Video & Evidence There Was No Controlled Demo

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by SpaceBits
sorry but a hollow alluminum plane sliceing into heavy Iron suport beams and cement floors just doesnt compute to an open mind.
If this were the case then the govenment is waisting money building bunker buster missles when they can just use old air linners.

Airliners aren't exactly built to hit a solid wall of steel, and the Twin Towers weren't exactly a solid block of steel (not to mention that there is hard proof both pics and videos that the plane didn't exactly bounced off). If you seen what the building looks like, its hollow as well.

As mentioned before that if you can make water cut through steel, why doubt aluminum cutting through steel?

[edit on 22-6-2007 by deltaboy]

well i never said it was a solid wall, i said it was an exoskeleton re-inforced with cement. I tried to look up the PSI for the water cutter(cant find it), but anyways it's huge. and at that PSI you still need a fine pin hole for the water to come out of like a laser... if the hole in the water cutter tip is a hair to big... it cuts nothing. I have used and tested water cutters in my profession and they are amazin but, can not be compaired to an alluminum plane.
and in comparison to a 500mph alluminum hallow plane, the PSI of the water cutter would probly put that plane at about 900/1000mph.

Not to mention that all the fuel in the planes were spent after the first 2 minuts of impact, the only things on fire after that where the building itself and that what was flamable inside the building , like wooden desks and plastics. Hardly hot enough to melt mettal.

as for the my thermite/mate therey i based it on several things.

1) a picture of an emergancy vehicle that was said to have had somthing heavy land on it. but it wast so, beacuse when something like that falls on vehicle it pops out the tires and the suspension, yeat these were all in tack.
only the top part of the vehicles packed near one of the towers looked more like it had been melted by acid or molten lava. I really wish i remembered where i saw this picture.

2) after the smoke cleared from GZ, amature video on youtube even show some of the center suport colums cut perfectly on a 45 degree angle, no one had time to do that while the building was comming down.
It had to have been done before or during the colaps. wich indicates help bringing the buildings down.

3) after 2 months of trying to clean up GZ the fire fighters still claim that GZ was still too hot to pour water on it or it would just cause steam and no one would beable to see anything, so they had to worked in with the heat.

[edit on 22-6-2007 by SpaceBits]

and one other thing... these buildings werent completely hallow they allso had a center core colums, these were even more thick and dence in comparison to the exoskeleton.

this demo expert calims that if it fell due to wait it would have given out at the bottom floors first and not the top floors.
Controlled Demolition Expert and WTC7 (original subtitles)

WTC building meterial
this video even showes the cut beams at GZ after the smoke setled.
WTC Core

If anything this proves that explosives were used. If that corner gave way first then the whole top part of the building should have toppled in that direction. Is this not completely logical? Explain to me how, when one side of the building fails, the mass it was previously supporting falls directly down at 90 degrees to the ground, through the path of most resistance.

Originally posted by SpaceBits


this demo expert calims that if it fell due to wait it would have given out at the bottom floors first and not the top floors.
Controlled Demolition Expert and WTC7 (original subtitles)

ive always said that a top down demo is POSSIBLE, but NOT covertly, it would take a LOT of demo becuase you dont have the mass of the whole building doing the work for you.


its long but read this

(yes guys im posting that link again because im simply too lazy to retype stuff ive already posted in great detail)

Originally posted by Damocles

ive always said that a top down demo is POSSIBLE, but NOT covertly, it would take a LOT of demo becuase you dont have the mass of the whole building doing the work for you.


its long but read this

(yes guys im posting that link again because im simply too lazy to retype stuff ive already posted in great detail)

have you seen the... umm.. sizmec scale on GZ? or whatever it's called.

Review of the scientific principles involve

This picture shows the building starting to topple over to one side as it should, yet if you look close to the other end on the building you can see it's colapsing before the actual side that is topplling. the only reson for this would be to control the fall.
p.s i wouldnt have wanted to be the poor soul taking this photo... lol

Originally posted by Damocles
ive always said that a top down demo is POSSIBLE, but NOT covertly, it would take a LOT of demo becuase you dont have the mass of the whole building doing the work for you.


its long but read this

(yes guys im posting that link again because im simply too lazy to retype stuff ive already posted in great detail)

and yet, as per the official line, with no explosives, only the mass of ten floors was capable of crushing the whole building.

if it can fall with no explosives, then it wouldn't take many to get it started.

this is the strangest argument coming from the official theory supporters. (not singling you out, damocles, you're a neutral in my book).

the towers fell under gravity alone, because you would need THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF EXPLOSIVES to demo the towers, and it would be impossible to rig them.

