Video & Evidence There Was No Controlled Demo

www.metacafe.com...

check this out..
no explosions prior to collapse
every controlled demolitions i have seen has multiple explosions just before the building comes down, in this video you can clearly see the column twist and fail. if thermite was used,you would see bright light coming from it like an arc welder, according to the theorists the explosives/thermite would have had to survive the aircrafts impact then 56 minutes of fire before detonating, this is so far fetched its laughable. on 10-26-2006 there was a 30 min.radio debate between leslie robertson (chief wtc engineer) and steven jones,available as a torrent and on ares (22mbs) mr robertson agrees that the planes impacts and fires collapsed the towers, he states 1 floor goes, the whole lot will go and that the towers were designed to fall in its own footprint. the towers were not built to withstand a deliberate impact by a plane doing 500mph,only a plane lost in the fog going at a slower speed. bin laden (an engineer) knew this and for that reason launched the attacks on the wtc. one of the most disturbing statements made by the conspiracy theorists is that the fires were not that hot,at 500 c centigrade steel loses 1/2 its strength , softens,buckles and fails. no need to melt. tower 1 fire was so hot that 200 people jumped rather then burn alive.

Watching the building twist before collapse is not a coincidence, it was this type of structural damage that really did cause the towers to collapse..

[edit on 13-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Really good find, this does not look controled demolition at all, I was one of the people that belived in control demolition, but I am having second thoughts after seeing this vid. Was this vid ever shown on tv or is it a brand new one ?

I have never seen it posted before, or seen this footage. It really does seem to debunk the CD theories.. For a CD of such magnitude the explosions would of had to be titanic..
I think this Video is great evidence, that backs up the official story. I started out a skeptic of the official story, but the more i study it the more evidence i find to back it up. Now i am not stating there was no information withheld, i am sure there was, in the interest of National Security and stability. I now believe the powers that be are fighting an almost hidden War, where some information at the moment needs to remain classified.

For those that do not know. The structural engineering in the WTC was unique in terms that its infrstructure was almost entirely endoskeleton. Meaning the explosions happened on the interior where the support beams were holding up all the floors.

AAC

We have the NIST and FEAM reports that state the buildings withstood the planes impacts. We have the NIST, firechief, and firemen reports that state the fires were not big enough or last long enough to cause the collapse.

So their had to be another source to cause the collapse of the towers, we know the incidenct commander decided to demo building 7.

You have clear video evidence that shows the impact area twisting causing total collapse...
Im afraid the more you look into the halfbaked CT's the more they look ridiculous, i know this wont get resolved here, but this video in my eyes is good evidence to back up the official line yet again. If people do really look hard enough they can see the BS for what it is..
A lot of you need to be careful where you point the finger, because this type of unpatriotic abuse will eventually be drawn up in the anti-terror laws..
As if the US would seriously authorize 9/11..
People insinuating such things in history would of been thrown in the tower and hung, drawn and quartered..
Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but when it can incite hatred against others and its own government, it can border on terrorism.

Oh thank god, it looks like you have completely confirmed the official story of the events of 9-11. It couldnt have been a controlled demolition if the buildings twisted a little, they would never do that. We can all go back to sleep now

Originally posted by twitchy
Oh thank god, it looks like you have completely confirmed the official story of the events of 9-11. It couldnt have been a controlled demolition if the buildings twisted a little, they would never do that. We can all go back to sleep now

I never said that is what i have done, but what it does do is add credibility to them, much more than your sarcasm.

If it was CD, the twist is an uncanny coincidence that it happened milliseconds prior to collapse.
If it was CD, there would of been massive explosions, noone would of been in any doubt to as what happened, but im afraid this did not happen.
Thankyou for your worthy contribution

Originally posted by Fowl Play
If it was CD, the twist is an uncanny coincidence that it happened milliseconds prior to collapse.
If it was CD, there would of been massive explosions, noone would of been in any doubt to as what happened, but im afraid this did not happen.
Thankyou for your worthy contribution

So please explain to us (that have not done as much research as you claim to have done) what casued the molten steel in the basements of all the buildings.

