PROOF that Building 7 was demolished with explosives!!!

reply to post by K J Gunderson


Maybe we should all take a vote. This is exactly what he did say.

You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse, first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it, TOP DOWN.

I read that as saying the penthouse level is crashing down, PULLING EVERYTHING ELSE WITH IT.

I am not sure how else to read it so hopefully someone will help us out.

Anyone else have a different interpretation?

reply to post by K J Gunderson

Did you claim that the penthouse pulled the rest of the building down or not?

Nope.

Peace out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By the way, I re-thought the part of the post that you managed to copy and quote, I was editiing it while you were doing that, apparently. Sorry for draggin you into it anymore, that's why I changed it, NOT because you quoted it. Just wished to clear that up.

Over and out.


[edit on 6 March 2010 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Did you claim that the penthouse pulled the rest of the building down or not?

Nope.

Peace out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By the way, I re-thought the part of the post that you managed to copy and quote, I was editiing it while you were doing that, apparently. Sorry for draggin you into it anymore, that's why I changed it, NOT because you quoted it. Just wished to clear that up.

Over and out.


[edit on 6 March 2010 by weedwhacker]

Then what does this mean???????

You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse, first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it, TOP DOWN.

Please explain.

reply to post by weedwhacker


I do not know what you are talking about with the editing thing but after you finish explaining your quote to us. If you would be so kind as to explain lie number two for us, that would be great. At this point your "NOPE" is a blatant lie until you can actually explain your quote. You keep avoiding it.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Maybe we should all take a vote. This is exactly what he did say.

You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse, first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it, TOP DOWN.

I read that as saying the penthouse level is crashing down, PULLING EVERYTHING ELSE WITH IT.

I am not sure how else to read it so hopefully someone will help us out.

Anyone else have a different interpretation?

Let me see here.

You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse,

The penthouse level is initiating collapse. First of all, this is false as we know from the NIST report that the support collumns holding up the penthouse level initiated collapse at the bottom. The result was a visible sag at the top of those supports as they gave way - the penthouse level. So it did not initiate collapse but that is clearly what you said. I understand how you can think that from watching but you believe the OS and you believe NIST so you have to go with what they determined and that is that the supports failed at the bottom first.

first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it,

Pulling everything else with it? What pulled everything else with it? According to this sentence, that would be the penthouse level. I read this as the penthouse level pulled everything else down. Everything else would be the rest of the building right? Not the sky, the ocean, the rest of the city certainly? So what is pulling everything down if not the penthouse level, ww? Please explain.

TOP DOWN.

If you did not read the NIST report then let me correct you. The supports failed at the bottom and there was a slight sag on the roof and then the bottom collapsed from the bottom up. If you did not watch the video, you should because it is obvious that the intact building comes crashing down and smashes into the ground floor by floor. It is obviously bottom up, even if you did not read the report. You may just be wrong about this but you obviously stated that the penthouse level pulled the building down. I am open to another interpretation of your statement though.

Originally posted by SPreston

This is what we see in the videos; the penthouse collapsing on the roof when internal supports are removed by demolition, and then the entire building falling straight down for eight floors in freefall (2.25 seconds) as approximately 8 floors are removed by demolition, and then the remaining 39 floors slowing in their collapse as they continue through the path of most resistance.

PRICELESS!!!

This has to be one of the best explanations of WTC 7 collapse.
I don´t see the need for NIST to exist when we can have such clairvoyance from our friend SPreston.

Please SPreston, please explain to us:

1.- How were those 8 floors "removed"?
Were they "pulverized" using Judy Woods "space ray", or Prof. Jones magic "super Thermite"?

2.- If you were to demolish 7 with explosives, shouldn´t there have been a series of clearly heard explosions right before the Penthouse collapse, and then once again, right before the rest of the collapse?

3.- What is the object of demolishing the Penthouse seconds before the rest of the "demolition"?

I have lots of more questions for you but I would just like you to answer these 3.

And please, pretty please, spear me from all those photos and videos, please just answer those 3 questions.
Thanks.

reply to post by K J Gunderson

You keep avoiding it.

Because it's off topic. And I've already explained, won't repeat myself.

