The weapons of 9/11

originally posted by: GLRockwell

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: GLRockwell

How am I moving the goal post. BECAUSE YOU DONT DEBATE ME HEAD ON.

My post are constant. CONSTANT ASSUMPTIONS

The delusion the WTC was brought down by planted pyrotechnics (explosives/thermite) is dead on arrival. BASED ON WHAT AND WHOM? YOU?

Again. The controlled demolition systems would have never survived the jet impacts and fires. Especially for the twin towers where the collapse of each tower was initiated in the areas of the jet impacts. AGAIN YOU DONT KNOW THAT. YOU HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN CONSTRUCTION NOR DEMOLITION. YOU JUST DONT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT #ING FACTUAL PART? FOR SOME REASON YOU CANT ACCEPT THAT, HENCE WHY YOU HAVE TO MOVE THE GOAL POST AWAY FROM THAT #ING FACT.

There is no indication the cores were cut by explosives or thermite since the core columns fell after being stripped of the floor system loosing lateral support, and tumbled down. BOX COLUMNS FROM THE CORE ARE NOT ACTUAL COLUMNS . WATCH THE VIDEO I POSTEDIN THE PREVIOUS PAGE. BY NOT ENGAGING THE VIDEOS I PRESENT IS MORE PROOF YOU DEFLECT.

[pic]ul5d0ec807.gif[/pi
Have I changed my argument? ONE CAN MOVE THE GOALPOST WITHIN THEIR ARGUEMNT . THATS WHAT YOURE DOING.

YES YOU HAVE

WATCH THE #ING VIDEO
www.youtube.com...

Why. You can clearly see the core columns feel last from loss of lateral support. Not from being cut.

a reply to: GLRockwell

Here. I’ll help you out more.




The moment the drooping l floor trusses cooled and starting pulling on the outer columns. Leading to the inward bowing and buckling that started the collapse of the building above the impacts zone.

No indication of any explosives setting off. No indication of demolition shrapnel being ejected in a building not set up to capture shrapnel.

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h.

This was just from a 10 story building

Canberra Hospital Implosion 1997

m.youtube.com...

There is zero evidence explosives cut core columns before building movement of the part of the building above the impact zone into the building below for the twin towers.

a reply to: Salander

NO NO Not this stupid crap again ......

You are aware that no radiation was detected at the WTC site, both during the collapse and afterwards

That some 20 people INSIDE THE BUILDINGS survived the collapse without any sign of radiation injury, Physical injuries
caused by the building collapse Yes Radiation injuries No

That even the smallest nuclear weapon fielded, WK54 caused lethal radiation for 1/4 mile around Why no radiation injuries ??

Also The NYC OEM had a man on site to measure any radiation just in case

Because of the earlier bombing of WTC in 1993 and possibility that terrorists would "salt" their bomb with radioactive materials creating a so called "dirty bomb" (RDD Radiological Dispersion Device) it assigned a health physicist
with sensitive radiation measuring equipment. Named Richard Borri he arrived at WTC South Tower collapsed, just avoiding being caught in the collapse

He was able to measure the area and detected no radiation

Here is excerpt from article about his activities that date

The original has been lost on the internet, this except is from a post I was able to find in the ATS archives

Tests for a ‘dirty bomb’

A major concern was that terrorists could have unleashed a so-called “dirty bomb,” an explosive device containing radioactive compounds like cesium.

Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department’s office of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way to work when the first tower was hit.
.
“While I was walking down Church Street, with all my instruments, I came within 1000 feet of the South Tower, and unfortunately the building came down,” says Borri, sounding every bit the unruffled scientist. “It’s a good thing I walked slowly.”

How does one continue on one’s mission without getting distracted by such details as a 110-story building comes down in front of you? “You concentrate on what you need to do,” says Borri, who simply walked amid the vehicles and victims covered with layers and layers of soot, “taking samples off the people coming out of the building.”

The high-tech gadget he carried, one of the few available in the United States, is far more precise than its century-old cousin, the Geiger Counter.

