Proof to put the 9/11 Truthers to bed in less than 2 mins

[LouderVol]

Is the top 20% of the WTC made of different stuff than the bottom 80%?

You can try to couch your argument in some false expertise of structural engineering. All I need you to tell me is how can 20% of something pulverize 80% of the same stuff at near free fall speed with almost no kinectic energy?

Its not like the top part of the WTC fell at 500 mph into the rest of the building. Even if the jet fuel made the steel beams supporting 20% of the building disappear, there is still 80% of the structure below ready to bear that load. For such a small portion of the building to pulverize the rest of the building would require incredible amounts of kinetic energy. And there was simply not enough space for that kinetic energy to arise.

For what happened on 9/11 to be possible without explosives in the building, you would need to drop the top portion of the WTC from a mile in the air so that it gets the kinetic energy necessary to drive through the other 80% of the building at free fall speed and reduces everything to rubble. Outside of that scenario (which obviously didn't happen on 9/11) the only way for what happened on 9/11 to happen was controlled demolition. NOTHING ELSE. Any other suggestion is just IMPOSSIBLE.


And you know it.

do you argue with stephen hawking too? I doubt you know anything more about astrophysics than you do building structure. (not saying anyone here is a hawking)

 

[LouderVol]

I'll just leave this here...

https://youtu.be/aAVd2txjNEc

when you saw the planes hit the towers, did it look like a pencil going through a mosquito net? sure didn't to me.

The last [recorded] words of Frank De Martini "Express elevators are going to collapse." - Political Conspiracies - The Education Forum

He first started working there when Leslie R. Robertson hired him to assess the damage done by the Feb. 1993 bombing.

he had nothing to do with initial construction.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I don't know what you do for a living but does everyone in your field automatically agree on everything?

the largest number I have seen for the "doubting" professionals is 3000.

Number of Licensed Architects (US)

looking at Architects alone that would be 1.5% of us if you took all of the doubters as architects, ignoring all the other fields. (3000/200,000)

civil is another 280,000Civil Engineers : Occupational Outlook Handbook: : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


couldn't find structural in two seconds but found a total for architects and engineers at 690,000.

Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services - May 2015 OES Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

if we take that number it is 0.4%.

as orangedog and I have pointed out we have a fair share of idiots (Masters of Disasters to borrow a term) in our field. yes I am not worried about that percentage based on my knowledge and the math I have done.

Using .gov sites for your argument just furthers my point. You have shown time and time again a very closed mind in this scenario. That's completely fine. But you and others who do not even entertain the possibility of the controlled demolition theory are just being ignorant.

Here are some serious questions I would like for you to answer.

1. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that the US government has provided every single piece of data from 9/11?

2. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that the US government did a thorough enough investigation regarding 9/11? That no stone was left unturned? No lead left unexplored? Nothing miscatalogged or anything?

3. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that all of those people involved with the 9/11 investigation, were not paid to give the American people the results the government wants? As opposed to the true facts?

4. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that all of these engineers and scientists you posted, were given not only all the relevant data, but the correct data, to make their analysis? What if they were given doctored and cherry picked data? If you know for a fact they werent, please explain how.

5. Can you say with any certainty whatsoever, that the US government doesnt have the ability to withhold crucial data germane to 9/11?

These are real questions you need to ask yourself. I have a striking suspicion that you will not really give these questions any real thought. Thats a shame. Because if you dont, then you are exactly what the government wants, an obedient sheep that will accept whatever they feed you.

 

[LouderVol]

Using .gov sites for your argument just furthers my point. You have shown time and time again a very closed mind in this scenario. That's completely fine. But you and others who do not even entertain the possibility of the controlled demolition theory are just being ignorant.

Here are some serious questions I would like for you to answer.

1. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that the US government has provided every single piece of data from 9/11?absolutely not. I believe they know a lot more than they let on and could be complicit.

2. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that the US government did a thorough enough investigation regarding 9/11? That no stone was left unturned? No lead left unexplored? Nothing miscatalogged or anything? again, of course not. it would be impossible to run down all the truther questions

3. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that all of those people involved with the 9/11 investigation, were not paid to give the American people the results the government wants? As opposed to the true facts? no

4. Can you say, with any certainty whatsoever, that all of these engineers and scientists you posted, were given not only all the relevant data, but the correct data, to make their analysis? What if they were given doctored and cherry picked data? If you know for a fact they werent, please explain how. I don't know what information they were given. but the reason I am sure is because I have done the math on the simple components and some of the loading for the entire building.

5. Can you say with any certainty whatsoever, that the US government doesnt have the ability to withhold crucial data germane to 9/11? again easily they could

These are real questions you need to ask yourself. I have a striking suspicion that you will not really give these questions any real thought. Thats a shame. Because if you dont, then you are exactly what the government wants, an obedient sheep that will accept whatever they feed you.

I, and others, have said as much.

let me flip these questions. Do you think if the truth came out that all of the truthers would accept it? Do you think 100% of the truthers are actually looking for the truth or looking for a way to blame the government no matter what the truth is? Can you say the engineers who don't buy the "official story" actually did the math and looked at the whole thing or did they cherry pick too? again with 100% confidence are you going to defend something you don't have the first clue about?

 

[Orangedogsrule]

sic 'em Louder!

 

[LouderVol]

sic 'em Louder!

The best part is the steel acts like concrete argument. lol:

because the only reason we ever choose between the two is personal preference, it has nothing to do with their real life characteristics. :crazy:
surprised with how adamant about it they are they haven't made the argument that concrete doesn't melt under normal office fire conditions so steel shouldn't either.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I, and others, have said as much.

let me flip these questions. Do you think if the truth came out that all of the truthers would accept it? Do you think 100% of the truthers are actually looking for the truth or looking for a way to blame the government no matter what the truth is? Can you say the engineers who don't buy the "official story" actually did the math and looked at the whole thing or did they cherry pick too? again with 100% confidence are you going to defend something you don't have the first clue about?

I will not speak for any other person but myself. If somehow the full truth came out, I would accept it. I think there are truthers that are looking to blame the government regardless of the truth. I also believe there are ones who just want the truth with no BS. Those scientists who dont buy the official story may not have did the math correctly. They could have botched it. Maybe they did cherry pick the data. I am going to defend what I know about the government. That it has lied to the American people since its inception and that it is fully capable of covering something like this up.

Dont you see? These are all real and valid questions that shed light on the problem. Nobody REALLY knows what happened. All we have is what the government has given us and others opinions. The government's analysis may very well be correct. But it may not because the general public was never privy to ALL of the evidence and data. Its for that main reason, that I believe calling people who offer alternate theories to the official story as wrong or stupid is just that. Wrong and stupid.

 

[LouderVol]

I will not speak for any other person but myself. If somehow the full truth came out, I would accept it. I think there are truthers that are looking to blame the government regardless of the truth. I also believe there are ones who just want the truth with no BS. Those scientists who dont buy the official story may not have did the math correctly. They could have botched it. Maybe they did cherry pick the data. I am going to defend what I know about the government. That it has lied to the American people since its inception and that it is fully capable of covering something like this up.

Dont you see? These are all real and valid questions that shed light on the problem. Nobody REALLY knows what happened. All we have is what the government has given us and others opinions. The government's analysis may very well be correct. But it may not because the general public was never privy to ALL of the evidence and data. Its for that main reason, that I believe calling people who offer alternate theories to the official story as wrong or stupid is just that. Wrong and stupid.

question the crap out of the story. the point myself and others have made is that the towers came down as only a result of the planes.

the math is real simple, and this is where we get to calling you misinformed, stupid may be a stretch. look at the truss clips and look at the weight of each floor slab. if you spend two minutes doing the math it becomes quickly apparent that as soon as one floor goes the rest don't stand a chance.

just because there are some government misdeeds on the events doesn't mean the whole official story is bogus. the best lies have some truth to them.

 

[hndog609]

I will not speak for any other person but myself. If somehow the full truth came out, I would accept it. I think there are truthers that are looking to blame the government regardless of the truth. I also believe there are ones who just want the truth with no BS. Those scientists who dont buy the official story may not have did the math correctly. They could have botched it. Maybe they did cherry pick the data. I am going to defend what I know about the government. That it has lied to the American people since its inception and that it is fully capable of covering something like this up.