Originally posted by SpaceBits

have you seen the... umm.. sizmec scale on GZ? or whatever it's called.

Review of the scientific principles involve

yup, sure have. can i explain it? nope. never claimed i could explain WHY anything happened the way it did, and i wish i knew where i had posted this before cuz i hate retyping things.

im not here to say WHY the towers did waht they did or why there was molten steel or why anything.

like you im simply trying to bring waht i know to the table and hope it makes a contribution to the discussion.

i cant explain why they fell, or why they fell the way they did, but if you read the link i provided you'll see i built a decent case as to why they didnt.

Originally posted by SpaceBits
This picture shows the building starting to topple over to one side as it should, yet if you look close to the other end on the building you can see it's colapsing before the actual side that is topplling. the only reson for this would be to control the fall.
p.s i wouldnt have wanted to be the poor soul taking this photo... lol

um........what? lol sorry, maybe im just tired but that made very little sense to me...little help?

Originally posted by billybob

and yet, as per the official line, with no explosives, only the mass of ten floors was capable of crushing the whole building.

if it can fall with no explosives, then it wouldn't take many to get it started.

this is the strangest argument coming from the official theory supporters. (not singling you out, damocles, you're a neutral in my book).

the towers fell under gravity alone, because you would need THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF EXPLOSIVES to demo the towers, and it would be impossible to rig them.

but heres the thing. wanna know the thing? ill tell you the thing...

in teh controlled demo theory, the core columns MUST be severed for things to go the way they did.

and based on the dimensions of the core columns at the 66th floor, it would take (im not gonna go read my own post and i dont recall teh EXACT number) somewhere like 170lbs of ordinance (conventional of course) to sever all of them on each floor.

doesnt sound like much does it?

hehe ever HEAR 170lbs of HE going off? i promise yer gonna hear at least the first one, loud and clear. (if im wrong its not the first promise ive broken lol)

there is no evidence of a CD other than it looked like a cd. and it only looked like a cd in the sense that it went straight down.

so the problem i have with the idea behind your post billybob is that theres no basis for comparison.

ive calculated how much ordinance it would take using linear shape charges based on the "leaked" schematics (though keep in mind that as you moved down the building the core columns supposedly got much bigger so you can guess what that did to the yeild requirements)

so using my figures ill ask, which is going to release more energy, 170lbs of HE going off, or ten stories of a building falling 10ft (which we should be able to agree would ahve been the "initiation" of the fall)

and thank you VERY much for considering me "neutral". ive never supported the govts official version 100%. but please try to understand where i sit on this. i essentially have two choices. it was terrorists/airplanes/fire OR it was a controlled demo. if youve read my debate thread (i wont post it again for now) you know why i dont think it was a cd. so what does that leave me with? for me to set aside what i know and believe it was a CD i have to have something more tangible. so far no one has provided anything tangible to support a CD theory to me or any of the demo guys i used to work with (yes we've discussed this over many beers, we've actually TRIED to work a CD into what we witnessed (yes on TV))

my offer to those of you working on a CD theory still stands, if you have questions about explosives ask, if i can answer you i will and ill do it honestly and in such a way you can verify it for yourself (i wouldnt trust me outright either hehe (no i wont tell you how to make bombs, dont ask)) maybe someone can come up with something ive missed.

but as of now;

no proof of bombs
no proof of thermite
no proof of mini nukes
no proof of space based high energy beam weapons
no proof of space based kinetic energy weapons
no proof of holograms (or that they even exist)

no real "PROOF" of anything....which of course applies equally to the govt as well

lots of circumstantial evidence that can LARGLY (granted not totally) be explained by more mundae things (or at least given equally mundane possibilites) but NO actual PROOF

but, once again ive used 100's of words when less would have done nicely. sorry lol

[edit on 22-6-2007 by Damocles]

also what makes me think it may have been a cd, iis that there were a few employees working at the towers, that claim several weeks before the incedent happened that they had gotten off at the wrong floors and that the floors was under some construction type thing, and they said the odd thing was that there was nothing... i mean nothing, no walls, carpets, drop ceilings, no wireing. they say they could only see big power tools and some suport beams, untill someone kicked them out. there wasnt any report of contruction bieng done at the towers at that time.

theres some video interviews on youtube. if they havnt been deleted yet.
I'll see if i can find them.