Originally posted by SPreston

Explosive Wave 7 Floors Ahead of Collapse Wave and Accelerating

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b817965410cc.jpg[/atsimg]

This one is OFF subject matter but I just couldn´t resist.

Kind of hard to see the "accelerating wave" in a photograph.
Wouldn´t you agree???



[edit on 6-3-2010 by rush969]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

You keep avoiding it.

Because it's off topic. And I've already explained, won't repeat myself.

It is not off topic. The topic is how building 7 came down. You said

You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse, first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it, TOP DOWN.

and now deny the first part and still deny you are wrong about the second part. If you already explained it, please supply a link to where that happened.

I am not trying to be a pain here but this is actually kind of serious. You spend a LOT of time on 9/11 threads defending the official story. You want people to take you seriously. I come here because I have questions. I expect serious answers. Since you are one of the most vocal people here, I would like to be able to take you seriously. I could if you just admitted there was a mistake on your part or something but this denial just makes you a liar. I would not even harp on that so much had it not been for you saying "LIE LIE LIE LIE....." Since you so brazenly called me a liar and never backed it up. Please link me to where you explained this sentence. Every time I read it, I see the same thing. I really do not understand how you can say anything else.

You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse, first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it, TOP DOWN.

How else can I interpret that? Since you already explained it, there must be a post you can link to. Please help me believe you are an honest person here truly defending what you in your heart believe. At this point you look dishonest which also makes me question your motive for spending so much time here.

Originally posted by rush969

Originally posted by SPreston

Explosive Wave 7 Floors Ahead of Collapse Wave and Accelerating

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b817965410cc.jpg[/atsimg]

This one is OFF subject matter but I just couldn´t resist.

Kind of hard to see the "accelerating wave" in a photograph.
Wouldn´t you agree???

[edit on 6-3-2010 by rush969]

The picture is showing the line of explosions several floors below the actual collapse zone.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

You keep avoiding it.

Because it's off topic. And I've already explained, won't repeat myself.

Weed, please. I have no previous issue with you. I am also here seeking answers to real questions. I am having a hard time understanding this though. My reading skills are quite good. I can only read this one way. I believe you if you say you already explained it but I have searched this thread and cannot find it.

Let me restate-
Let me see here.


You can see WTC 7 penthouse level initiating the collapse,

The penthouse level is initiating collapse. First of all, this is false as we know from the NIST report that the support collumns holding up the penthouse level initiated collapse at the bottom. The result was a visible sag at the top of those supports as they gave way - the penthouse level. So it did not initiate collapse but that is clearly what you said. I understand how you can think that from watching but you believe the OS and you believe NIST so you have to go with what they determined and that is that the supports failed at the bottom first.
first....crashing down, pulling everything else with it,

Pulling everything else with it? What pulled everything else with it? According to this sentence, that would be the penthouse level. I read this as the penthouse level pulled everything else down. Everything else would be the rest of the building right? Not the sky, the ocean, the rest of the city certainly? So what is pulling everything down if not the penthouse level, ww? Please explain.
TOP DOWN.

If you did not read the NIST report then let me correct you. The supports failed at the bottom and there was a slight sag on the roof and then the bottom collapsed from the bottom up. If you did not watch the video, you should because it is obvious that the intact building comes crashing down and smashes into the ground floor by floor. It is obviously bottom up, even if you did not read the report. You may just be wrong about this but you obviously stated that the penthouse level pulled the building down. I am open to another interpretation of your statement though.

So if you could explain it to me or show me where you have already explained it, I would be forever grateful. Please weed, I am not looking to argue with you but it looks to melike you said one thing and then flat out denied saying it. I keep reading this over and over and I only get one thing out of it.

reply to post by evil incarnate


Look, I wrote what was my impression, from that ONE video. I said nothing about NIST, nothing else except it looked as if, to me from that angle that the top level started down first. In that video.

The question that started all of this was "why" the exterior walls moved inward, and not outward.

Seemed to me that AS the top floors fell, they pulled on the outer walls.

It is really that simple, it was how I saw it.

Certain other individuals seem poised to pounced on any perceived weakness in clarity, as someone writes in these forums. There is a term for that.