Borri checked the World Trade Center site for signs of radiation before and after the collapse of the buildings. Radiation could have originated in industrial radiology sources, such as the installing beams of the huge office buildings, which may have contained some radioactive elements from x-rays taken, and from depleted uranium used in ballasts in aircraft wing tips (such counterweights in airplane wing tips give the most weight for least volume, says Borri). It might also be left from any medical or dental offices.

’

Also FDNY HAZ MAT 1 checked the area and was there for days as were other federal, state, local agencies

None of them were able to detect any radiation from a mythical nuclear device

a reply to: GLRockwell

You

NO # SHERLOCK, YOUR EVIDENCE IS THE EXACT SAME RETARDED APPROACH LIKE THE NIST REPORT.

Then provide actual evidence of steel worked on by pyrotechnics at the WTC. You can’t, because there wasn’t.

You

THATS BECAUSE YOU DONT KNOW ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO TOTAL DEMOLITION SYSTEMS. THIS IS WHERE YOU FAIL.

I know enough to know jet impacts that took out vertical columns, floor pans, leave a big hole in the building, took out elevator service, and electrical service is also going to take out a controlled demolition system.

And that the twin towers were not prepared to capture demolition shrapnel with traps and water barrels. In fact. Big gapping holes from the jet impacts where the collapse of each tower began.

So stuff like this should have occurred.

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h.

This was just from a 10 story building

Canberra Hospital Implosion 1997

m.youtube.com...

There is zero evidence explosives cut core columns before building movement of the part of the building above the impact zone into the building below for the twin towers.

You

ITS NOT INSULTS, THEYRE TRUTHS ABOUT YOUR AGENDA AND YOUR INTELLECT.

Your the one that cannot make your case.

YEA I DO HAVE ,MANY ,BUT THIS # STAIN SITE DOESNT ALLOW ME TO UPLOAD THEM.

Even I can figure out how to upload pictures. What’s that say about your intellect. Or you just have the same old pictures repeatedly debunked, or explain with real facts and physics.

You

THAT^ IS WHAT YOU CALL DEFLECTION.

No. I state clearly how the towers fell. And WTC 5 shows the structures were susceptible to fire related structure failures.











What’s that lie you keep going on about no investigation at the WTC?

How was over 18,000 pieces of human remains recovered?

You cannot state what pyrotechnics were used, how many were used, were the collapse of each tower started, and you cannot provide proof steel was worked on by pyrotechnics. And explain how the demolition systems would maintain there integrity through jet impacts and fires to actuate.

You

YOURE A WEAK HUMAN

False statement.

You

HENCE WHY YOU WHINE ABOUT OTHERS WHO COMPLAIN OR INSULT. BUT IT MAKES SENSE

At least my post have cited evidence, logic, based on actual physics of explosives and jet impacts.


You

HENCE WHY YOU WHINE ABOUT OTHERS WHO COMPLAIN OR INSULT. BUT IT MAKES SENSE

That the cores were not cut. Fell last. And there is no evidence the cores were worked on by pyrotechnics. When it’s right there in the video evidence?



You

AND EVEN WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE INTERNET YOURE STILL SUBJECTIVE. TRULY PATHETIC.

Your the one that cannot make their case? And can’t post a picture. What’s that say about you.

a reply to: GLRockwell

Before you go on some rant about too much dust and squibs.

Dust and such from a hydraulic initiated collapse by having the upper portion of the building fall into the building below.





I can find the link to the video if you want to keep going..

a reply to: GLRockwell

Start simple. Where did the collapse of WTC 1 initiate. Where did the collapse of WTC 2 initiate.

a reply to: neutronflux

Only fools buy into official government narratives, from the assassination of JFK, RFK and MLK to 911 to Gulf of Tonkin to Covid 19. Sorry.

a reply to: Salander

This this should be easy for you…

Start simple. Where did the collapse of WTC 1 initiate. Where did the collapse of WTC 2 initiate.

As supported by the physically, photographic, video, and audio evidence.

a reply to: Salander

I’ll give you a hint. Has nothing to do with your BS delusion nukes were used at the WTC.

a reply to: neutronflux

Your efforts to deflect from the subject at hand by showing meaningless pictures and asking silly questions are typical and consistent for a person still attempting to defend and indefensible story 20 years after that story has been crushed by the facts and evidence.