Dont you see? These are all real and valid questions that shed light on the problem. Nobody REALLY knows what happened. All we have is what the government has given us and others opinions. The government's analysis may very well be correct. But it may not because the general public was never privy to ALL of the evidence and data. Its for that main reason, that I believe calling people who offer alternate theories to the official story as wrong or stupid is just that. Wrong and stupid.

You don't seem to be as crackpot as some so I'm serious about this question. Why exactly is controlled demolition of the towers so absolutely integral to the 9/11 conspiracy? Perhaps more to the point why does anyone who looks at the very real and demonstrable evidence supporting there was NOT a controlled demolition automatically associated with being some poor dupe that is only capable of buying whatever the government tells them? Why the "all or nothing" mindset?

 

[Pacer92]

You don't seem to be as crackpot as some so I'm serious about this question. Why exactly is controlled demolition of the towers so absolutely integral to the 9/11 conspiracy? Perhaps more to the point why does anyone who looks at the very real and demonstrable evidence supporting there was NOT a controlled demolition automatically associated with being some poor dupe that is only capable of buying whatever the government tells them? Why the "all or nothing" mindset?

Because they were pulverized into dust. When two 110 story skyscrapers "collapse" there would be 220 stories of debris at the bottom...where was it?

There's plenty of evidence that supports demolition.....lack of debris and debris that is shot upward and outward blocks away. Amount of dust and the many audible blast, both recorded and testified. The many samples of nanothermite discovered at ground zero. And the most obvious....the rate at which they fell...symetrically no less..

And you guys can't be serious with the pancaking theory...had it taken 30 seconds to fall completely, this may be believable. Resistance from each floor would've slowed the "collapse" to way less than free fall speed...

 

[bamawriter]

Because they were pulverized into dust. When two 110 story skyscrapers "collapse" there would be 220 stories of debris at the bottom...where was it?

I didn't personally weigh all of the debris myself, but the photos and video of the site appeared to show a heck of a lot.

And you guys can't be serious with the pancaking theory...had it taken 30 seconds to fall completely, this may be believable. Resistance from each floor would've slowed the "collapse" to way less than free fall speed...

No matter how many times you post this absolute tripe, it will never be meaningful because...

The

Buildings

Did

Not

Fall

At

Free

Fall

Speed

 

[Pacer92]

I didn't personally weigh all of the debris myself, but the photos and video of the site appeared to show a heck of a lot.



No matter how many times you post this absolute tripe, it will never be meaningful because...

The

Buildings

Did

Not

Fall

At

Free

Fall

Speed

Ah, my lost little puppy...

There was little to zero resistance..

Like

Between

Your

Ears

 

[volfanCLT]

I didn't personally weigh all of the debris myself, but the photos and video of the site appeared to show a heck of a lot.



No matter how many times you post this absolute tripe, it will never be meaningful because...

The

Buildings

Did

Not

Fall

At

Free

Fall

Speed

I've never understand the "towers falling at free fall speed" argument. It's the most ridiculous and is easily proven wrong to anyone with a lick of common sense.

 

[bamawriter]

Ah, my lost little puppy...

There was little to zero resistance..

Like

Between

Your

Ears

I does not matter how many times you repeat and repeat and repeat your insane belief that the sky is purple, it is still blue.

 

[bamawriter]

I've never understand the "towers falling at free fall speed" argument. It's the most ridiculous and is easily proven wrong to anyone with common sense.

It's one of those facts that seem important and relevant if one doesn't spend any time thinking about it. It is absolutely true that, in that situation, the buildings could not possibly have collapsed at free fall speed. But, given that they fell considerably slower than the rate of free fall, it's a point that goes nowhere.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

So are people who just blindly accept what a corrupt and brain dead government feeds them.

 

[Pacer92]

I does not matter how many times you repeat and repeat and repeat your insane belief that the sky is purple, it is still blue.

