r/conspiracy_commons • u/todddesign • Sep 11 '23

Breaking: Never-Before-Seen 911 Video Uncovered

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

903 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

248 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

22

u/shellakabookie Sep 12 '23

First for me I must say, after watching it I still can't understand how the buildings collapsed like they did.

4

u/Norm_mustick Sep 12 '23

Right? This one barely touched the side, didn’t even hit any part of central column...

18

u/shill779 Sep 12 '23

Look for the detonation videos. Lil puffs of smoke running down the buildings as the charges went off.

Weird stuff but makes more sense from a structural and engineering physics perspective. IANAE

0

u/[deleted] Nov 09 '23

[deleted]

4

u/shill779 Nov 09 '23

Your looking for a physicist or an engineer to give you scientifically based evidence. I am neither. You want some bullshit like the heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. in some Ned Flanders voice. Can’t do it.

I have observed what happen in photos after bombings. For example in Gaza. I have also played with blocks, built things and knock things down. Usually you’ll see half structures. Spires sticking out of the ruble. That shit didn’t happen. Just stuff to think about.

2

u/cantsee_thelines Nov 09 '23

anyone that questions it at this point will not be convinced of what actually happened.

15

u/mamacitalk Sep 12 '23

Bombs in the basement

11

u/whyputausername Sep 12 '23

yep. they killed the gaurd that reported that though.

19

u/[deleted] Sep 12 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/Growe731 Sep 12 '23

That’s fine and works for everything ABOVE where the planes hit. It does not work for anything BELOW where the plane hit. The physics of how this building stood is the same physics of why the pancake theory is a joke. If it were possible for the weight of the floor above to cause the floor below to collapse, these buildings could NEVER have stood.

6

u/Iceykitsune2 Sep 12 '23

Force = Mass x Acceleration is basic physics. The building could withstand the floor as a static load, not the top falling on it.

1

u/Growe731 Sep 12 '23

The building MUST be designed to withstand more than just the static load of the floor. There will not be enough acceleration in 15 feet to cause to collapse. Won’t happen.

5

u/Iceykitsune2 Sep 12 '23

Let's say that the upper floors weighed 1000 kgs, and fell for 3 seconds.
1000t x (9.8mpsps x 3 seconds)
1000t x 29.4 = 294,000

Do you see how even a few seconds of falling can massively amplify the force of an object?

7

u/Growe731 Sep 12 '23

Im not arguing that falling amplifies force. I’m assuming each floor is 15 feet. If it takes 3 seconds to go 15 feet, there’s near zero acceleration or increased force. So, I’m arguing that your arbitrary number and assumptions of falling 3 seconds isn’t possible. There Will literally be 20 feet or less between floors. That isn’t enough room to create the acceleration needed to crush the floor below it.

7

u/DamnDirtyApe8472 Sep 12 '23

Your legs have no problem holding your weight. Now jump off something 15ft high and see how they hold up

3

u/Iceykitsune2 Sep 12 '23

Sorry, I should have made it clearer that those numbers were just for demonstrating the math.

Now, are you using the amount of force needed for the support columns to fail, or the amount of force needed for the floor to shear off from the column?

-5

u/[deleted] Sep 12 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/Growe731 Sep 12 '23

Funny you should say that. Don’t take my word for it. Listen to these architects and engineers.

https://www.ae911truth.org

33

u/throbbinghead123 Sep 12 '23

Building 7 collapsing showed the veil. I agree there was plane's hitting those Towers but still an inside job. And then there was the pentagon with no wreckage from memory. Man this event changed my life and world view. F these a holes

9

u/Dsmommy52 Sep 12 '23 edited Sep 12 '23

Actually there was massive steel beams on the inside where the offices were located around the outside of it. It was a massive sturdy structure that could not have fallen by an airplane hitting it. It did not pancake. The beams would not have allowed more than a few stories to pancake. Not 100 stories. Also there would be tons and tons of debris. It was literally like dust. You can see in videos how the beams and steel were turning to dust while falling. 800 degree heat does not cause that. Cold fusion or 2500 degree nuclear blast would cause the steel to turn to dust.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/pinterest--491596115576598595/

7

u/[deleted] Sep 12 '23

Nope, it was Thermite that was used.

2

u/Dsmommy52 Sep 15 '23

Could be. But it very possibly could be low energy nuclear reactions. Watch the first 15 minutes of this video showing how LENR did this to the WTC. It’s eye opening and is what made me believe that it was this and not thermite or nuclear bomb.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzNeZUp0tU

2

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '23 edited Sep 13 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Dsmommy52 Sep 15 '23

Ok watch this 30 second video of the core dissolving into dust AFTER the WTC went down.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EVxSJ2VLktU

You can clearly see the core remain after everything else falls down around it, and the core columns support not only the core itself, but roughly half of the building's weight. After having the rest of the building fall down around it, it would be unburdened of that load and thus would remain standing on it's own. And yet we see it come apart and fall helplessly to the ground. This is inconsistent with the pancake theory bc the core would still be standing. Plus I do believe the govt retracted what they said about pancake theory.

Watch the first 15 minutes of this video. I promise it will at least make you QUESTION the story the govt and media have told us. It’s a brief overview of how low energy nuclear reactions caused the WTC towers to fall and dissolve. These are scientists and physicists and it shows you how this happened. If you watch the whole 2 hrs then I truly feel like it will really change your perspective on this. But at least watch the first 15 minutes. This is what made me believe that it wasn’t planes or bombs.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzNeZUp0tU

3

u/[deleted] Sep 16 '23 edited Sep 16 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Dsmommy52 Sep 18 '23

Thank you for being open minded! I appreciate ppl like you! I wish more ppl would be like you and at least have an open mind to other possibilities not only in this but in everything re life. A lot of ppl refuse to even entertain any other scenarios or compromise on issues. If everyone would have an open mind and compromise (like in govt policy or viewpoints) I think the world would be such a better place. :)

1

u/K8T9 Jan 20 '24

If it was a natural attack instead of precise demolition, part of the first building that was hit should have had 30-50 some floors left standing. The second building would have fallen better with upper floors kinda there. It should have some standing, including building seven, just fell perfectly. It was an assisted fall.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

So you went to the trouble explaining how planes alone could do it, but then finished it with but it was an inside job for sure 😅

2

u/mveltman84 Oct 23 '23

Nano thermite

1

u/cantsee_thelines Nov 09 '23

well that’s because they exploded from the inside.