We have videos and photos showing the fires were burning out well before the towers collapsed. We have the firemen reports stating the fires were isolated. We also have the firechiefs stating that none of them believed the towers would completly collapse, they were only worried about the floors above the impact area if the fires would have burned for several more hours (which they didn't)

I'm sure there are plenty of smart people who've seen this and other such videos showing non-explosive buckling and still believe in some kind of demolition. I'm simply too ignorant on the issue to know for sure, and not too conversant with demo methods and evidence. Dunno why, I've just halfway chosen to stand back from this whole huge issue. FOr example - endoskeleton vs. core columns - we don't have consensus on such a core issue, that I'm aware of. Alleged blueprints are a major find, and old copies of books of its contruction hot items now.
Thank you for your contribution, FP. I don't have too much to offer here. Dunno even if its already been posted a million times. You'll get some debate for sure.

"NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface."
link
wtc.nist.gov...

I just don't see how the twisting, which I don't really see, proves natural collapse?

Also the thermate, or whatever, would be on the inner core columns not the facade, so you wouldn't see any explosions. They only had to take away the inner core, that held the majority of the vertical load, to collapse the towers.

I'd like to know how you explain the lack of resistance from undamaged columns etc...?

How did pieces of facade get ejected laterally up to 600ft?

What caused the concrete and everything else to be pulverised into a powder?

What caused steel and concrete to fuse together in what is known as the
WTC meteorite?

Why is the inner core not still standing if it was a pancake collapse, a theory which btw even NIST now rejects?

What caused the massive twisting and rotation of the top of WTC2, and what caused it to defy physics? (which it would have to have done of no energy other than impacts and fire was acting on it).

Why are there so many unanswered questions, if the govs official report stands up on it's own?

Why do people spend so much energy trying to make the official story stick if it stands up on its own?

Sry bud but you've got to try a whole lot harder than that...

Originally posted by Fowl Play
"NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

So your saying the witnesses that stated they saw molten steel (like the firemen, demo and excavation teams) are all wrong or lieing ?

I am not the one who has to prove what you say..
I am providing documentated evidence from an official report, that details the official story..
You are providing secondary information that is hearsay, allegedly taken from a person/s that are not experts in this field..
You prove that the official line is not correct with something more than secondary sources, and then possibly i may emalgumate it into my opinion..
You havent given anything??

What I see in that video is a zoomed in shot with no reference to the rest of the building's frame. It also coincides with the 'walking' of a building under controlled demolition.

The thermite that was used for the initial collapse was not to make a huge explosion, but to slice through the steel beams like a hot knife through butter. This was done inside the buildings structure, not on the outer parts.

The latter explosions as the building was coming down were to ensure the building fell all the way to the ground and demolish it completely. They would not be as noticable because the building's debris would be blocking most of the view.

It's just a series of timing to get the result you want in the demolition. Not all the explosives or charges were the same throughout the building. They each had a specific use.

Nice find.

Originally posted by Fowl Play
I am not the one who has to prove what you say..
I am providing documentated evidence from an official report, that details the official story..
You are providing secondary information that is hearsay, allegedly taken from a person/s that are not experts in this field..
You prove that the official line is not correct with something more than secondary sources, and then possibly i may emalgumate it into my opinion..
You havent given anything??

Well let me see how many ways i can prove the official story wrong using official sites.

1. How about we start with the fires not being hot enough to cause any of the WTC buildings to collapse from a NIST report.

wtc.nist.gov...

1) No WTC-7 steel was recovered or analyzed.

2) No unprocessed, intact floor trusses were recovered or analyzed.

3) No testing for explosives (or sulfidation or other residue of any kind) was performed.

4) Only 12 total core columns were recovered from WTC-1 & WTC-2 combined.

5) Of the recovered core pieces, none showed exposure to temperatures in excess of 250 C.

6) Of 170 examined areas on the perimeter column panels, only three showed exposure to temperatures in excess of 250 C and for one of these three forensic evidence indicated that the high temperature exposure occurred AFTER the collapse.

7) No recovered steel showed any evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 C for any significant time.

