To what purpose? To keep the buildings from toppling sideways (which they would not do, anyway)?
Can you find a citation for your memory so we know what we’re discussing?
I’d agree with you. Heck, a concrete and steel building might not even fall down and turn to dust despite being at ground zero of an atomic explosion:
So that would appear to leave us with two alternatives:
-
“Falling down due to a few small fires” and “turned to dust” are not accurate statements of what happened.
-
Marvin The Martian used his Illudium Q36 Space Disintegrator on various WTC buildings during all the chaos.
Personally I favor (1).
The failure mechanism of the collapses is really well understood by actual engineers using knowledge that has been out there for many, many decades. Not only is there no need to resort to exotic explanations involving sabotage, thermite and mysterious government plots, but there is no evidence of anything unusual happening, by which I mean any behavior that you wouldn’t reasonably expect under the circumstances. When I watched buildings coming down that morning I was shocked and horrified but from an engineering standpoint I could understand what was going on.
The conspiracy folks are fond of making unfounded claims based on flimsy evidence that doesn’t stand up to even the most cursory examination - example, calling the fires “small”. If you’re aware of something that has a little more weight to it, please let us know, I’d be interested to see it.
I’ll also ask the same question I’ve asked in previous threads when people have opined on collapse mechanisms, fire damage, explosives, thermite and other such topics: May I ask what your education, background or credentials are in those areas?
Also, they envisioned a plane lost in the fog, circling for an approach, stuff like that. Reduced speed, not throttles pushed to the max and in a dive to build speed. Quite a bit more energy at max speed than a slow maneuvering speed.
That’s just the planes. You still need to figure out how to crash them at precisely the floors where your explosives are set and crash them carefully enough so as to not disturb the placement of the explosives or prematurely detonate them. Because if you don’t crash them just so, you risk having the buildings remain standing where a forensics investigation would uncover the plot. But of course the CT must have a contingency plan for that scenario, right?
Those are pretty small fires. The black smoke goes to show that it is an oxygen-starved fire and not burning properly.
A bit of somewhat relevant CT humor:
I don’t understand the “turned to dust” meme. In the days after 9/11 all the news channels, when they weren’t showing the towers falling 10x in a row, had cameras at “ground zero,” which showed an enormous pile of twisted steel and concrete rubble in a pile that dwarfed the tiny people and construction vehicles working on sorting the material/looking for survivors. Someone has some 'splainin to do!
The one picture above shows a fire at least 5 stories tall and basically over the entire side of the building. That’s not a small fire.
DeMartini died in the WTC attacks. He said he felt they could withstand multiple plane impacts since a plane couldn’t penetrate the outer columns. Well, the planes did penetrate the outer columns, in fact they penetrated completely through the buildings. DeMartini was mistaken, he died before anybody could put up the YouTube clip of him saying, “Wow, those planes punched right through the columns. I never expected that”.
Clearly, tiny little fires. By the way, that’s one entire size of an acre sized floor fully ablaze.
Much like this clearly oxygen deprived fire.
Here is a clip from 9/11 Mysteries
If it was a true collapse it would have taken at least 1.5 minutes to fall and there wouldn’t have been an explosion of dust clouds pushing through the city. There were 8 ton beams that were launched 300 meters away into other buildings. You think a collapse can do that?
If you believe it was a collapse then how do you explain the disappearance of the 47 impenetrable cores?
How do you explain WTC 7 falling after people around the building are told it’s going to be coming down?
How do you explain people witnessing and getting killed by bombs in t he basement before the plane hit?
You think explosives can do that (not to mention silent explosives)? They can’t. That clip equates the dust clouds of the WTC collapse to a pyroclastic surge, ignoring the fact that a pyroclastic surge would incinerate anything caught in its path. Since many , many people survived the dust cloud, it obviously was no such thing.
I’m not sure why I’m bothering…
-
They fell down (impenetrable?). More specifically, they were not designed to either withstand the massive lateral forces they were subject to as the buidling collapsed, nor to stand on their own once the floor pans had fallen away.