Obviously, in order for the upper floor, and the penthouse level, to begin to fall first, then the supporting structure beneath them had to have been compromised in some way. The cause of the underlying supports' failing is the real debate, here.

I also said, repeatedly, that the video showed nothing about what was happening internally. In fact, the entire "free-fall" argument takes into account ONLY the start time of the penthouse level beginning to fall, right? Or, am I wrong about that?

But, there had to have been something else, inside, as precursor.

"truthers" of course claim planned demolition, and claim they have 'proof'.

Show us the 'proof'. Physical evidence, not video analysis --- because we can see how terribly THAT works.

Seems I have to repeat myself. The TM insists that the collapse was caused by planted explosives. Yet, still no proof. No physical proof, no signs of explosives, no detonator caps, nothing else that is associated with CD. Only accusations, and speculation.

Show us the 'proof'.

Until then, we have SPreston showing us where the building was compromised, lower floors (7-14) where, also coincidentally, the biggest fires burned for most of the day. How did any 'explosives' get 'planted' there?

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Until then, we have SPreston showing us where the building was compromised, lower floors (7-14) where, also coincidentally, the biggest fires burned for most of the day. How did any 'explosives' get 'planted' there?

Dont you know weedwhacker?
The military has high-tech special future explosives, and special fire-proof ninja-suits that can withstand high-temps and supply the wearer with oxygen long enough to plant the special explosives that are completely fire resistant, heat resistant, shock-resistant, and the wiring that can also be exposed to high temps without degrading in the heat. Oh and they also can slow down our time, so they can quickly and silently wire up the building in record time, without a soul noticing. Also, their suits have cloaking ability. its a gift from the NWO!

reply to post by K J Gunderson


Sorry. But I don´t see any "explosions" going off.
What I see is the structure of a building disintegrating in a collapse.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
So you are certain that the people that would do such a thing do not have access to methods of demolition that you may not be fully aware of? We all know the military has more advanced technology than we are allowed. We are just now learning about steel weakening solutions that were unheard of just 10 years ago.

Please explain to me how you could possible know each and every method that could have been used to bring down those buildings. If you do not, then you have no clue what kind of prep was needed, right?

I cannot wait to hear.

As was just pointed out, there was maintenance happening in the elevator shafts. Please tell me just how many people you think look into closed elevator shafts.

I see that you are reverting to the super-secret noiseless explosives again. This is always the default "safe harbor" that allows those who have no arguments find solace in their fantasies and seems to collect those divorced from reality.
Based on what you are claiming, there was maintenence in the elevator shafts of building #7 for many weeks and all demolitions, precuts, and cabling were placed in the elevator shafts.
This must mean that you have some idea of charge placement, numbers of charges, and timing that would effect the collapse. What are they?

What novel steel weakening solutions are you speaking of?

Originally posted by GenRadek
Dont you know weedwhacker?
The military has high-tech special future explosives, and special fire-proof ninja-suits that can withstand high-temps and supply the wearer with oxygen long enough to plant the special explosives that are completely fire resistant, heat resistant, shock-resistant, and the wiring that can also be exposed to high temps without degrading in the heat.

Well lets look at some facts.

1. There were no fires on the lower floors due to the fact that the EPA recovered most of the fuel from the tanks.

2. We have the statments from Chief Nigro and hayden about when the firemen were removed from the building.

3. We have the statment from Chief Hayden that they were worried about fire jumping to other buildings.

reply to post by REMISNE


Chief Nigro even states that his decision came to pull the firefighters out around 3-3:30PM. This had to occur AFTER LS was to have spoken with him. so no, Nigro does not support your claims.

And all of this was a result of watching the condition of the building degrading in the fires. The reason why they put a surveyor transit was to monitor the "creep" of the building as it was slowly beginning to collapse. The bulge and the tilt were two VERY obvious signs the building was in danger of collapse and the order was given to evac the area so no more firefighters or anyone else would get hurt. There was no firefighting efforts so they just let the thing burn until it collapsed.