Originally posted by Damocles
my offer to those of you working on a CD theory still stands, if you have questions about explosives ask, if i can answer you i will and ill do it honestly and in such a way you can verify it for yourself (i wouldnt trust me outright either hehe (no i wont tell you how to make bombs, dont ask)) maybe someone can come up with something ive missed.

What do you know of thermobarics? Could it be possible for the terrorists to place a couple thermobarics in the core? Maybe like the base and mechanical floors? I'm just asking. Would it cut the columns instantly or melt them over time? If it would melt them over time, it could be plausible I believe. Also could account for the fireballs that went up and down the elevator shafts? Just a working theory. Any info that you know would be helpful. Thanks.

Originally posted by SpaceBits
also what makes me think it may have been a cd, iis that there were a few employees working at the towers, that claim several weeks before the incedent happened that they had gotten off at the wrong floors and that the floors was under some construction type thing, and they said the odd thing was that there was nothing... i mean nothing, no walls, carpets, drop ceilings, no wireing. they say they could only see big power tools and some suport beams, untill someone kicked them out. there wasnt any report of contruction bieng done at the towers at that time.

theres some video interviews on youtube. if they havnt been deleted yet.
I'll see if i can find them.

First of all.... SEVERAL people got off on the wrong floors? ok...I'll give you that...we can pretend that yeah they forgot what floor they worked on.

Now...fact.. When a floor is getting completly renovated for a new tennant, the tennant may in fact ask the floor to be gutted. That would explain no wall and wiring... etc.. Often you start from scratch.

A couple things I see wrong with this.

Why wasnt the elevators to that floor locked off so that people can't just wander onto that floor? ( this is typically what is done)

The most important... IF and a HUGE IF.... if someone is planting explosives in a building... WHY WHY WHY would they make it so obvious as to do it in a WIDE OPEN area??!!!!

Come on now!!

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

Originally posted by SpaceBits
also what makes me think it may have been a cd, iis that there were a few employees working at the towers, that claim several weeks before the incedent happened that they had gotten off at the wrong floors and that the floors was under some construction type thing, and they said the odd thing was that there was nothing... i mean nothing, no walls, carpets, drop ceilings, no wireing. they say they could only see big power tools and some suport beams, untill someone kicked them out. there wasnt any report of contruction bieng done at the towers at that time.

theres some video interviews on youtube. if they havnt been deleted yet.
I'll see if i can find them.

First of all.... SEVERAL people got off on the wrong floors? ok...I'll give you that...we can pretend that yeah they forgot what floor they worked on.

Now...fact.. When a floor is getting completly renovated for a new tennant, the tennant may in fact ask the floor to be gutted. That would explain no wall and wiring... etc.. Often you start from scratch.

A couple things I see wrong with this.

Why wasnt the elevators to that floor locked off so that people can't just wander onto that floor? ( this is typically what is done)

The most important... IF and a HUGE IF.... if someone is planting explosives in a building... WHY WHY WHY would they make it so obvious as to do it in a WIDE OPEN area??!!!!

Come on now!!

Well actually the elevaters were suposed to be locked... and what i ment by getting off on the wrong floor means that, the employee's that seen this i think 3 eye witness's and another that said they heard strange nois's comming from another floor that sounded like heavy contruction.
Also remember there was no construction schedualed for that time, just some security upgrading and suposedly new iternet cables bieng installed.... but thats all the work that was reporeted to have been going on.(no need to rip out the walls for that)
Another employee said that the weekend of 911 the power was out of both towers for the entire weekend, this has never happened in the history of the towers.(maibe they were worried somone might acsidently set the explosive of with a cell phone or something)
Bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the toweres security 3 weeks before 911.
Oh... and guess who was in charge of securit of the towers? the prez's little brother, and the renter of the towere invested $15,000,000 and got $17,000,000,000 not bad huh? wth did he possible get so much from the insurance company? maibe cause he was bought and told to shut up!
I'm still trying to find the witness video's.