For your official story to be true, it is necessary to suspend many rules of physics and bury one's head in the sand.

a reply to: Salander

The topic of this forum is and thread are 9/11.
Not what-aboutisms concerning JKF

After 20 years. People like you cannot answer the simplest of questions concerning the actual physical and documented evidence of the WTC.

People pushing stupid delusional truth movement rhetoric as the only possible explanation like nukes, and the inability of the truth movement to police the craziness out of itself, killed the credibility of the truth movement.

I welcome actual debate of the WTC collapse. Just tired of people using the same tired debunked truth movement lies.

It’s like people pushing items like nukes at the WTC wanted to kill what little credibility the truth movement had. Things that make you pause and think.

I ask again.

Start simple. Where did the collapse of WTC 1 initiate. Where did the collapse of WTC 2 initiate.

As supported by the physically, photographic, video, and audio evidence.


I’ll give you a hint. Has nothing to do with your BS delusion nukes were used at the WTC.

Everything from the cited radiation surveys that found no radiation above background. To the basses of the core columns had to be cut from their foundations with no signs of being exposed to high extreme high heat. Not being exposed to sources of radiation like a nuclear device.

Why use nukes if nukes are unnecessary?


Nanothermite charges on the 2 floors above, and 2 floors below the impact site makes enough sense.

NIST's pancake collapse has solid physics to it, but ONLY if 2 or 3 floors of unmitigated free fall were used to initiate it. (The "hammer effect") Steel columns naturally giving way under the heat, should have lead to a padded collapse of the floors, not a sudden one.


But after that, the gravitational potential energy of the building materials was substantially more energy than what was needed to overcome "chemical energy of deformation" required to destroy the floors below, so long as the horizontal trusses were being destroyed first (by falling debris). Collapsing at near free fall speed makes sense if the energy of the fall is really a lot more than the energy of resistance.

This isn't true in smaller buildings. It's only true of really big ones.



Also using nanothermite on only the floors near the point of impact would explain why the thermite samples recovered for Dr. Jones to test, were found in places that were high off the ground and a reasonable distance away from the Towers themselves. When the collapse began, and those first few floors were rapidly crushed, the air escaping out the side would be pushed with tremendous force. It would blow dust from inside that space outward to a far distance, and an (initially) high starting point, which could carry it pretty far away.


But what really sewed it for me, was when I looked at who had rented the spaces where the impacts happened, and how that was laid out.

I figured if multiple tenants owned the floor space, it would be too hard to get them to let a demolition tech into their space to rig the explosives. But if only one tenant owned all the surrounding space, it would be fairly easy, so long as someone working there provided an excuse.

Fuji bank owned 4 floors of one building, and the plane hit dead center. Between the 2nd and 3rd floor.

Lerner MClennon owned 9 floors of the other building, and the plane hit the 5th floor.

So one excuse per building, to set the charges.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

You

Nanothermite charges on the 2 floors above, and 2 floors below the impact site makes enough sense.

I know enough to know jet impacts that took out vertical columns, floor pans, leave a big hole in the building, took out elevator service, and electrical service is also going to take out a controlled demolition system.

You know. The jet’s left big old holes where the charges should have been.

You

NIST's pancake collapse has solid physics to it, but ONLY if 2 or 3 floors of unmitigated free fall were used to initiate it.

One. Two late. Richard Gauge and the majority of the truth always pushed the “big box” above the impact zones couldn’t “smash the larger box” under the impact zones. The truth movement as majority have ignore the core columns fell last. And the falling mass above the impact zones strip the floor system leaving the core columns standing in its wake to tumble from loss of lateral support.

Two. It wouldn’t have to be “free fall”. Just a mass of sufficient size to ever load the floor system to strip them from the core columns. Which is what happened.

Three. The moment of the inward bowing of WTC 2. With the bowing showed in the picture below.



No visible sparking and flashing. If your saying the thermite acted like an “explosive” then your still at:

No sounds indicate of charges creating a pressure waves with the force to cut steel columns.

