The History of High Rise Collapses

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by snapperski

 

if this is the case,then why wont they have a full international public inquiry concerning the full events of 9/11

Why? What requires us to have a "full international public inquiry" concerning the events of that day?

ERMMM is this guy for real...maybe the murder of 3000 people,just going to work to feed there familys..not soilders,or secret agents..innocent people,and we have so many unanswered questions... blatant lies.....i lossed 2 good school friends working in tower one that day...i want to know the whole truth,as to why they died...and im insulted that you people,would stand so firm to the OS when clearly its just a crock of sh#t..

reply to post by snapperski


That picture is of North face of WTC 7 - side opposite the damage

Truthers often use this to lie

Look at these shots

www.911myths.com...

Clips 9, 10, 11 show heavy fire breaking out of North face

Other clips show building damage and heavy smoke pouring out of South face

You lose again.....

reply to post by vipertech0596

1.Damaged the surrounding buildings that it did (keeping in mind that a large portion of the debris ended up where Tower 1 USED to sit)

It isn't unusual for buildings that are destroyed via controlled demolition to damage neighbouring buildings in very close proximity. As far as controlled demolitions go, you won't see many more as symmetrical as WTC7.

2. Left a large portion of the north wall draped over the top of the pile (which is actually a very good indicator that it was NOT a controlled demolition of any kind, but that it indicates the main portion of the building collapsed to the south in other words, an asymmetrical collapse)

An asymmetrical collapse? Have you seen the videos of WTC7's collapse? It certainly did not collapse asymmetrically.

You can continue to parrott the tripe found on various websites about controlled demolition, but the truth is, the evidence does not support the controlled demolition fantasy.

Your mantra-like repetitions and outright falsehoods here have done nothing to substantiate the theory that WTC7 collapsed exclusively form fire.

but the truth is, the evidence does not support the controlled demolition fantasy.

I'm afraid that WTC7's collapse exhibits pretty much all of the characteristics associated with a controlled demolition and none of the characteristics associated with a fire-induced collapse. Given that fact, I would say the majority of evidence is in favour of a controlled demolition. Of course, we also have the fact that it collapsed at pure freefall acceleration, an impossibility, if one accepts that Newtonian physics wasn't temporarily suspended on 9/11.

Originally posted by snapperski
this is what destroyed building 7 folks,according to these paid debunkers...who work as a team...notice how the fire is way out of control...LMAO....please..
building 7 never collasape from fire..it clear to see

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cd9722e6c27b.jpg[/atsimg]

edit on 24-10-2010 by snapperski because: (no reason given)

What about the damage on the other elevation of the building this huge gaping hole

www.debunking911.com...

Any comments on that!

reply to post by snapperski


I'am affraid you being lead astray by internet conspiracy theories is a FAR BIGGER INSULT to your friends!!
You saw what happened! Planes hit the twin towers that cuased STRUCTURAL damage the fires also caused damage and if you look at the video of the south tower collapse here

www.youtube.com...

Go to 1:55 and watch see if you spot what happens.
The South Tower although hit second collapsed first WHY? the answer is simple the load above the impact point was far greater as the plane hit the building lower down.So when the structure at the impact point could no longer support the weight, well the rest is history, have you looked at the video above look at the collapse and tell me what you see.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by snapperski

 

I'am affraid you being lead astray by internet conspiracy theories is a FAR BIGGER INSULT to your friends!!
You saw what happened! Planes hit the twin towers that cuased STRUCTURAL damage the fires also caused damage and if you look at the video of the south tower collapse here

www.youtube.com...

Go to 1:55 and watch see if you spot what happens.
The South Tower although hit second collapsed first WHY? the answer is simple the load above the impact point was far greater as the plane hit the building lower down.So when the structure at the impact point could no longer support the weight, well the rest is history, have you looked at the video above look at the collapse and tell me what you see.

Have you not seen the images of the WTC towers' construction showing what the core structure of the towers consists of? You guys blather all day about the "pancake" collapse of the floors surrounding the core structure, but you never give an explanation of what happened to the core. Either you have never seen the images of what the core consists of, choose to ignore them, forgot what they show, or have an agenda. Which is it?

Explain how the core structure of the towers, which consist of many massive vertical steel tubes and beams and other elements, collapsed in pancake style upon itself. The core of the building was plainly not susceptible to the so-called "pancake" type collapse.

This is an issue which you and your debunker buddies like to avoid. I will check later to see what you come up with.

reply to post by snapperski


And again, I ask you, WHY do we need to have a "international" investigation? We have already had several investigations and one commission. What else do you think you are going to gain?

reply to post by dubiousone


Do some research into the collapse videos, you should have no problems finding videos that show segments of the core toppling over like trees.

reply to post by Nathan-D


I would learn how to blow stuff up if I were you. Build your knowledge base. As for WTC 7, it looked NOTHING like any of the CD's I have witnessed over the years. I have NEVER seen a controlled demolition tilt and fall the way WTC7 did.

Man those towers were brought down by demolition charges and everyone with a brain and an open mind knows it. I can't stand all the people who talk about Truthers having a lack of evidence when ALL THE EVIDENCE IS BEING WITHHELD BY OUR GOVERNMENT!