[edit on 3/6/2010 by GenRadek]

Originally posted by rush969
This has to be one of the best explanations of WTC 7 collapse.
I don´t see the need for NIST to exist when we can have such

clairvoyance

from our friend SPreston.

Please SPreston, please explain to us:

1.- How were those 8 floors "removed"?
Were they "pulverized" using Judy Woods "space ray", or Prof. Jones magic "super Thermite"?

Nope probably something like RDX...

Demolishing steel columns is a bit more difficult, as the dense material is much stronger. For buildings with a steel support structure, blasters typically use the specialized explosive material cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine, called RDX for short. RDX-based explosive compounds expand at a very high rate of speed, up to 27,000 feet per second (8,230 meters per second). Instead of disintegrating the entire column, the concentrated, high-velocity pressure slices right through the steel, splitting it in half. Additionally, blasters may ignite dynamite on one side of the column to push it over in a particular direction.

science.howstuffworks.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

Does not create a visible 'explosion' that you seem to need to see before you can grasp the reality of what happened.

2.- If you were to demolish 7 with explosives, shouldn´t there have been a series of clearly heard explosions right before the Penthouse collapse, and then once again, right before the rest of the collapse?

NO, see answer to question 1.

3.- What is the object of demolishing the Penthouse seconds before the rest of the "demolition"?

The site the above quote came from gives you your answer in detail, please read the whole thing.

In short and my words....
Drop the center of the building first and the outer wall have a space to fall into. The penthouse was the center columns dropping first. Typical and common demolition method. A method that wouldn't work on the towers, too tall and skinny. They would have had to be demolished piece by piece in the real world at a cost of millions, lucky larry had it done for free with an extra bonus of insurance to help re-build his complex (re-building complexes is how he made his fortune).

I have lots of more questions for you but I would just like you to answer these 3.

Questions are good, but will you take the answers and actually learn from them, or ignore them like all other debunkers?

And please, pretty please, spear me from all those photos and videos, please just answer those 3 questions.

Don't like the pics cause they contradicts your claims? I know I'm not who you were replying to but questions answered.

[edit on 3/6/2010 by ANOK]

reply to post by pteridine


Thermite, thermate, nano-thermite and RDX are not secrets. They are well know 'explosives' that do not create an actual 'explosion' but either cut with heat or expand rapidly.

Thermate is just thermite with finer particles, the finer the mixture the more efficiently it burns...

Thermate is a variation of thermite and is an incendiary pyrotechnic composition that can generate short bursts of very high temperatures focused on a small area for a short period of time. It is used primarily in incendiary grenades.

en.wikipedia.org...

Nano_thermite...

Nano-thermite, also called "super-thermite",[1] is the common name for a subset of metastable intermolecular composites (MICs) characterized by a highly exothermic reaction after ignition. Nano-thermites contain an oxidizer and a reducing agent, which are intimately mixed on the nanometer scale. MICs, including nano-thermitic materials, are a type of reactive materials investigated for military use, as well as in applications in propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics.

en.wikipedia.org...

Thermite cutter charges...

The invention relates to thermite charges that are useful for cutting materials including metals, masonry, reinforced concrete, rock, and the like. The invention allows more expeditious and safer material removal, including entry into structures, and structural demolition.

www.freepatentsonline.com...

RDX...

At room temperature, it is very stable. It burns rather than explodes and detonates only with a detonator, being unaffected even by small arms fire. It is less sensitive than pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN). However, it is very sensitive when crystallized, below −4 °C. Under normal conditions, RDX has a figure of insensitivity of exactly 80 (as this is the reference point).

en.wikipedia.org...

Why do you have to play ignorant all the time to make your arguments?
You just want to believe, or convince others to believe that we are making this stuff up don't you?...

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by rush969

Originally posted by SPreston

Explosive Wave 7 Floors Ahead of Collapse Wave and Accelerating

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b817965410cc.jpg[/atsimg]

This one is OFF subject matter but I just couldn´t resist.

Kind of hard to see the "accelerating wave" in a photograph.
Wouldn´t you agree???

[edit on 6-3-2010 by rush969]

The picture is showing the line of explosions several floors below the actual collapse zone.

I guess it just goes to prove - you can see anything you want - if that's what you want to see.