And that the twin towers were not prepared to capture demolition shrapnel with traps and water barrels. In fact. Big gapping holes from the jet impacts where the collapse of each tower began.

So stuff like this should have occurred.

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h.

And if your claiming the charges only burnt through the columns. Then the molten ends are being pressed together under load with the risk of cold welding the ends together. And you would still need kicker charges to misaligned the columns to achieve the free fall you claim was needed.

Finally, the columns where not cut. They were buckled / bent, or welds broke.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Why or why not use nukes is irrelevant.

The point is that forensic evidence abounds that nuclear events took place that day.

Satellite pictures, melted steel, huge lateral forces ejecting massive pieces, humans sick with radiation poisoning and much more show nuclear events played out that day.

a reply to: Salander

You

Why or why not use nukes is irrelevant.

No. Why would they use nukes in you delusion. Where would they get them. How and where were they be placed.

The point is that forensic evidence abounds that nuclear events took place that day.

A blatant delusional falsehood. There is zero evidence of Nukes at the WTC.

Satellite pictures,

Really? Cite and quote.

melted steel,

Sigh. And again…

If you argument radioactivity kept steel hot, then people would have dropped dead within an hour at the WTC site from radiation poisoning

And. Again…

The pile was sprayed with water liberally and without caution for weeks. Know what happens when water hits liquid metal. It causes violent steam “explosions” that throws liquid metal.

(and if radiation was keeping the steel hot, then water would have not stopped the nuclear reaction. There would have been millions of gallons of contaminated water.)

I have never seen any evidence the people working the pile where ever afraid of spraying water on the smoldering pile (like the process that makes charcoal) out of fear of violent steam reactions, nor seen any reports of violent steam reactions from water hitting liquid metal.

——-
Then how were the nukes deployed in you nuke delusion?

Cores of WTC 1 and WTC 2 fell last?



(As far as “ huge lateral forces ejecting massive pieces” no. The pieces of structural steel simply tumbled outward. See photo above)

And the bases of the core columns had to be cut from the WTC a solid foundation.



You

humans sick with radiation poisoning and much more show nuclear events played out that day.

What cases? Now your just making crap up.

There is this?

Male firefighters have an increased risk of prostate cancer

www.prostate.org.au...


Firefighters are potentially exposed to a range of chemicals during the course of their work. This includes mixtures of smoke, toxic gases, fumes and compounds formed due to high temperatures. These contain many known and potential carcinogens – cancer-causing substances. Whilst firefighters often wear protective and breathing gear to reduce their exposure, there is still some risk. If firefighters are exposed to cancer-causing substances as part of their jobs, then it’s possible that they have increased risks of some cancers.

The truth movement is sick and absolutely shameless to exploit known increases in cancer rates among first responders that are caused by chemical exposure and have nothing to do with radiation.

originally posted by: neutronflux

NIST's pancake collapse has solid physics to it, but ONLY if 2 or 3 floors of unmitigated free fall were used to initiate it.

One. Two late. Richard Gauge and the majority of the truth always pushed the “big box” above the impact zones couldn’t “smash the larger box” under the impact zones. The truth movement as majority have ignore the core columns fell last. And the falling mass above the impact zones strip the floor system leaving the core columns standing in its wake to tumble from loss of lateral support.

Two. It wouldn’t have to be “free fall”. Just a mass of sufficient size to ever load the floor system to strip them from the core columns. Which is what happened.

Yeah, it's true that cutting the horizontal supports was the key to the building falling. Without those the vertical columns would be wobbly because they're composed of many beam stacked on top of each other and bolted together. The bolts wouldn't hold up against any lateral wobbling.

However the top box still needed to build up speed before it would be able to do that.

If the top box had gradually descended until it came to rest on the lower one, the lower one would have held it up.

Instead, the debris from above was able to get a "running start" by falling unopposed for 10 to 30 feet or so before meeting its first obstacle, which it immediately destroyed, creating more debris, which would go on to hit more obstacles and destroy them, creating more debris.......... etc.

Three. The moment of the inward bowing of WTC 2. With the bowing showed in the picture below.

