the issue, and find your best quotes, and post them.


You always try this garbage, asking me to go on a link, where piles of links are found, or pages of posts about something, and think I need to pluck out something or other, from the pile, and come back here, and present it to you.

The best part is when you end by saying something like 'when you want to have an intellectually honest debate', I should waffle through a pile of posts on a forum, to find something which I bring back to you, and show my evidence against it!!


If you really want an intellectually honest debate, it's helpful if you could show something, so I know exactly what it is you're asking me to debate!

Please stop throwing out sources with nothing from them, and asking me to sift through pile of crap for something, because that's YOUR responsibility.

So, before you post any more sources, start with the actual material you want to show from them....

Then we can have an honest debate, right?

Since you wanted an honest debate, can you tell me if anyone, anywhere, on Earth, has ever been able to replicate this collapse, with actual models?

I'd think a few honest scientists would've attempted to replicate this by now, but they never have, which means they probably can't replicate it, and they know that it can't be replicated, so they do nothing about it, say nothing about replicating the collapse, and hope nobody thinks about it anymore. At least if they don't mention it, they're still not liars, anyway!

The whole problem is when we know - or should know - that these collapses would, could, should be replicated with real world models, over and over and over again, using different materials, different scales, and so forth. Answers are found with real-world replication of a well-documented structure, obviously.

We already know every piece within these structures, how they were used, where they connected to everything else, and so on. We also know where the point of initial collapses were.

Why don't they explain how it actually collapsed, within an investigation into what caused the collapses, should be a clue to you, as well.

Simply ignore the entire collapse, you're supposed to be investigating, and let's all move along, folks!

What a joke!


By ignoring the whole thing they were supposed to investigate, many people said this was bs, a coverup, and they are absolutely right. This stinks to high heaven, and nobody can dispute that. It was all for show, a complete farce, throwing a piece of science into the slimy mess, and hoping it works.



All this is done to avoid the elephant in the room - the fact that such a collapse is completely impossible. That's why they ignored it completely, as if it was not relevant, not important, or whatever.


In fact, the collapse is all that matters here, and the other issues, while worth discussing, are simply a huge red herring to avoid the elephant in the room, which is the collapse itself.



Last question - do you honestly believe we could not be able to replicate this collapse with actual models?

a reply to: turbonium1

I am not going to do this circle jerk logic thing to feed trolls like in the flat earth threads. What is your belief in gravity again?

You totally ignore the video evidence. Then there is the the audio evidence, and the seismic evidence. Funny you keep going on about repeatability? When the audio, video, and seismic evidence captured data of two buildings built the same way collapsing from jet impacts and thermal stress. How’s that for repeatability on two recorded events.

With fire related failures on WTC 5


There is no evidence of the WTC being brought down by planted pyrotechnics unless you have actual physical evidence to cite? Not your tainted logic, and ignoring the recorded events.

The jest hit the twin towers. Let’s go with WTC 2. The WTC was known to have deficient fire insulation. The jet hit. Took out outer and inter vertical columns. Left floor panels hanging. The impact stripped fire insulation from the structure. The impact not only severed vertical columns. It cut water pipes and electrical services. The impact may have breached an elevator shaft and cut elevator cables. The jet impact and resultant fires made it impossible for any controlled demolition systems to survive to initiate the collapse as recorded on video. The fires heated up the floor trusses on the damaged floors. The floor trusses still boxed in on either end encounter resistance when they tried to expand in length from being heated. Being under load, it was easier for the floor trusses to droop downward. Upon cooling, the floor trusses contacted to cause
vertical columns on the damage floors to bow inward. Once the bowing became great enough, the columns buckled. The building above the buckling fell into the building below. The falling mass broke floor connections. There where vertical columns still standing after the complete collapse of the floor system. The vertical columns toppled from loss of later support provided by the floor system. The vertical were not cut.



If my account is soooo wrong, then outline what detailed conspiracy theory you believe is more credible. Then argue those points. What are the truth movement choices after 18 years?

Is it nukes?
Thermite ceiling tiles and paint?
Dustification?
Holograms with missiles and lasers?
Fizzle no flash bombs?
Fire extinguisher bombs?
Plasma?


Did I miss any?

So which one are going going to champion? If you cannot state which truth movement “theory” I should find more credible, take you circle logic circle jerk to another thread to taint.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Since you wanted an honest debate, can you tell me if anyone, anywhere, on Earth, has ever been able to replicate this collapse, with actual models?

