New 9/11 photos 'prove WTC exploded from inside.' Video: Russia Today

reply to post by Pilgrum

I suggest you study the physics some more

I'd suggest YOU NOT getting yer phony info from a DUH-bunker sites that LIE!

2005 NIST found MINIMAL damage caused by said impacts.....14.5% just as DESIGNED to do..

and NO supporting evidence the FIRES PRESENT allow the failure of AMY load bearing WTC columns to ALLOW collapse to ensue..

Not suggesting the core was instantaneously destroyed but it did take significant damage in arresting

lmao!!....that is EXACTLY what you are doing.....and FAILING miserably!

where is YOUR supporting evidence this occurred.....2005 NIST did NOT think so.....so, WHY do YOU?

There could only be heat effects in areas where there were large intense fires

oh yea...like where Edna is seen waving, HANGING onto the very perimeter steel that is SO HOT is going to fail.....with NO flames in sight.....why don't you post a CONTINUOUS video showing this inferno claimed to be there failing the steel...

I'll be willing to bet ya claim an INFERNO in WTC7 too huh bunkie.....even though 2005 NIST can't see it...

1A-3.2] "It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"

building came down stone cold once enough mass was in motion (kinetic energy again).

too bad for YOU, there is NO MOTION till the vertical support ALLOW it to occur.....and here we are RIGHT back to YOU providing EVIDENCE the FIRES PRESENT allowed collapse to occur...

something the 2005 NIST did NOT find.....NO scientific reason why these three buildings fell on 9-11.

"No conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse fires were sever enough to have a significant effect on the microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel structure." NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, p. 235

no evidence the type of joining methods, materials, or welding procedures used was improper NIST 1-3 p.99

recovered bolts were stronger than typical. NIST 1-2 p.133

"no core column examined showed temp. above 250C" NIST 1-3 6.6.2

NCSTAR1-3 7.7.2 "because no steel was recovered from WTC7,it is not possable to make any statements about it's quality"


"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006. htm


guess that is why the 2008 NIST ignores their own facts to follow AGENDA!

for SOME UN KNOWN reason they are allowed to IGNORE their own scientific investigation, and claim fire not only caused collapse, but did so as NO OTHER building has done before, stated by Shyam Sunder at NIST technical briefing
vimeo.com...

Shyam Sunder, all through the Q&A section of the video stating, ....."brand new event"..."new phenomenon"..."there has *NEVER* been a collapse like WTC7".

and the only supporting evidence they have are computer models which they REFUSE to release the data that TELLS the models what to do

reply to post by Soloist

Oh! I have tons of tech knowledge

lmao........yea...which made my laugh for a good 10 minutes.

ok techie.....here are known science and FACTS from the 2005 NIST scientific investigation concerning WTC7....

tell me HOW FIRE ALONE removes 105 vertical feet of structural resistance globally in WTC7, BEFORE 1.74 seconds, when we see the kink form, so acceleration EQUAL to Gravity can ensue, GLOBALLY and UNIFIED IMMEDIATELY following at 1.75 seconds to 4.0 seconds......

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."


The NIST WTC7 Fig 3-15 shows the graph with the regression line yielding acceleration of 32.196ft/s^2. SEE the time interval between 1.75 and 4 is 2.25 sec. the interval where WTC7 does achieve a period of free-fall ACCELERATION.

what does SCIENCE say about the 2.3 second interval, "Indistinguishable from FREEFALL". The significance is NONE of the gravitational energy is available to destroy the supporting structures, ALL converted to MOTION!

meaning, any bending, crushing, breaking of connections, REMOVAL of structural RESISTANCE, BELOW the mass ACCELERATING, is occurring WITHOUT the assistance of energy from the mass accelerating. ZERO resistance.

now where else do we see those SAME numbers, 9.8m/s^2, seen in the rate of acceleration within the steel framed building in the atmosphere????
open ANY science/physics text...."rate of acceleration seen by ALL mass REGARDLESS of weight toward the earth, at sea level, *~**WITHIN a VACUUM**~* is 9.8m/s^2.

hmm.....So, the SAME numbers we see under 'CONTROLLED conditions, WE SEE occurring globally and UNIFIED in a 47 story steel frame @ 1.75 SECONDS, when kink forms, to 4.0s of the collapse....2.5 seconds later, it's done....6.5 second building collapse from FIRE we can't really see from the windows.

NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"



tell me bout fire and it's amazing steel eating capabilities........specially when there is NO FIRE THERE!

reply to post by Alfie1

You know, NIST assembled a bunch of PhD's and other highly qualified engineers, co-opted prestigious engineering firms, studied samples, videos, stills etc and spent millions of dollars in order to come to their conclusions. What a pity they didn't think to give you a call and get it all cleared up straight away.

the 2005 NIST conclusion was they found NO reason why these three building failed on 9-11

2008 NIST conclusion is to *IGNORE* their own scientific investigation, and claim fire not only caused collapse, but did so as *NO OTHER* building has done before, stated by Shyam Sunder at NIST technical briefing
vimeo.com...

Shyam Sunder, all through the Q&A section of the video stating, ....."brand new event"..."new phenomenon"..."there has *NEVER* been a collapse like WTC7".

and the only supporting evidence they have are computer models which they *REFUSE* to release the data that *TELLS* the models what to do...

.....and you were saying????....

originally posted by: ugie1028
reply to post by Whyhi

 

so.. the survivors, and victims are conspiracy theorists because they haven't had their questions fully answered? really?

Ugie there are just as many survivors/victims who feel discredit the dead with talk of "Inside Job", so let's not play appeal to emotion. The facts are there is absolutely no evidence to speak of of controlled demolition. I'm sorry there may still be some who feel their questions aren't answered, but that doesn't change facts or reality.

originally posted by: richierich
The 2nd still image in the beginning shows the ERUPTION of the concrete...right on film, we see the concrete literally changing from a solid to a powder!! It is amazing to look at that picture and realize that the official explanation is laughable, if not for the severity of the issue.

What you are seeing is the tons of drywall being crushed by 30,000 + tons of concrete and steel.

There is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

a reply to: cantonear1968

so....ya bailed off UTUBE to come here.....with the SAME nonsense.

What you are seeing is the tons of drywall being crushed by 30,000 + tons of concrete and steel.

wait.....let me guess.....and all the 'sulfur' within the drywall, and ONLY the sulfur, magically dissociates itself from the other elements, to mix in MID-AIR with the RUST of the steel columns and the aluminum shavings from the facade cladding, ALL comes together to form 'thermite'!!!!

and that is how there is 'thermite' like residue......

since you bailed on utube when I asked you to PROVE this brand new NEVER before seen physics phenomenon, claimed to fall these buildings on 9-11 by the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew, IGNORING their own initial science from the 2005 NIST that found NO scientific reason for collapse.

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

Shyam Sunder at the 2008 NIST technical briefing


tell me how "warm steel" at the other end of the buildings created conditions for global unified ACCELERATION equal to g. before 1.74 seconds.

as the 2005 NIST found occurred.

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."