-
The damage, as well as telltale creaking and bulging of the building led people to believe that the building was coming down–which it did. I fail to see the problem.
-
Explosion !=bombs.
If you’ve got the World Trade Center towers rigged with enough explosives to bring them down, and you want to make it look like a terrorist attack, why bother with planes? There was an attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that was a truck bomb. The WTC’s architect said at the time that that bombing came close to knocking down one of the towers.
You obviously don’t need a plane to hit a building to trigger a controlled demolition. Getting materials for a couple of truck bombs shouldn’t be a problem for someone who can secretly rig a whole building with explosives. And you don’t even need to find someone who is willing to die to carry out your plan- the guy who set off the WTC truck bomb in 1993 is still alive today (he’s in prison). You don’t have to deal with the extra uncertainty of whether the planes will take off on time, will the hijackers manage to get control of the plane, will the pilot-hijacker chicken out at the last minute, or any of that.
Also, if the collapse of the towers was deliberate, why wait several hours after the planes hit? The reduced death toll from the people who get out of the towers is going to reduce the shock and outrage. Plus, any one of those people who get out might have seen something that would indicate that the towers were intentionally demolished.
Well, there’s always the answer that It Never Fucking Happened. Did you even consider that?
Upon review, I retract my question.
I can’t find one. This was something I heard in the aftermath news coverage.
Why would they not topple sideways unless designed that way? When they implode buildings isn’t it because they set charges in a particular sequence so as to weaken it in the middle before the outside so that it falls inward?
And all the Jews calling in sick that day! How do you explain that?!!
And what about all of those other things that didn’t happen! Explain those!!
Yes, that’s why people were hurling themselves out of windows. To avoid little fires. Or were they being thrown with hidden catapults?
Since you’re also claiming bombs killed people in the basement, which they didn’t, I guess it’s not a stretch from there to look right at a picture of what is obviously a gigantic inferno and call it “a few small fires.”
They were told to pull out of wtc7 around 11 in the morning. Everyone seemed to know it was coming down. It had a few fires and a small corner chunk taken out. Falling at free-fall speed into it’s own basement…it is clearly controlled demolition, classical style. In slow motion you can see a central column being blown so that it falls in on itself.
Here is the reaction from a controlled demolition expert seeing the collapse of wtc7. He didn’t even know it happened on 9/11 prior to his viewing and critique.
Just because parts of the plane went through the building doesn’t mean they took out columns at all. The cores were massive and bolted underground. If it was a true collapse they’d still be standing because the floors around it would slide around them. They couldn’t fall without disassembling or explosives.
What silent explosives? NYFD, reporters, witnesses, employees all say they witnessed bombs going off and others getting killed from explosions.
It was a pyroclastic flow because it destroyed and rusted cars where the flow went. (Star Wars Beam Weapon 5 ) I don’t believe their Star Wars weapon thing but it has nice pictures of those cars.
People seeing their friends getting killed in the basement from explosives I’m pretty sure are not lying since everybody else explains seeing and hearing explosions. They didn’t allow those people to testify for the 9/11 commission.
Are you going to explain the timing of the collapses? They went down at free-fall speed meaning each floor encountered no resistance coming down. A collapse would now fall that way, it would fall where there is the least resistance. If there was a true collapse it would be more than likely that the part above the impact would topple over and the rest would remain standing. Those cores can’t fall down, you’re speaking like a moron.
Yes, because it was severely damaged and on fire. Plus, the water mains in the area were broken, so there was no way to fight it.
Yes, tiny,tiny fires
It didn’t fall into its own basement. It fell across the street and caused severe damage to other buildings.
Danny Jowenko is:
- The only demolitions expert in the world who thinks that WTC7 is a controlled demolition, and
- Does not believe that WTC1 or WTC2 were controlled demolitions.
Quite the compelling witness.