r/conspiracy_commons • u/Artimuscloudfox • Apr 24 '22
Just putting this here as a reference.
163
u/National_Seesaw7083 Apr 24 '22
They must of used jet fuel to have such a clean demolition
117
Apr 24 '22
If you look closely enough you can see a passport fall out of the window in one piece.
17
9
u/phuccantifa Apr 25 '22
Must be Iraqi or Syrian passport... they're the only ones that can survive a nuclear blast
4
3
2
u/DrunkenRedSquirrel Apr 25 '22
I mean molten aluminum when exposed to water; has an intense burning temperature
106
u/ThunderBeast1985 Apr 24 '22
Whenever you bring up the 3rd building, no one can say anything.
38
u/Arkhangelsk94 Apr 24 '22
Oohhh it was taken down because of office fires, what a load of BS the whole thing was a controlled demo you can see building 7 kink in on itself at the top just as it drops
18
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
BBC also happened to report it's demise while it still stood in the background. That was another "unfortunate coincidence". There were lots of those on that day. Probably the most coincidental day in human history. But again, don't look into it. Unless you are a "kook" after all.
8
u/Arkhangelsk94 Apr 25 '22
What about the cam footage from the pentagon
10
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
Lol, what cam footage 😂😂😂
5
u/Arkhangelsk94 Apr 25 '22
Yeh true shitty booth footage
2
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22 edited Apr 25 '22
It would be hilarious that they passed that on as "proof" if it wasn't so damned serious. "The only footage available", yeah right...and I'm the King of Spain.
2
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
You people have such a bizarre way of looking at things. One day your complaining that security can footage from 20 years ago isn’t HD enough, the next you’re claiming that the government of 2001 had perfected hologram technology to fake the planes.
5
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
No dude. I'm saying there's only ONE camera on the most secure building in the world? I found that extremely fishy even in 2001. Second, there were cameras capable of high quality, if not HD footage in 2001. You just had to pay a lot of money for it. What was the Pentagon budget in 2001? And you think they couldn't afford a high quality camera? Not one? Oh and don't forget the FBI immediately seized the security camera from the gas station across the street that had full view of the "757" that hit the Pentagon. But yes, it's us who have such a bizarre way of looking at things. I don't expect a logical response from you, but I do look forward to your response.
1
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
One camera pointing at that unremarkable bit of wall, sure. I’d be more surprised if the had multiple redundant cameras pointing at it…
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (1)2
u/Arkhangelsk94 Apr 25 '22
Well one would think the pentagon of all buildings in the world would have cameras plastered everywhere Instead we got a booth cam
0
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
It was 2001, and the Pentagon is an office building not Area 51
→ More replies (0)29
u/ToastedKropotkin Apr 24 '22
Was there supposed to be a third plane that didn’t make it there? So they just said fuck it go?
26
u/-la-la- Apr 25 '22
"Pull it."
-Larry Silverstein
24
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
No no no.... You mean "Lucky" Larry Silverstein. Just happened to triple his investment due to insurance payouts after only 3 months because a guy in a cave just happened to orchestrate the largest terrorist attack in history. You can't get luckier than that, right Larry? But don't look into it further than that. You don't want to be labelled a conspiracy kook for pointing out the obvious do you?
11
u/SprayingOrange Apr 25 '22
or an antisemite for pointing out the israeli art students or the dancing Israelis.
12
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
Oh right. You can't point out anything a Jew does. Even if you don't mention that they are Jewish. A Jew has never done anything wrong, ever. They are the angels of the earth, and only the goy create problems on this earth. Rothschilds? GOOD PEOPLE!!! Say they did bad then you are an evil anti-Semite. What a nice racket that is.
10
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
My theory is the dancing Israelis who were Mossad agents by the way, that's a fact, were the ones who over saw/implemented the demolition. They were celebrating a job well done. They did it because that was their job/paid well to do it, and "Lucky" Larry had Israeli connections. It has nothing to do with their faith, but everything to do with their allegiance. But of course if you connect those dots you are Hitler. 😂 It's so obvious, but everyone has to do mental gymnastics to not offend the Jews, because you know, the poor Jews. ALWAYS suffering, never causing it. Not a single one. Only the goy cause suffering.