This is the square cube law. If you are smart enough to understand it, then you would understand why it is a dumb idea to try and model the collapse with scale models.

en.wikipedia.org...–cube_law

Another thing, in all the truther models the failure mode is compression. In the actual collapse of WTC1&2 the failure mode was shear. (It sheared off the truss seats) Truthers aren't smart enough to figure this out, so their models don't represent the actual collapses.

The WTC1&2 collapses were cascade failures. If there was no such thing as cascade failures, we wouldn't have the phrase cascade failure.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Another angle cut piece. Three photographs same columns. Fractures and tears. Amazingly the bolts are still there.

Angle cut with no rust on it, and very little signs of weathering. I think it’s were a sample was taken after the steel was moved to the lay down area. Recent to when the video was filmed.

You still might want to read through this Metabunk thread?

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

You

- fireproofing still there though NIST claims it got removed.

At the areas of jet impacts were thermal stress failures resulting in buckling on those floors.

Now quote were NIST claims the hundreds, if not thousands, pieces of structural steel had all its insulation removed?

They're public photographs- a policy of fair use. I don't have to search the name of the person who took it. It not copyrighted protected. We all can see (least some of us can) it a photograph of the explosion on 9/11.

If your opinion is the Floors trusses are pulling in the perimeter walls, then why does everything inside the building propel outwards?
Can you locate examples, the history of fire, where the building breaks apart and forms huge dust plumes and steel girders and beam shot out horizontally from the area of the build?
According to the debunkers, the steel only lost strength because of fire- it didn't melt. So what the liquid pouring out of the towers? 
Hot Topic soup- it just another thing debunkers say to sound clever. You do not realize steel boundary layers will contain leftover marks from what caused the melting of the steel?
Guess what we have an official government-controlled theory the steel underwent steel sulfation. The Sulphur interacted with the atoms of the steel to melt steel. Literature printed by government sources The process requires the least temp of over 1000c plus the elementary sulfur content to even get that far. 

 Even the photograph I have shown there is no fire flames pouring out of the building when the tower exploded. Its fairly clear the heat generated from some other sources. Conspiracy theorists claim ( chemical substances or nuclear) devices were placed around the steel columns that caused the building to collapse. I'm open to that possibility.
That not true actually. The tower perimeter wall thin steel was stronger and came from Japan. The steel hat truss core was just thicker. 

Debunkers claim demolitions are nonsense- yet they ignore fire never brought down a steel-framed high rise before. They are basing their symposis around what they think possible. For most people, a controlled demolition explains everything that we see on video and explains why engineering institutions NIST lied about the failures and construction of the buildings. NIST even appeared at a conference in Aug 2008 and gave a presentation of their final draft of building seven collapse and at this conference they told the audience "free fall" is not a feature of progressive collapse. Debunkers completely ignore this and just accepted NIST lies about this later. Debunkers have mental difficulty and often just dismiss previous statements from them as if they are not important conclusions. 

a reply to: Hulseyreport

If my account is soooo wrong, then outline what detailed conspiracy theory you believe is more credible. Then argue those points. What are the truth movement choices after 18 years?

Is it nukes?
Thermite ceiling tiles and paint?
Dustification?
Holograms with missiles and lasers?
Fizzle no flash bombs?
Fire extinguisher bombs?
Plasma?


Did I miss any?

So which one are going going to champion? If you cannot state which truth movement “theory” I should find more credible, take you circle logic circle jerk to another thread to taint.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Conspiracy theorists claim ( chemical substances or nuclear) devices were placed around the steel columns that caused the building to collapse. I'm open to that possibility

Then create a logical argument with structured evidence.

Not randomly posted pictures with no context, and with noting but comments based on purposefully misleading innuendo.

The truth movement itself said the fires were no hotter than normal office fires. I guess that rules out thermite fueled fires. Welcome to the contradiction that is the truth movement.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Now. How would controlled demolition systems survive the jet impacts to initiate a collapse in WTC 1 and 2 on the floors of the jet impacts?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

If my account is soooo wrong, then outline what detailed conspiracy theory you believe is more credible. Then argue those points. What are the truth movement choices after 18 years?

Is it nukes?
Thermite ceiling tiles and paint?
Dustification?
Holograms with missiles and lasers?
Fizzle no flash bombs?
Fire extinguisher bombs?
Plasma?


Did I miss any?

So which one are going going to champion? If you cannot state which truth movement “theory” I should find more credible, take you circle logic circle jerk to another thread to taint.