I found this video, it's not an interview but what i like about it is, that it explains about metal. it's 5 part's of 7 min clips, if you have low bandwith then i really recomend part 2 and listen relly carfully what they say "about steel" this is very true, and why they make building out of steel.
In my profession i defenitly agree with the way they describe metal. so dont just say these ppl do not know what there talking about, cause they do, and i confirm this and i'm sure anyone else with expirence in metal will too.
WTC 1
WTC 2
WTC 3
WTC 4
WTC 5

Originally posted by SpaceBits

Well actually the elevaters were suposed to be locked... and what i ment by getting off on the wrong floor means that, the employee's that seen this i think 3 eye witness's and another that said they heard strange nois's comming from another floor that sounded like heavy contruction.
Also remember there was no construction schedualed for that time, just some security upgrading and suposedly new iternet cables bieng installed.... but thats all the work that was reporeted to have been going on.(no need to rip out the walls for that)
Another employee said that the weekend of 911 the power was out of both towers for the entire weekend, this has never happened in the history of the towers.(maibe they were worried somone might acsidently set the explosive of with a cell phone or something)
Bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the toweres security 3 weeks before 911.
Oh... and guess who was in charge of securit of the towers? the prez's little brother, and the renter of the towere invested $15,000,000 and got $17,000,000,000 not bad huh? wth did he possible get so much from the insurance company? maibe cause he was bought and told to shut up!
I'm still trying to find the witness video's.

There was always construction going on at the WTC. People are constantly doing upgrades, moving offices etc.

There is not ONE shred of evidence that there was a powere down at BOTH towers. NONE! There was a report from ONE person (Scott Forbes) who has made this claim. It has yet to be confirmed by anyother tennant.

For the towers to close down on a weekend would cost MILLIONS of dollars of lost productivity.

Bomb sniffing dogs? Yes the EXTRA ones were removed. EXTRA ONES...becasue of some calls of a bomb scare.

All the other FULL TIME bomb sniffing dogs were there. (one died during the collapse)

And no .. Marvin Bush was not in charge of security at the WTC at the time of the attacks. Do a Search on Wikipedia to get a better time line and what his function at his company was.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

Originally posted by SpaceBits

Well actually the elevaters were suposed to be locked... and what i ment by getting off on the wrong floor means that, the employee's that seen this i think 3 eye witness's and another that said they heard strange nois's comming from another floor that sounded like heavy contruction.
Also remember there was no construction schedualed for that time, just some security upgrading and suposedly new iternet cables bieng installed.... but thats all the work that was reporeted to have been going on.(no need to rip out the walls for that)
Another employee said that the weekend of 911 the power was out of both towers for the entire weekend, this has never happened in the history of the towers.(maibe they were worried somone might acsidently set the explosive of with a cell phone or something)
Bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the toweres security 3 weeks before 911.
Oh... and guess who was in charge of securit of the towers? the prez's little brother, and the renter of the towere invested $15,000,000 and got $17,000,000,000 not bad huh? wth did he possible get so much from the insurance company? maibe cause he was bought and told to shut up!
I'm still trying to find the witness video's.

There was always construction going on at the WTC. People are constantly doing upgrades, moving offices etc.

There is not ONE shred of evidence that there was a powere down at BOTH towers. NONE! There was a report from ONE person (Scott Forbes) who has made this claim. It has yet to be confirmed by anyother tennant.

For the towers to close down on a weekend would cost MILLIONS of dollars of lost productivity.

Bomb sniffing dogs? Yes the EXTRA ones were removed. EXTRA ONES...becasue of some calls of a bomb scare.

All the other FULL TIME bomb sniffing dogs were there. (one died during the collapse)

And no .. Marvin Bush was not in charge of security at the WTC at the time of the attacks. Do a Search on Wikipedia to get a better time line and what his function at his company was.

Ohh you belive wiki huh?
sorry but i dont put much faith in wiki, considering anyone can edit a wiki definition... yah, and i guess steel framed buildings eject 5 inch thick beams into the air due to fire! that land into buildings accros the street?
only extream power(explosions) can eject these iron beams like there were wood. an entire steel stuckture doesnt just fall apart to the ground due to fire, and i dont care even if 3 planes hit the same building them toweres would "never come down like the way they did" ask anyone who knows even just a litte about metal, and they will tell you that an uncontroled fire can not harm metal, and it definetly doesnt through iron beams arround like they were toothpic.

ohh they knew there was a bomb for WTC? i never knew that thx for the info. but why did they call off the extra dogs if there was a bomb scare?

as for other witness's to the black out... well i'm sure many ppl are scared to come forword.

I mean if i witnessed all these strange or even just some and got my suspision up, and though maibe it's an inside job... where the hell do you expect me to go to file a complaint? who do you trust? most will just stay quite, mostly because they like there life style and everything is good for them, and they might feel intemedated if they were to report what they saw. (by intemedated, i mean worried for there life)
As you said it was only the one withness that said anything bout the black out, and yet none of his letters were replied when he claims he sent the authorities letteres explaining the wierd black out.