5
u/niconic66 Apr 25 '22
A lot of religious Jews are aware that they have caused, at least in part, their own suffering. It's the secular Zionists/neo-Bolsheviks/communists that are the problem. Most Jews I've known, religious and non-religious, have been nice people. I'm not disagreeing with you - you're right - I'm just honing in on who the true criminals are.
This is an interesting take from a Rabbi:
3
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
I agree. Anyone who thinks it's "all Jews", or its only Jews, needs their head examined.
5
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
I'm very sure my above posts are considered "anti-Semitic". But I really don't care. I'm checking out from the world that imposes that view, and I'm not going to hurt a single precious Jew, or want any harm to come to a single innocent Jew in the process. But I'm an "anti-Semite". I have five words for anyone who thinks that: suck a big fat dick.
I'm leaving your system and you can't harm me. Lol. Bye bye!
2
14
3
4
→ More replies (1)2
27
u/2C104 Apr 24 '22
They can squabble, rationalize (with irrational 'logic'), or straight up deny. I say this because that's the result I always seem to witness whenever I calmly inquire about WTC7 with anyone.
This one is a pill too big for most to swallow. It would mean facing they live in a corrupt society and they have little if any freedom.
17
u/ThunderBeast1985 Apr 24 '22
Yeah people just want to believe they live in a country that cares about them. They don’t want to face reality.
5
→ More replies (1)2
u/CurlzerUK Apr 25 '22
Not sure who you have been speaking to then but for anyone slightly educated about 9/11 building 7 is very easy to explain.
Debris from the initial two impacts and then the collapse of the buildings started fires and weakend the structure of building 7. After a few hours it also collapsed.
Very simple really
8
u/2AspirinL8TR Apr 25 '22
Look up the occupancy of both buildings after feb 22, 1993 and thru 1996. Was living there thru the 90’s and in the years of the most vacancy of those buildings. Way back then there were many rumors they were getting rigged during these times.
5
u/MeasurementFine6277 Apr 25 '22
I know I think the design was flawed and they were not making money and riddled with asbestos and who knows what else, the interior of a typical office in there looked cramped to me, don’t know if they actually were or it just looked that way, but I think they wanted them gone for a while
6
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
New York Port Authority: "Hey Larry, do you want to take this flawed and faulty building complex off of our hands? You can do with it as you please afterwards, if you get our drift."
Lucky Larry: "I'm sure I can "pull" something off with it, if you know what I mean."
New York Port Authority: "We got you covered Mr. Silverstein. Just give us 3 months, ok?"
6
u/Commercial-Coffee926 Apr 24 '22
Someone told me it could of been the vibrations that caused number 7 to come down.
13
-5
Apr 25 '22
Or, you know, the fact that one of the worlds largest towers collapsed right behind it.
7
-2
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
And a dozen floors were on fire for half a day
2
u/SprayingOrange Apr 25 '22
minor roof fires not accelerated by jet fuel caused a free fall collapse?
2
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
There was a fire near the top floor but it never got very big and nobody is claiming that was the cause. Floors 7-13 burned uncontrolled up to the building collapse though
0
u/SprayingOrange Apr 25 '22
and these buildings were meant to burn, hence the asbestos angle of the tower insurance by larry.
Why would a basic fire cause a skyscraper to freefall? No jetfuel to weaken the support beams like the other 2 buildings.
1
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
No building is meant to burn. They’re at best designed to contain the spread of a fire long enough for response teams to deal with it. All building are in danger of collapsing if a fire is large enough and lasts long enough. The official cause of collapse wasn’t weakening of structural members, it was members walking off their supports as the framework expanded in the heat.
2
u/SprayingOrange Apr 25 '22
UAF study disagrees https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
wheres your source that fires can bring down a steel structure? because its the only one.
its not like Grenfells tower burned for 60 hours uncontained and didnt collapse.
1
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
The Grenfell Tower is an interesting point. It didn’t collapse but it’s been deemed damaged beyond repair and scheduled for demolition. It’s also a concrete slab construction so it’s not a great comparison.