A total of 236 recovered pieces of WTC steel were cataloged; the great majority belonging to the towers, WTC 1 and WTC 2. These samples represented a quarter to half a percent of the 200,000 tons of structural steel used in the construction of the two towers. The NIST inventory included pieces from the impact and fire regions, perimeter columns, core columns, floor trusses, and other pieces such as truss seats and wind dampers.

The collection of steel from the WTC towers was sufficient for determining the quality of the steel and, in combination with published literature, for determining mechanical properties as input to models of building performance.

...

Of the 31 core floor truss connectors (core seats) recovered, about 90 percent were still intact, although many were extensively damaged. Only two were completely torn from the channel.

...

A coating on the SFRM prevented the loss of the SFRM in some locations on the perimeter columns. This coating appeared as a band of white features on the SFRM wherever two aluminum panels met on the exterior columns of the buildings, becoming visible when the panels were dislodged. This may be a coating applied to protect the SFRM from moisture infiltration at the aluminum panel joints, acting to preserve the SFRM even when the SFRM was knocked off both above and below those locations.

...

The pre-collapse photographic analysis showed that 16 recovered exterior panels were exposed to fire prior to collapse of WTC 1. None of the nine recovered panels from within the fire floors of WTC 2 were observed to have been directly exposed.

NIST developed a method to characterize maximum temperatures experienced by steel members using observations of paint cracking due to thermal expansion. The method can only probe the temperature reached; it cannot distinguish between pre- and post-collapse exposure. More than 170 areas were examined on the perimeter column panels ...

Only three locations had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 °C.

These areas were:

• WTC 1, east face, floor 98, column 210, inner web,
• WTC 1, east face, floor 92, column 236, inner web,
• WTC 1, north face, floor 98, column 143, floor truss connector

Other forensic evidence indicates that the last example probably occurred in the debris pile after collapse. Annealing studies on recovered steels established the set of time and temperature conditions necessary to alter the steel microstructure. Based on the pre-collapse photographic evidence, the microstructures of steels known to have been exposed to fire were characterized. These microstructures show no evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 °C for any significant time.

Similar results, i.e., limited exposure if any above 250 °C, were found for two core columns from the fire-affected floors of the towers.

[edit on 13-6-2007 by ULTIMA1]

M.I.T. professor of civil and environmental engineering Eduardo Kausel states:

I believe that the intense heat softened or melted the structural elements--floor trusses and columns--so that they became like chewing gum, and that was enough to trigger the collapse.

That statement only speaks for the area where the heat was. What does he have to say for the structure below the point of impact? That all should have been at near 100% structural integrity and would have collapsed long ago on its own under the building's weight.

I can go along with the top part of the building being weakend from the heat, but the sturdy lower structure would have stopped the (small by comparison) falling upper section in it's tracks and busted it to rubble, or made it fall to the side.

It sounds rediculous doesn't it? A building collapsing under it's weight? Seems like they would ban tall buildings.


[edit on 6/13/2007 by Spoodily]

This page totally debunks the thermite allegations, and in fact makes them look totally ridiculous.
www.debunking911.com...

Originally posted by Fowl Play
M.I.T. professor of civil and environmental engineering Eduardo Kausel states:

I believe that the intense heat softened or melted the structural elements--floor trusses and columns--so that they became like chewing gum, and that was enough to trigger the collapse.

Professor Shi Yongjiu, director of civil engineering department of Qinghua University and an expert on steel structure, guesses that the lower part of the WTC twin towers may got seriously damaged.

According to steel structure's mechanical nature, the towers shouldn't collapse as late as an hour later after the planes slammed into. What's more, it should be in a way to topple over gradually instead of crashing down as seen in videotapes. It looks more like a directional blast in doing the job of destruction, so he feels that huge damages must have been done at the lower part of the towers.

As seen on TV, the big fire, climbing higher and higher, is still more than 300 meters away from the base of the towers, not big enough to destroy the steels of the lower part.

He was surprised that a 40-storied supportive building beside the towers should collapse 6 hours later, for at that time the blast force by main towers should have been lost for a long time.