Originally posted by SpaceBits

Ohh you belive wiki huh?
sorry but i dont put much faith in wiki, considering anyone can edit a wiki definition... yah, and i guess steel framed buildings eject 5 inch thick beams into the air due to fire! that land into buildings accros the street?
only extream power(explosions) can eject these iron beams like there were wood. an entire steel stuckture doesnt just fall apart to the ground due to fire, and i dont care even if 3 planes hit the same building them toweres would "never come down like the way they did" ask anyone who knows even just a litte about metal, and they will tell you that an uncontroled fire can not harm metal, and it definetly doesnt through iron beams arround like they were toothpic.

I believe facts that are backed up with different sources. I was trying to make it easier for you.

But if you insist:

Marvin Bush was reelected to the Stratesec board of directors annually from 1993 through 1999. His last reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000.

www.washingtonspectator.com...

Marvin Bush is a Co-Founder and Managing Partner at the investment firm Winston Capital Management, located in McLean, Virginia. Mr. Bush has portfolio manager duties at Winston.

Your last part of your paragraph is pathetic at best. To claim that fire can not melt metal.... um..well... what can? Nothing?

No one claimed fires caused beams to be ejected out of a building!

Where do you get this stuff?? Please back up your claims with some links and or sources to your jibber jabber.

Originally posted by SpaceBits
ohh they knew there was a bomb for WTC? i never knew that thx for the info. but why did they call off the extra dogs if there was a bomb scare?

as for other witness's to the black out... well i'm sure many ppl are scared to come forword.

I mean if i witnessed all these strange or even just some and got my suspision up, and though maibe it's an inside job... where the hell do you expect me to go to file a complaint? who do you trust? most will just stay quite, mostly because they like there life style and everything is good for them, and they might feel intemedated if they were to report what they saw. (by intemedated, i mean worried for there life)
As you said it was only the one withness that said anything bout the black out, and yet none of his letters were replied when he claims he sent the authorities letteres explaining the wierd black out.

Bomb Sniffing Dogs:

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday.

Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday, bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.

"Today was the first day there was not the extra security," Coard said. "We were protecting below. We had the ground covered. We didn't figure they would do it with planes. There is no way anyone could have stopped that."

www.newsday.com...

I stand corrected...Im not sure of the threats were in fact bombs, but seeing they brought in extra dogs, I would think it would be safe to assume that they were.

Power Down:

Please tell me WHY someone would be afraid to come out and say..."oh there was a power down for an entire weekend!" If it indeed happen (and it didnt) There would have been a substantial amount of communications between companies so that proper procedures could take place.

FACT:

SF: All systems were shutdown on Saturday morning and the power down condition was in effect from approximately 12 noon on Saturday September 8, 2001.

GW: When did it end?

SF: Approximately 2PM on Sunday 9/9.

georgewashington.blogspot.com...

SF = Scott Forbes... it wasnt all weekend (per him who is the ONLY employee at WTC complex that states this)

it was 26 hours....

And WHERE did this power down take place?

Well..listen to Scott:

GW: How do you know that there was no electricity from floor 50 up, if Fiduciary Trust was on much higher floors -- starting at the 90th floor?

SF: I can't absolutely verify that there was no power on lower floors ... all I can validate is that we were informed of the power down condition, that we had to take down all systems and then the following day had to bring back up all systems ...

georgewashington.blogspot.com...

So, all we know from Mr. Forbes is that HIS company was taken down. He even says so himself!!

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

I believe facts that are backed up with different sources. I was trying to make it easier for you.

But if you insist:

Marvin Bush was reelected to the Stratesec board of directors annually from 1993 through 1999. His last reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000.

www.washingtonspectator.com...

Marvin Bush is a Co-Founder and Managing Partner at the investment firm Winston Capital Management, located in McLean, Virginia. Mr. Bush has portfolio manager duties at Winston.

Your last part of your paragraph is pathetic at best. To claim that fire can not melt metal.... um..well... what can? Nothing?

No one claimed fires caused beams to be ejected out of a building!

Where do you get this stuff?? Please back up your claims with some links and or sources to your jibber jabber.

William Rodrigues also said the power was out for that weekend too.

you said: Your last part of your paragraph is pathetic at best. To claim that fire can not melt metal.... um..well... what can? Nothing?