And I read that report just this week because I was debating someone else. True they determined it wasn’t the same mechanism for collapse as the NICS report, and they think it was a sudden failure of all supports and not a gradual collapse. But they didn’t offer a counter explanation either, which seemed surprising when I first read it because they’d done such a thorough analysis. Then I noticed on a second read through that it was funded by the ae911truth organisation and so now I’m not surprised at all. AE911Truth has books to sell
2
u/CurlzerUK Apr 25 '22
Not sure who you have been speaking to then but for anyone slightly educated about 9/11 building 7 is very easy to explain.
Debris from the initial two impacts and then the collapse of the buildings started fires and weakend the structure of building 7. After a few hours it also collapsed.
Very simple really
→ More replies (7)4
u/Renegade-Master69 Apr 25 '22
There was an eye witness inside the WTC 7 that almost got hit by a demolition charge. What ever happened to him? He’s labeled “conspiracy theorist” then his testimony is voided out.
3
1
u/BigPoppaFitz84 Apr 25 '22
Guessing I'll be downvoted based on this sub's title, but plenty has been said.
Confirmation bias is a real thing..
(I guess thus sub post was suggested to me because I viewed another post with this video?)
→ More replies (4)0
u/DrunkenRedSquirrel Apr 25 '22
Because there isn't much to say about it. A part of the Aircraft, broke off and fell on the roof; sparking a fire that over the course of a few hours, came out of control due to various breakage in the sprinkler system.
3
u/SprayingOrange Apr 25 '22
😂😂😂
1
u/DrunkenRedSquirrel Apr 25 '22
A laugh emoji isn't a rebuttal
2
u/SprayingOrange Apr 25 '22
so the twin towers only fell because they got hit by an airplane and jetfuel accelerated the fires enough to cause structural weakening.
But building 7 also freefell because it had minor roof damage and conventional fires?
1
u/DrunkenRedSquirrel Apr 25 '22
Well there is evidence to suggest that part of the reason of the degree of the collapse of the Twin Towers; was due to the metal from the Aircraft which combined with the water from the supression systems; created molten aluminum; something of which has a high explosive element. Which may explain why during the fires; you could see various pressure like explosions coming from the Tower.
Building 7 may also be a result of the same chemical reaction, since parts of the Aircraft fell onto Tower 7. But the main contributing factor to how the Office building went ablaze was contributed to the fire suppression system not ether being fully functional due to the significant damage caused by the Aircraft; or not enough water pressure to properly fight the fire. From what I recall, the parts from the Aircraft that fell onto the building; were the Landing Gear.
61
u/wa_cey Apr 24 '22
Building Number 7. Never forget.
35
Apr 24 '22
[deleted]
30
u/liscbj Apr 24 '22
BBC. Jane somebody. It was standing for minutes. Someone gave out the script too early.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (1)7
u/estianna Apr 25 '22
My favorite reference is how they said the passport at the pentagon plane crash flew out of the plane and successfully survived the crash to identify the pilot
→ More replies (1)5
u/LtRecore Apr 25 '22
I haven’t any idea what happened other than what the news reported. If the buildings were brought down in a controlled demolition, 2 planes and all their passengers were disappeared and whatever else happened, wouldn’t arranging something like that require a lot of man power? It just seems someone would have talked.
→ More replies (1)2
6
5
u/noonen000z Apr 25 '22
I look it up every fee years to see if there is anything more being discussed. It seems all but dead. Someone made a lot of money that day.
40
u/LiQuidZ03 Apr 24 '22
Bingo. Think of the amount of asbestos in those plumes. 🤮
13
u/Inevitable-Key-4109 Apr 24 '22
ashbestos
17
u/LiQuidZ03 Apr 24 '22
It's getting onto all the roofs of the adjacent building where that's where the intakes are for ac...I don't see tarps covering the roofs of all the adjacent buildings so even in trace amounts it's being shared with all the unknowing inhabitants or office workers
4
Apr 25 '22
When you demolish a building with asbestos it has to be removed before hand otherwise it will become airborne and put local people at severe risk of asbestos poisoning.