It does not matter the amount of times you follow me around with butt hurt....it never gets old laughing at your effort..

 

[LouderVol]

Because they were pulverized into dust. When two 110 story skyscrapers "collapse" there would be 220 stories of debris at the bottom...where was it?

There's plenty of evidence that supports demolition.....lack of debris and debris that is shot upward and outward blocks away. Amount of dust and the many audible blast, both recorded and testified. The many samples of nanothermite discovered at ground zero. And the most obvious....the rate at which they fell...symetrically no less..

And you guys can't be serious with the pancaking theory...had it taken 30 seconds to fall completely, this may be believable. Resistance from each floor would've slowed the "collapse" to way less than free fall speed...

skyscrapers are at least 90% empty space. and most of what you see is gypsum board, which will turn to dust. and you saw the pictures that orangedog put up of the floor structure, even most of that is air space. also the concrete would turn to dust.

 

[hndog609]

It's one of those facts that seem important and relevant if one doesn't spend any time thinking about it. It is absolutely true that, in that situation, the buildings could not possibly have collapsed at free fall speed. But, given that they fell considerably slower than the rate of free fall, it's a point that goes nowhere.

That the "free fall" thing is so obviously and demonstrably wrong is a great way to tell who isn't even interested in anything other than the agenda narrative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoOp40E6UZg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K82wcKwxPZc

 

[GoBigOrangeUT]

Oh boy this thread is still going. Somehow the only two points the truthers bring up (free fall speed and the melting point of steel) continue to be shot down with scientific proof that they are wrong. Yet here they are fighting the retarded fight over and over and over again.

 

[bamawriter]

That the "free fall" thing is so obviously and demonstrably wrong is a great way to tell who isn't even interested in anything other than the agenda narrative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoOp40E6UZg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K82wcKwxPZc

Pacer is the same guy that went on and on about how the hijackers had little to no flight experience. He linked to some nutjob blog as "proof", but that very blog linked to legitimate sources that detailed how they not only had many hours of experience, but that they were certified or licensed to fly large crafts. When confronted with the very links that his source was supposedly relying on, he doubled down on his total fabrication.

It's not even cognitive dissonance. It's delusion.

 

[AirVol]

Aeronautical engineers learned something very valuable from 911. All four of the “indestructible” flight recorders (black boxes) in both of the planes that crashed into the Twin Towers were completly vaporized by the force of the impact. However, The passport of Mohammad Atta (one of the highjackers) was found in perfect condition amongst the rubble. Hence, now the black boxes, so as to be more indestructible, are made from recycled passport paper.

 

[bamawriter]

Aeronautical engineers learned something very valuable from 911. All four of the “indestructible” flight recorders (black boxes) in both of the planes that crashed into the Twin Towers were completly vaporized by the force of the impact. However, The passport of Mohammad Atta (one of the highjackers) was found in perfect condition amongst the rubble. Hence, now the black boxes, so as to be more indestructible, are made from recycled passport paper.

Actually, only the two WTC boxed weren't recovered.

And there are several instances of black boxes being mutilated in a crash. They are not "indestructible", and any aeronautical engineer who believed that they were was mistaken.

For instances prior to 9/11, see Korean Air MD-11 and the rescue chopper crash near Harlingen, TX.

 

[Pacer92]

Aeronautical engineers learned something very valuable from 911. All four of the “indestructible” flight recorders (black boxes) in both of the planes that crashed into the Twin Towers were completly vaporized by the force of the impact. However, The passport of Mohammad Atta (one of the highjackers) was found in perfect condition amongst the rubble. Hence, now the black boxes, so as to be more indestructible, are made from recycled passport paper.

And these are the kind of fairy tales the "smart" ones buy into...

 

[red butler]

Actually, only the two WTC boxed weren't recovered.

And there are several instances of black boxes being mutilated in a crash. They are not "indestructible", and any aeronautical engineer who believed that they were was mistaken.

For instances prior to 9/11, see Korean Air MD-11 and the rescue chopper crash near Harlingen, TX.

I think Airvol's post went right over your head. The black boxes are irrelevant, it's the passport being indestructible that is the gist of his post.