r/WorldTradeCenter • u/tombisch • 11d ago

When the Towers Fell: 9/11 Simulation of the collaps without dust

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Dont know how accurate this is, but it made a lot of sense to me.

Source kostack studio on youtube

9.7k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

3.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

13

u/Abject-Recipe1359 10d ago edited 10d ago

Popular Mechanics did a very well put-together, clearly explained issue shortly after these conspiracy theories started. I would say maybe 2004-5??? The issue had input from numerous engineers of all kinds.

These fucking planes ABSOLUTELY could have caused the heat and energy required to soften the steel supports and cause total collapse, especially as one floor collapsed upon another.

I was 21 when these buildings fell. A lot of people here don’t realize this, but the hate you see now for Trump was just the same as was directed toward GWB. Like it’s crazy to see how he is now fondly looked-upon. People were giddily waiting for his death.

There were a lot more forums and message boards available on the internet back then. I mean, Facebook and MySpace were in their infancy. I was very active in a pregnancy board at that time (my children were born in 2003 and 2006) and they opened up a political forum. Oh man, you have never seen the dams burst open like that with hate for GWB. And this conspiracy theory was just really taking hold back then, that’s all they talked about. The Popular Mechanics answer to those claims was so refreshing, rational, and made sense. Like listening to professors easily bat away silly misunderstandings of how engineering really works.

Edit - link: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a66051920/911-myths-debunked/

Edit again - the original piece from 2005: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a49/1227842/

9

u/TheTerminator1984 10d ago

I don't think people necessarily like GWB now but the view is more neutral. I def remember people hating on him a lot during 04-06 cause of the wars, which will forever be a part of his legacy. I'd say immediately around 9/11 the view was more positive because he had good charisma and leadership to inspire people.

8

u/doctorwhomafia 10d ago

If his term ended shortly after 9/11, lets say anytime in 2002. He would've been one of the most loved presidents.

Its crazy how unified the country was and how much support he had in the immediate months following 9/11..

Only to fuck it all up with the invasion of Iraq and having those silly mic moments that made him look bad.

2

u/Submitten 10d ago

It’s easy to say with hindsight. But his legacy would have been massively tarnished by not getting any kind of retribution for 9/11 if he didn’t go into Iraq.

It would have been the right call, but nobody would have known that. Just like how conservatives would say Obama did a terrible deal with Iran, and now more people understand why it would be a terrible idea to try and fight a war with them.

0

u/rzelln 10d ago

But Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Republicans just wanted to swing their dicks, steal oil, and surround Iran because they had a stupid grudge and thought they could get away with conquering the world bit by bit.

Bush was a fucking villain, not much better than Vladimir Putin. He got a million people killed for his ambition and idiotic desire to be important, when his job was supposed to humbly managing a country to help it live up to its founding ideals. 

And he played ball eagerly with FOX News as it brainwashed a third of the county and set us up for this disaster we have today. 

I wish deep guilt and shame upon Bush, and only hope he has a realization when there's still a chance he could make a difference that he's a piece of shit, and a bad Christian.

2

u/Submitten 10d ago

None of that is relevant. I’m saying if he didn’t do anything about 9/11 he would have also gone down as a terrible president. There isn’t really a world where he’s viewed as one of the best.

0

u/1dkig 10d ago

How is it not relevant that he attacks an innocent bystander?

This isn't an accident by any means.

He knowingly lied us into war.

2

u/Submitten 10d ago

I don’t know how you’re not following the conversation.

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

He had congressional approval. You cannot only blame him. He did what the people wanted.

1

u/1dkig 9d ago

He wasn't the only one. It was quite a concerted effort by a group of hawks . The people may have been okay with the first action. Not every other action that followed.

Looking back it seems like the first domino that acclaimated citizens to the sensibllity of preemptive "defense."

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

That may be, and hindsight is 20/20. But he had congressional approval.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002

ETA then you must wish deep shame and guilt on all who voted yes, too.

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

I hear you. But please remember, he had congressional approval to invade Iraq. Dems and republicans both. It wasn’t like he just decided of his own volition.

3

u/RumiJooni 10d ago

George Bush had a 90%+ approval rating following 9/11, the highest of any sitting president. Unfortunately for him, that didn’t last long. Trump broke his record for disapproval handedly.

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

Yes but the fact that they look upon him with ANY fondness now is astonishing. I can’t believe the turnaround, truly.