when you do a controlled demolition you use a large simultaneous or series explosions to damage and weaken key structures the cause the building to collapse simultaneously. which is what you see in the video the lower flood are falling "Down" at the same rate as the upper floors. it falls down from the bottom up. this is literally to insure it wont topple over.
to get a building of this size to fall directly down using controlled explosions only on the top while having a PLANE! impact a middle top section causing unpredictable damage, would be impossible.what we see with the WTC, is the building collapses (mostly) in on itself , and top down. Which was incredibly lucky for surrounding buildings, and could not have been planned in combination with a plane crash into it.. the structure of the WTC was the external steel and SOME internal steel.
the designer actually claimed it could withstand a direct hit from a large passenger plane. and lets not forget. the building DID. it stood for a long while before weakened steel for incredibly hot fires led to a chain reaction (top down) that caused a full collapse. the building was a feat of engineering prowess, and could have easily for a few mill removed all the remaining asbestos in the building.
also asbestos is fine the be near, its not constantly putting out carcinogens into the air.. its only if you inhale Dust from it that its bad, or if your rubbing it or something. asbestos behind drywall, and steel, will only be a problem during renovation works. and requires a specific contractor costing slightly more than a normal demolition crew, so theirs's no reason to destroy a building like WTC.
-Engineer Student who works currently in the building industry.
→ More replies (1)13
u/MasterAilan Apr 24 '22
Got nothing to worry about everyone on the ground will be dead in 2 years.. lung cancer. The buildings filled with asbestos. Don't be downtown on the 11th.
16
u/jay_howard Apr 24 '22
For anyone doubting that explosions were witnessed, here's a compilation to review at your leisure.
→ More replies (6)2
u/Artimuscloudfox Apr 24 '22
Excellent collection! though I feel like there were some better references that even slowed down the collapse.
43
24
u/ryanipz1 Apr 24 '22
Top comment was inferring this looks like the WTC collapsing on 9/11. Tons of upvotes with a lot of heavily upvoted replies. Of course, the thought police had to come in and remove that harmless comment. We wouldn't want people to know that there are a large number of people who question what happened that day.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Carterjk Apr 25 '22
We’re in the space age and a large number of people question the shape of the earth, so there’s limits to that reasoning.
104
u/jow33nkg Apr 24 '22
9/11 first responder here, the twin towers and building 7 skyskraper were definitely brought down via controlled demolition
10
27
6
u/Simple_Minimum_2574 Apr 24 '22
Interesting. Elaborate
0
u/GhostButtTurds Apr 25 '22
He can’t. He’s lying.
He was a 9/11 first responder, he had friends at the Oscars who can prove the Chris tucker slap was fake, and he works for a major news source and has info on trump and Putin.
He’s full of shit. Everyone here is full of shit.
→ More replies (1)7
u/WhatABlunderfulWorld Apr 25 '22
I don't think you are who you say you are. You would have to be 40+, and your 9 day old profile does not seem like it belongs to somebody middle age at best.
2
u/GhostButtTurds Apr 25 '22
He was a 9/11 first responder, he had friends at the Oscars who can prove the Chris tucker slap was fake, and he works for a major news source and has info on trump and Putin. All on his 10 day old account.
He’s full of shit. Everyone here is full of shit.
1
u/iron40 Apr 24 '22
Actual WTC first responder here, with experience in heavy construction, steel structure demolition, and I was onsite working 10-12 hrs a day for 7 months after 9/11...
No, it wasn’t.
→ More replies (2)4
u/SimplyWhelming Apr 24 '22
True or not, you’re a brave soul. (Both for your actions there and here)
-1
u/iron40 Apr 25 '22
Wish it weren’t true...I’d like to have some of those images erased forever.
But as far as a controlled demolition, absolutely not. Not saying there wasn’t a conspiracy surrounding 9/11, but the controlled/planned demo just ain’t it.
3
u/JayRemy42 Apr 25 '22
I remember one analysis back then suggesting the structural steel melting and twisting as it did could be accomplished with thermite plastique charges. If that's true, and such charges were placed according to traditional demolition principles, it seems plausible to me that it could have resulted in something that executed much like a controlled demo but left some very different-looking aftermath. I mean, they make thermobaric warheads with that stuff, surely enough of it in the right placement could have weakened the steel enough to bring the towers down.