A controlled fire can melt metal not an uncontroled fire

you said: No one claimed fires caused beams to be ejected out of a building!

then how did the iron beams that may be 1000's of pounds stick into buildings accross the street?

you said: Where do you get this stuff?? Please back up your claims with some links and or sources to your jibber jabber.

I have 25 years in welding, metal shaping, and metal cuting, i guess you could say i'm a bit of an expert on metal, and since i worked in body shops for the past 25 years i also witness tones of accsidents.
like 2 cars heading head to head, both travel at about 100mph each when they hit each other. metal does not go flying everywhere it compacts then stops. the same thing whould have happend to the towers. Instead the tower fall at a free fall speed and they fall taking the path with the most resistance. had these towers toppled over as they should have, then i would have nothing to argue, because that its how a steal struckture should fall, it takes the path of leat resistance then topples over. steel doenst implode on itself. nor will it creat enough energy to eject heavy beams into buildings accross the street.

if you really belive the towers fell the way they did just by an alluminum plane then i think you need to see a doctor!

If you belive an uncotrolled fire can melt or even bring down a steel building then i... well.. i dono what to say m8, it goes againt the laws of phisics and i think that mabe you should go back to grade 9 school and retake science, because even i remember learning about how metals react to heat in a grade 9 science class. it's basic science ppl.

Originally posted by SpaceBits
William Rodrigues also said the power was out for that weekend too.

A controlled fire can melt metal not an uncontroled fire

then how did the iron beams that may be 1000's of pounds stick into buildings accross the street?

I have 25 years in welding, metal shaping, and metal cuting, i guess you could say i'm a bit of an expert on metal, and since i worked in body shops for the past 25 years i also witness tones of accsidents.
like 2 cars heading head to head, both travel at about 100mph each when they hit each other. metal does not go flying everywhere it compacts then stops. the same thing whould have happend to the towers. Instead the tower fall at a free fall speed and they fall taking the path with the most resistance. had these towers toppled over as they should have, then i would have nothing to argue, because that its how a steal struckture should fall, it takes the path of leat resistance then topples over. steel doenst implode on itself. nor will it creat enough energy to eject heavy beams into buildings accross the street.

if you really belive the towers fell the way they did just by an alluminum plane then i think you need to see a doctor!

If you belive an uncotrolled fire can melt or even bring down a steel building then i... well.. i dono what to say m8, it goes againt the laws of phisics and i think that mabe you should go back to grade 9 school and retake science, because even i remember learning about how metals react to heat in a grade 9 science class. it's basic science ppl.

Willie Rodriquez... the guy responsible for sweeping the stairs from the 17th floor down? (approx)
I have not heard he said this. If so, it is because of the information that is being fed to him. (please offer a link to this)

If you are such an expert, please provide NIST with a detailed explanation as to why you think the towers fell. You say your an EXPERT with metal because you fix cars and claim cars just compact and stop after an accident. Well cars are made with crumple zones (sic) to protect the occupants of the vehicles.

Sorry, but you claim to know about basic physics and you are an "expert" with metal...yet you can't even spell "physics" or "steel", I highly doubt anyone should take the advice from your posts. I'm not picking on your spelling abilities, God knows I can't spell to save my life. But darn, your posts are almost illegible.

Also, please tell me why according to the NIST report, why the towers collapsed.


[edit on 23-6-2007 by CaptainObvious]

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

Willie Rodriquez... the guy responsible for sweeping the stairs from the 17th floor down? (approx)
I have not heard he said this. If so, it is because of the information that is being fed to him. (please offer a link to this)

If you are such an expert, please provide NIST with a detailed explanation as to why you think the towers fell. You say your an EXPERT with metal because you fix cars and claim cars just compact and stop after an accident. Well cars are made with crumple zones (sic) to protect the occupants of the vehicles.

Sorry, but you claim to know about basic physics and you are an "expert" with metal...yet you can't even spell "physics" or "steel", I highly doubt anyone should take the advice from your posts. I'm not picking on your spelling abilities, God knows I can't spell to save my life. But darn, your posts are almost illegible.

Also, please tell me why according to the NIST report, why the towers collapsed.


[edit on 23-6-2007 by CaptainObvious]

I allready posted the link. i beleve its on part 5 where Wiliam sais it.

As for my spelling well, i never claimed to be an english proffessor. It would help if there was a spell check here.

And all I'm saying is that metal just dont act like that, to just falling appart and come crumbling down into a ruble. This building also had 2 steel frames(exoskeleton and the interior chaft joined by steel cross beams, bolted and welded together)