There are theories which make more sense than the OS though, concerning thermite and other explosive devices (please don't say they wouldn't use multiple devices...why not? they'll make the money back from defense contracts, oil fields and drug trades when they get us into war). Not to mention the numerous testimonies from NY's own fire department, law enforcement, and other various groups. I mean damn, what more evidence do you want! Do you want to wait 25 more years before the NSA "gets around" to investigating and tells us it was all a lie, like with the Gulf of Tonkin incident? What then, it's too late to do anything about it!

The debunkers need to get on their job and instead of debunking conspiracy theories, they should debunk the OS by calling for a reinvestigation!

You could not bring down the WTC towers even with conventional demolition methods...you would have to dismantle something that large. If anyone tells you anything different they are stuck in the limited box of unflexible academics. Somewhere between Ignorant and Moron..

Originally posted by superluminal11
You could not bring down the WTC towers even with conventional demolition methods...

Keyword is CONVENTIONAL. I'm pretty sure there is no fear in using unconventional methods concerning an event this important to a planned war. Especially since military tech is at least 25 years ahead of ours... just think of what some secret projects within the government are capable of! (Not saying that's how it happened, but you get the point. )

"Do some research into the collapse videos, you should have no problems finding videos that show segments of the core toppling over like trees."

1) Are you talking about the video below? Check out from 0:45 to about 1:02. There is a spire (approximately 50 stories high) which is obviously part of the core and remains standing for approximately 17 seconds (after building collapse), until it miraculously disintegrates and finally drops straight down. Ooops! That's not the way it was supposed to go down!

a) Does this look like a tree toppling over to you? If so, what kind of trees do you have in your neck of the woods?

b) If this was the result of a pancake collapse, why would this section still be standing and not be "crushed" along with the rest of the building?

c) What would cause this steel spire to disintegrate into dust like it is shown doing?

2) In addition, take a look at the video from the :30 mark just prior to the initiation of the collapse. Take a close look at the numerous squibs on the right side of the building.

a) What exactly is causing these multiple squibs, which are occurring a split second prior to the collapse?

b) If these are being caused by the fire, why aren't they present for the first 29 seconds of the video?



And if that does not satisfy you, here is a closer look at the remaining core disintegrating. Timber!

"The debunkers need to get on their job and instead of debunking conspiracy theories, they should debunk the OS by calling for a reinvestigation!"

Not a good idea, considering the woefully pathetic job they're doing attempting to hold the lousy excuse for an Official Story together. I must admit though; they do have a rather difficult job attempting to defend such a garbage story.

reply to post by vipertech0596

I would learn how to blow stuff up if I were you. Build your knowledge base. As for WTC 7, it looked NOTHING like any of the CD's I have witnessed over the years. I have NEVER seen a controlled demolition tilt and fall the way WTC7 did.

You seem to be under the impression that because WTC7 lent over to the side by a few meters it therefore rules out a controlled demolition. If we apply your infallible, watertight logic - the following footage (here) purportedly claiming to be a controlled demolition couldn't possibly have been because it didn't collapse perfectly symmetrically and lent, might I add, significantly more so than WTC7. In the case of WTC7, all I see is a slightly smoking 47-storey building with a 40,000 ton steel-frame-structure suddenly falling straight down symmetrically (apart from a demolition-style crimp in the middle) almost entirely into it's own footprint at free-fall acceleration. And you're telling me what I see is nothing like a controlled demolition? Seriously, where do you people come from?

OK you guys I will ask you once more on the following video from 1:55 for 5-10 secs describe what you see I have asked twice but you all seem to AVOID giving an answer, I wonder why

www.youtube.com...

I will also ask again if any of you have any costruction industry experience ie have any of you any idea about structures!!

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Your spire which you claim crumbles to dust DOESN'T what you see is a layer of dust blowing from it, but then again why look to see what actually happens when it spoils a good story, look at the video and watch exactly happens with you spire!

reply to post by Nathan-D


A few meters? Are you completely unaware that the North Wall of WTC 7 was draped across the debris pile extending onto the the mess that use to be WTC 1? Its a lot more than "a few meters". Controlled demolitions drop the center of the building straight down.

You also seem unaware that your "crimp' is directly related to the failure of the building structure above the hole carved out of the building by the collapse of wtc 1.

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by snapperski

 

That picture is of North face of WTC 7 - side opposite the damage

Truthers often use this to lie

Look at these shots

www.911myths.com...

Clips 9, 10, 11 show heavy fire breaking out of North face

Other clips show building damage and heavy smoke pouring out of South face

You lose again.....

Scattered fires and asymmetrical damage do not cause symmetrical near perfect collapse into the building’s footprint from the ground up as occurred with WTC7. This has been stated an untold number of times and yet you still fail to grasp this concept after all this time!?!

Did you notice that WTC7’s bottom floors give way one-by-one as the upper floors move down from above? Floor 1 gives way, followed by floor 2, followed by floor 3 . . . until all upper floors have crashed onto the ground one after another.

Doesn’t it seem odd to you that the floors above remain intact until they reach the ground or the accumulation of debris below? How is such a sequential collapse at the bottom explained by scattered fires and asymmetrical damage?