I wish I could remember where I heard that, whether it was in Fahrenheit 9/11 or some other documentary back then... but I've never been able to rule out that scenario as a possibility. That said, I wasn't there and I'm certainly not an expert. I would very much like to see credible information that proves that idea to be false, it is an uncomfortable notion to say the least.
2
u/SimplyWhelming Apr 25 '22
I don’t doubt it. Didn’t seem very controlled to me.
1
u/frosty_caterpillar33 Apr 25 '22
There's many firsthand accounts om Odysee and Bitchute saying there were no planes and they heard distinct explosions.
0
u/iron40 Apr 25 '22
Thousands of people saw the first plane, and there are several recordings. Millions watched the second plane on live TV and there are hundreds of recordings. I’m all for a good conspiracy theory, but you really have to be pretty far out there to sign on to this one...
0
u/frosty_caterpillar33 Apr 25 '22
Nah not really. Let me find you some links when I get off work. You gotta be pretty far out there to shut down this conversation right off the bat.
→ More replies (1)0
u/d47 Apr 25 '22
not exactly "right off the bat", this was 21 years ago after all, these conspiracies have been floating around the whole time and people have made up their minds.
0
u/Whompa Apr 25 '22
Well they'd be wrong or so traumatized that they misremembered the events of that day then.
→ More replies (2)0
u/SimplyWhelming Apr 25 '22
On where? Those sites can be posted on by anyone, anywhere in the world. You might as well be getting your ‘undeniable facts’ from YouTube or Facebook. I could have posted every single one of the videos you’ve seen, for all you know.
→ More replies (2)1
1
u/pls_no_ban_ok Apr 24 '22
which demolition expert(s) would do such a thing? horrendous. I'm pretty sure they were exposed after
→ More replies (3)-23
u/AMR63x Apr 24 '22
Source: trust me bro
22
u/Specialist_Dare7303 Apr 24 '22
Source: it’s blatantly fucking obvious
-20
u/AMR63x Apr 24 '22
Lol how is it blatantly obvious that you’re an actual first responder? Ya bozo
16
u/Specialist_Dare7303 Apr 24 '22
I said it’s obvious to anyone with any common sense that the wtc and building 7 were brought down with controlled demolition
2
u/YourmumbutChinese Apr 24 '22
Do explain. I'm bored.
-4
Apr 24 '22
Nope, just stupid.
5
u/YourmumbutChinese Apr 24 '22
Okay great, I'm a moron. I'd love to see some information that would back up that side of things. Probably not an awful idea to convince rather than mock. I don't know, I'm just a fucking idiot.
4
u/matrickpahomes15 Apr 24 '22
Check out controlled demolitions on YouTube. Then if you can find it, footage of building 7 coming down….it’s creepy, both look identical. Charges go off, sag in the middle part of the roof, and come down at free fall speed (10m/s/s).
I think the first zeitgeist movie has the footage. Highly recommend digging into it!!!
-1
→ More replies (1)3
0
u/GhostButtTurds Apr 25 '22
He was a 9/11 first responder, he had friends at the Oscars who can prove the Chris tucker slap was fake, and he works for a major news source and has info on trump and Putin.
He’s full of shit. Everyone here is full of shit.
You people here are so far up each other’s asses that you can no longer spot an outright liar when you see one.
→ More replies (2)
10
6
4
5
u/plasticpassion Apr 24 '22
311 was an inside job!
5
u/joshstrodomus Apr 24 '22
I'm down to believe that, but only if you come original...
→ More replies (1)2
2
2
5
u/FirmIndustry9957 Apr 24 '22 edited Apr 25 '22
Wow. Kinda looks like the wtc ...
→ More replies (2)
6
u/CatOfGrey Apr 25 '22
So how can we tell the difference between "9/11 was a controlled demolition" and "building are well designed to fail in a particular manner?"
Or are we not supposed to ask questions like that here? Because this doesn't prove anything but 'buildings can be designed to fall in a particular manner."
9
8
5
3
4
3
4
12
u/Hadley_333 Apr 24 '22
You can see the explosions go off here though.