 Steve Jones claimed he has unpublished data research belonging to USGS (US geological survey) and they according to him found melted Molybenium spheres in the WTC dust.. The USGS did not publish this research, and they kept it secret. I just curious why the truther movement has not published this data online? It a smoking piece of evidence to find melted Molybenium the temp where it was found needs to above 2500c and that beyond any temp that would occur during an office fire.
To reach those temps you need an external source of energy to place inside the building. The only two options i have it was caused by a small nuclear explosion or by some exotic chemical. 

a reply to: Hulseyreport

That’s not what I posted about. During the collapse of the twin towers, there is no evidence of thermite fueled fire. Do you have any evidence of thermite burning before and during collapse. With no why a thermite CD would have survived the jet impacts to initiate the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 as captured on video.

If radioactive reactions was keeping the pile hot, the radiation would be greater than what was recorded at Fukushima. People would drop dead in hours, or became violently ill with in hours at being at the pile.

a reply to: Hulseyreport


See any glowing molten steel on the uncut vertical columns?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

There is no evidence the vertical columns were cut.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Now. How would controlled demolition systems survive the jet impacts to initiate a collapse in WTC 1 and 2 on the floors of the jet impacts?

If you know anything about demolitions, a few going off doesn't set them all off. They are pre programmed with delays. A few going off early doesn't ruin the rest. Commercial demolition firms use duct wire because of its cheapest option. US military uses wireless/radio receiver devices to blow things up. 
In my opinion, they did not wire the building for demolition? Just my opinion they used small devices and strategically placed them around the steel columns. The device could be just a small mini-nuke or a container of chemicals that react in a fire. 

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Thats not what I said. The jet impacts cut outer and inner columns. Stripped insulation from the structure. Decimated floor panels. Cut electrical services. Breached elevator shafts and cut elevator cables in at least WTC 2. Then the wide spread fires.

There is no way a CD system, it’s wiring, and it’s electronics wound maintain its integrity to initiate the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 as captured on video. On the floors of impact. With there being no evidence of explosions, and no evidence of cut columns.

Collapse initiation of WTC 2 as the outer columns started to bow inward.


No evidence of detonations.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

That’s not what I posted about. During the collapse of the twin towers, there is no evidence of thermite fueled fire. Do you have any evidence of thermite burning before and during collapse. With no why a thermite CD would have survived the jet impacts to initiate the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 as captured on video.

.  dead in hours, or became violently ill with in hours at being at the pile.

Responders are all sick from exposure to whatever was in the building, some even have diseases that are linked to radiation sickness. Molten metal and molten steel are often found after a nuclear event. The whole point of using a low kiloton nuke is to reduce fallout. You want to keep it contained to an area. 

The evidence for thermatic reaction is the steel melted. Debunkers claim a toxic soup caused it that not right. 
Government source FEMA said it was caused by a 1000c temp and sulfur.  
Thermate- has sulfur
Explosives- has sulfur
Nuclear- Sulfur would be present. 
Steel has not got enough Sulfur content.
Drywall- does not explain it

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Thats not what I said. The jet impacts cut outer and inner columns. Stripped insulation from the structure. Decimated floor panels. Cut electrical services. Breached elevator shafts and cut elevator cables in at least WTC 2. Then the wide spread fires.

There is no way a CD system, it’s wiring, and it’s electronics wound maintain its integrity to initiate the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 as captured on video. On the floors of impact. With there being no evidence of explosions, and no evidence of cut columns.

Collapse initiation of WTC 2 as the outer columns started to bow inward.

No evidence of detonations.

Have you watched a movie where the marines demolition a wall of the enemy building?
They use timed devices that are set off remotely.
They would not wire the towers as it would take too much time and it be too noisy for workers in the buildings.
It makes no sense they would do this way when building occupied by people. 
Like i said a few explosions going off early, doesn't ruin the demolition job. They are devices with timers.

There plenty of evidence of blasts. I showed you pictures of fractures, tears and deformed steel at the dump sites.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

I am not taking about a movie. From the WTC video, audio, seismic evidence, is there any evidence of detonations with the force to cut steel columns? Or evidence of an over pressures event with the force to cut steel columns.

With no way a system of detention devices would survive the jet impacts and fires to initiate the collapse of WTC1 and WTC 2 in the floors with the most damage as captured on video.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Now. Would you actually cite physical evidence of WTC columns being cut by detonations?