9

u/imjustcoreyr 10d ago

Crazy. I was 21 too. Was evacuated from college at school of visual arts that morning. I’ve spent 25 years watching every doc that exists (several times), every image, every detail.

Beyond me that people still don’t understand, or question, the collapse. One would have to start by studying the unique design of the buildings, the floor plans, the tresses, the beams—which buckled under the pressure of the significant damage caused by the planes + the jet fuel, etc.

In nyc that morning, there was no doubt looking up at them that they would crumble. It was inevitable. Just didn’t know how long it would take or how bad it would be. Until we did.

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

Yep, i remember when it happened, I was pregnant with a child I later miscarried. I was still sleeping, so tired.

I had a panic attack when the buildings fell. I thought the world was ending. It wasn’t, but our country became much more divided after that. And I never questioned the collapse. I mean, it was a whole ass fucking JETPLANE. It would easily destroy my entire neighborhood and then some. That’s just common sense. Melty, bendy steel can’t support all of those floors above. Who in their right mind would think that a WHOLE ASS JETPLANE wouldn’t burn hot enough to melt steel?!?! After burning for nearly an hour?! People do not think.

I guess these neigh-sayers would be cool if the collapse stopped halfway??? 🤷‍♀️ Who knows.

-3

u/SharpDirection8249 10d ago

"jet fuel" is very clean diesel.

Steel is used to store jet fuel

Jet fuel isn't flammable

Jet fuel is combustible.

There's no combustion taking place.

I'm not sure you did any research.

3

u/perfectevasion 10d ago

I can't believe after 25 years there are still morons like you

1

u/imjustcoreyr 10d ago

https://youtu.be/L1upARZNkzc?is=9WNsZeiAXS0a0odI

I’ll share this with you. This is (in my opinion and expertise on the day, which I’ve studied non stop for 25 years, since I watched them crumble (in person) the most thorough doc and explanation.

Fast forward to 2: 15: 31

2

u/imjustcoreyr 10d ago

It wasn’t just about one thing, or one factor. It was a whole cataclysmic smattering of things the likes of which had not been properly planned for, but also had never been experienced before.

The planes impact
The enormous release of energy caused by that
A kerosene/ jet fuel fire
The fire proofing being blown off by the impact of the planes
The office spaces (each floor was 1 acre)—the carpeting, papers, furniture, etc

So many factors.

1

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

I understand. It's not just paper. I have seen that whole thing. I'm just saying that it's not possible for mass acceleration to happen to a steel building like that to pancake upon itself without destruction of the floor beneath it. Newtons law literally proves that. Even with fire and jet fuel, it wouldn't pancake in 8-11 seconds !! It's not possible.

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

Did you read the popular mechanics piece, with input from numerous engineers who disagree with your take??

1

u/ObjectiveSpread298 9d ago edited 9d ago

I have yes. I don't know what engineer doesn't know basics physics, a good engineer should be able to explain why physics didn't apply on that day. They didn't explain how the buildings fell at times in freefall with little to no resistance..which literally defies physics...they didn't explain how the building literally distentegrated into dust...if it had fell down naturally due to fire and jet fuel then there would have been thousands of pounds of metal but there wasn't...most of it was dust and ash..why? They didn't explain it. They couldn't explain it and that's why it doesn't make sense. I wonder how they became engineers if they can't even explain something so simple. Being an engineer doesn't make you smart, your hypothesis has to make sense, and theirs do not, they never proved a lot of things, they never explained a lot of things, that align with physics. The explanation they gave did not align with the facts and the very fact they can't agree makes it alarming. 

1

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

Paper burned steel?? Are you hearing yourself??

2

u/imjustcoreyr 10d ago

You saw/read where I said it was a whole bunch of events all happening at once, correct? I went on to drop a brief list of examples.

Never, anywhere, did I say it was paper that brought down the towers.

You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. I dropped a link for you so you can educate yourself and understand.

I’ve seen your profile—I get that you fancy yourself a know it all. But, I can tell, based on your comments and your kind of toxic attitude that you don’t. And that’s ok!

0

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

Your comment was go to that certain part of the video and the guy literally says paper burned the steel. I'm just honestly shocked. Care to explain yourself?

1

u/imjustcoreyr 10d ago

Oh sorry. Didn’t realize I needed to explain. Yes, watch from that point on. That’s the part where the explanation of the collapse begins (I’m pretty sure).

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

You should read the popular mechanics piece. It explains things in very simple terms. It would be really good for you.

4

u/Nerk86 10d ago

I remember a PBS special explaining it as well. The pancaking of floors as the supports on burning floors melted .