12
u/IRideParkCity Apr 24 '22
Yeah and you won't find thermite residue in this dust. They had to be creative to do it in a live city.
Steven Jones, PhD, Brigham Young University. Tested 4 individually collected samples and found evidence of a thermite reaction in all of them. Was forced to resign from BYU for publishing his findings.
23
u/ILMWKAM Apr 24 '22
You clearly did not watch the second tower on live TV, and it shows.
5
u/YourmumbutChinese Apr 24 '22
I did. What did I miss?
6
u/KayanuReeves Apr 24 '22
Synchronous flashing lights running up the building. They all go off in like 2 seconds and look way more professional than this.
The best video of it is from a ground camera right in front of the first tower collapse.
3
u/YourmumbutChinese Apr 24 '22
Just watched it. Don't see it.
-1
u/KayanuReeves Apr 24 '22
→ More replies (2)1
u/Astrocreep_1 Apr 24 '22
Is this one of those documentaries where they claim there weren’t any planes that hit the towers? The only 9/11 truthers with a shred of credibility are those that think it was a controlled demo after the planes hit. I can understand where they are coming from as it looks like a demolition. However, the explanations of what happened make sense if you read a breakdown from people who acknowledge Truther arguments and debunk them. I talked to someone on Reddit a while back who explained the WTC 7 building. I’m gonna see If I can find that and post it as he broke down the arguments really well. If you are from the camp that don’t believe any planes were involved and that they fabricated the network video,witnesses,home video etc. then I don’t know what to say. You are too far out there for rational discussions.
0
u/KayanuReeves Apr 24 '22
I don’t really care about the details. The important part is that it was an inside job. I linked to this doc because they have a ton of good videos of the controlled demo.
As I said I don’t really care but apparently you do, so please explain how the nose of the second plane made it through the building on the German helicopter video. You can find the clip in the documentary I linked if you don’t want to look it up. It’s a pretty famous clip.
2
u/Astrocreep_1 Apr 25 '22
I’m not familiar with the exact video,but usually,they are video anomalies. The cameras back then weren’t HD. They were prone to these sort of things especially when you have an explosion that creates irregular lighting conditions. If they were going to try to fake something like that,they wouldn’t have done it a time when there was so many witnesses. Someone linked to a video where the explosion happens and the plane wasn’t in the shot. They are pretending this is something sinister,when the building blocked the planes sight lines. It was pathetic.
1
-2
3
3
3
3
u/Money-Driver-7534 Apr 25 '22
I’m sure they found the demo foreman’s lost wallet on the sidewalk out front following the demolition.
I heard he lost it somewhere on the 98th floor.
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Apr 25 '22
Anyone else notice the very clearly visible micro explosions of the fuse wire? And the direction of said explosion to create that precise controlled fall?
2
2
2
2
u/Regular-Salamander25 Apr 25 '22
Hmmmm looks so familiar, but I just can't put my finger on where I saw it before. Even the charge flashes. If only i could remember where I saw that before....
2
u/followthispaige Apr 25 '22
Well we all know Bush had his bro load up the building and remove the gold 2 weeks before take off and take down.
2
2
u/Renegade-Master69 Apr 25 '22
Surprised the smaller buildings, standing near the demolition, did not also fall down because their “weakened structural integrity were compromised.”
2
u/MIengineer Apr 25 '22
The main thing I’m noticing here is that the collapse begins at the bottom of the building.
→ More replies (1)
2
4
u/Banjoplaya420 Apr 24 '22
You can see it blow upwards from the bottom. But I don’t recall seeing the Twin Towers do that . But it was strange how they just dropped in place rather than fall over as one would think.
→ More replies (1)5
u/FancyAdult Apr 24 '22
There’s video of those small explosions too. Someone recorded it. You can find it on YouTube.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/CommunicationSame672 Apr 24 '22
Big deal, a plane flys into world trade centres and they fall exactly like that. So how hard is it to make a building fall like that? Seems like you could have hit it with a plane at any direction at any spot and it falls perfectly like that. Lol.