So, the thing you have to understand about building 2 is that building 2's fire was a highly lopsided fire. Nearly all the plane's fuel and resulting fires ended up being only on the side where you see that bowing.

In fact, several people who had been initially located in the floors above, managed to safely walk down the stairs on the cooler side of the building, and made it to safety. That's how lopsided it was.

Building 1's fire, on the other hand, made it all the way around and burned fairly evenly throughout the whole floor. It was about 20 minutes away from running out of fuel when the collapse began.

No visible sparking and flashing. If your saying the thermite acted like an “explosive” then your still at:

No sounds indicate of charges creating a pressure waves with the force to cut steel columns.

And that the twin towers were not prepared to capture demolition shrapnel with traps and water barrels. In fact. Big gapping holes from the jet impacts where the collapse of each tower began.

So stuff like this should have occurred.

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h.

And if your claiming the charges only burnt through the columns. Then the molten ends are being pressed together under load with the risk of cold welding the ends together. And you would still need kicker charges to misaligned the columns to achieve the free fall you claim was needed.

Finally, the columns where not cut. They were buckled / bent, or welds broke.

I am thinking they were used to cut the beams, rather than used as explosives, but adding kicker charges wouldn't be very difficult.

I spent a summer installing satellite systems for Dish Network once. One thing I can tell you about the times I went into peoples' crawl spaces under their homes is this: no one ever came down and checked on me. Not once.

If the demolition tech who was installing the charges were able to bluff his/her way into being allowed access to the crawl spaces, then once they were in they would be free to set things up as carefully, and intricately as they desired with no risk of being caught.


But I'm only thinking this was done to 4 floors out of over 100. The overwhelming majority of beams left in the rubble would not show any signs of cutting, because the overwhelming majority of beams were not cut. They broke the way NIST says they broke, when they were struck by falling debris that was falling at high velocity due to having been allowed to fall for 10 to 30 feet at free fall speed before making initial impact.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Why or why not use nukes is irrelevant.

The point is that forensic evidence abounds that nuclear events took place that day.

Satellite pictures, melted steel, huge lateral forces ejecting massive pieces, humans sick with radiation poisoning and much more show nuclear events played out that day.

If you were pulling off a heist like this one, would you use a method that was more complicated than it needed to be?

There's already about 20 or 30 ways they might screw up and get caught. Smuggling a nuke into the middle of NYC just ............ seems like an unnecessary risk to take.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

You

Yeah, it's true that cutting the horizontal supports was the key to the building falling.

There is no proof they were cut. The truth movement hasn’t made its case in 20 years.

but adding kicker charges wouldn't be very difficult.

And yet there is no evidence they were ever installed in a tower designed to maximize rental space, no indication they ever actuated.

Again…



The moment the drooping l floor trusses cooled and starting pulling on the outer columns. Leading to the inward bowing and buckling that started the collapse of the building above the impacts zone.

No indication of any explosives setting off. No indication of demolition shrapnel being ejected in a building not set up to capture shrapnel.

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h.

This was just from a 10 story building

Canberra Hospital Implosion 1997

m.youtube.com...

There is zero evidence explosives cut core columns before building movement of the part of the building above the impact zone into the building below for the twin towers.

You

I spent a summer installing satellite systems for Dish Network once. One thing I can tell you about the times I went into peoples' crawl spaces under their homes is this: no one ever came down and checked on me. Not once.

And what does that have to do with installing a controlled demolition system on columns surrounded by valuable rental space in tower on multiple floors with stationed security and bomb sniffing dogs, charges that had to survive jet impacts that left big holes where the CD system should have been, fires, and no indication of demolition shrapnel being ejected, and no demolition shrapnel recovered from the injured and the human remains, with no evidence of steel worked on by pyrotechnics especially from the columns from the areas of jet impacts and collapse initiation, with no indication of over pressure events from charges setting off, and no loud booms indicate of a pressure wave to cut nor misaligned columns, and no seismic evidence.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

You

But I'm only thinking this was done to 4 floors out of over 100.

But that is not what the lead truth movement organization Architects and Engineers have been saying for twenty years. Their argument is that all the building columns under the impact zones had to be cut floor by floor to achieve the witnessed rate of collapse.