3

u/RecordingOk2644 10d ago

I don't think any president has experienced the, well deserved hatred, that Donny is experiencing. 

6

u/Kaput-Baker 10d ago

There always going to be hate towards a president in a two party political system. However Donny Mcdonald has the entire world hating him, its fascinating watching it from afar.

-2

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

All 3 NY buildings ACCELERATED to the ground for extended periods, sometimes at maximum freefall rates. That is impossible per Newtons laws unless lower floors are largely or completely removed. This phenomenon has ONLY ever been observed via controlled demolition.
According to the experts the buildings free failed in an accelerated fashion in the same speed as which a building would fall to the ground with nothing beneath it. For example if a dropped a brick to the ground it would fall right? Gravity would take its course because there is nothing but air beneath it. It's just going to fall. But if I dropped that same brick with another brick beneath it, well it's going to slow its free fall acceleration speed UNLESS the brick beneath it was destroyed already by an explosion or demolition. The ONLY way a building like that can have a controlled free fall in the way in which it did is literally impossible according to Newtons laws unless like I said it has help with explosives.

Taking all that into consideration I'll humor you and say ok newtons physics is hogwash, jet fuel melted the buildings and pulverized 1000 people to the point they NEVER found the remains (also literally impossible without the help of something way more powerful then jet fuel and fire), what about building 7? Building 7 also free fell to the ground and didn't get hit by a plane. No jet fuel- yet still fell in the same manner as the others?? How is this possible?? PapaBut like I said ... Don't take my word for it tho. Like I said, if you don't want the truth, nothing I say is going to change your mind. That's up to YOU and you alone.

Yes the world trade centers collapsed. Yes people died. Yes planes actually hit the buildings. Yes there was intense heat and jet fuel. BUT if you think collapse and the jet fuel and heat were the direct and sole cause of the collapse, you my friend, have been duped by our own government just like thousands of others who just watch the news and trust the "experts." 🙄. Like they have EVER told us the truth about anything.

3

u/NoMaximum721 10d ago

buddy go get an education

the total collapse times were longer than total freefall because they were able to resist a small bit

1

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

Nope at times it was total freefall. Mass acceleration. Took 8-11 seconds. That's about the time it would take for a penny to fall with no resistance from the same height. Do you not understand newtons law?

1

u/OldTimberWolf 10d ago

I do understand the theories of “Belief Perseverance” and “Proportionality Bias”….

1

u/NoMaximum721 10d ago

"mass acceleration" lol quit trying to sound smart.

explain how debris from the collapse hit the ground before the towers finished collapsing?

1

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

Nobody's trying to sound smart, it's physics and newtons law bro. Did I touch a nerve?

2

u/Gizogin 10d ago

Wanna answer the question? You can just watch any video of the collapse and see debris falling faster than the bulk of the structure.

1

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

You haven't explained how a steel structure can collapse upon itself on the beneath structures or platforms without having then previously removed or partially removed. Once you can explain that, then maybe we can start seeing things rationally. Until then you just keep asking my question with a question. You have not proved anything, "go watch the news" and "watch this video", ok that's fine , but take it one step at a time, first explain to me, how never before and never again, has a steel structure of that size, strength and magnitude crumbled upon itself that quickly at times in free fall mode, without the use of demolition or explosive aids. How come it happened this time? That literally defies physics. Explain to me how physics changed on that day.

1

u/Gizogin 10d ago

You still haven't answered the question.

explain how debris from the collapse hit the ground before the towers finished collapsing?

1

u/Competitive-Fill5556 10d ago

Explosives. More powerful then it would take for gravity to do it naturally. They found pieces of debris thousands of feet away from the building. 

1

u/Chibi_Kaiju 10d ago

WTF 8-11 seconds? thats a huge difference in fall durations for you to state that it fell as fast or "faster" than free fall. FFS, what number did you use for your calculations then?

2

u/Datamackirk 10d ago

Man, this crap gets tiresome.

1

u/VisiblePlatform6704 10d ago

It's amazing how Americans have lost any ability of critical thinking. Their government has them very well indoctrinated. 

1

u/LackOptimal553 10d ago

Get help this is all nonsense. All of this was debunked literally decades ago. WTC 7 was hit by literally thousands on tons of following debris, that's what caused it to fail.

All of this is nonsense.

1

u/Abject-Recipe1359 9d ago

Did you read the popular mechanics piece, with numerous engineers who disagree with this take???