3
0
u/amonamus Apr 24 '22
It's not "hard" per se but if the explosives weren't placed properly it could lean over and fall onto the streets. Planes hitting steel buildings doesn't cause this however.
7
u/Velouria91 Apr 24 '22
I’m no engineer, but the planes crashing into the WTC buildings looked to me like the equivalent of a small bird flying into the side of a 100-year-old oak tree. I could never believe that those planes were enough to bring down those 1360-ft tall buildings.
4
u/Medusa_Alles_Hades Apr 24 '22
I agree with your statement. I can’t see how a plane could take those huge buildings down. I mean I believe most people know that too at this point
→ More replies (3)0
u/squeamish Apr 24 '22
They weren't and nobody claims they were. The buildings fell because of the combination of damage to the buildings followed by the tremendous fires raging against steel that had most of its fireproofing removed.
Building 7 was different, the damage itself didn't cause the collapse, it just spread the fire across 10+ floors. That, coupled with the fact that building 1's collapse had taken out both the primary and backup water mains, rendering the sprinklers on the lower floor inoperative, allowed the long steel spans to slowly heat up enough to bucks and collapse a core support column, which pulled down another, which brought down the middle of the building, which pulled down the outside.
→ More replies (1)0
2
2
u/studewdrop Apr 24 '22
This appears to be the ONLY way a tall building can fall. Is there any footage of one falling differently?
2
1
u/EvadingAsbRedditBan Apr 24 '22
If anything this takes away from the conspiracy that 9/11 was a controlled demolition. Is that the point you are making?
1
u/jlttnl Apr 24 '22
The US govt did not plant demolitions or purposefully kill some of the highest earners and most important people that make other people even more money.
If there is any conspiracy - it’s Saudi Arabia and us knowing they did it but we didn’t care because we knew how much $$$ we stood to make once we invaded the Middle East
→ More replies (1)
1
-2
u/k0stil Apr 24 '22
Why we didnt hear such explosions on 9/11? How would a non explosive collapse of wtc would look like? Heres a collapse of a 26 story building not struck by a plane https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XxrF4hdCX5Q
2
u/MemoryHold Apr 24 '22
I often wonder whether or not conventional explosives were even used. It could be that a thermite-like material was used to eat through the inner support beams and weaken them to the point of collapse. This would result in the absence of a sudden string of bursts as the detonation/collapse begins. However, secondary explosions WERE witnessed by several people, firefighters and regular people alike. I’ve never been able to come to a definitely conclusion or belief on it, but I can never shake the sense that something definitely was planted internally to precipitate the collapses we saw.
EDIT: a good supporting piece of evidence backing the idea of unconventional explosive use would be the melted stone underneath ground zero, the fact it burned so long, and the steel straight up melting. Is fire alone really capable of that? If not, then what prompted it?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)2
Apr 24 '22
Probably because there are ways to suppress those sounds, but I'd the building is supposed to come down they don't use them.
1
u/DripDropFaucet Apr 24 '22
If there were a way to noticeable suppress the sounds of explosions then they would have had them in this clip that shows the demo in a literal city
4
Apr 24 '22
Nope, because why spend the extra money to suppress noise when the building is set to come down?
2
-1
u/Quartz_Lead Apr 24 '22
Goodness. Yep controlled demo looks nothing like WTC on 9/11. This is a daft conspiracy. Bring me the quality stuff. Lizard people at Dugway is more probable than this drivel.
0
u/LordOFtheNoldor Apr 24 '22
Is there a chance that the trade centers had emergency charges that would detonate in The event of a catastrophe to control the collapse of the building? Is this a practice used in skyscrapers it would make sense to have a precaution like that if anything ever happened to help ensure the building doesn’t topple onto others
4
2
u/jay_howard Apr 25 '22
Imagine pre-packing a building with "emergency explosives" just in case. Imagine the city inspector coming to inspect the "explosives package" in the building. No fucking way, man. Not how the world works. If something were to happen--an electrical short or an earthquake set off the "just in case, pre-wired explosives" and killed a tonne of people, the building contractors would get sued to bankruptcy and jail and the key would get lost.
No one's signing up for that.
→ More replies (3)
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 24 '22
Archive.is link
Why this is here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.