Although the jet fuel may burn hot enough to weaken the structural support beams, how long do you think it takes for the fire to burn through the fire retárdant that covered the beams? How does that time compare with the amount of time it takes for the jet fuel to combust? Have you ever lit gasoline on fire? Doesn't burn for very long, does it?
Fascinating facts. You see, there's a difference in the way structural support columns are weakened compared to the bulk properties of the material. In a three-point bend test, for example, the steel would deflect at 900 degrees, but when you place that same beam in a columnar load configuration, you have a different load requirement, called "buckling." Buckling loads are typically orders of magnitude higher than horizontal beam configurations.
I'm reading the NIST report right now. On page 49 of the Building 7 investigation report, it says "Diesel fuels did not play a role in the collapse of WTC7." It said even if the diesel had caught fire, it would have just made a big fireball but not burn long enough to cause structural damage.
So the towers collapsed because of the plane crash, massive fire (for Tower 7) or a planned demolition :-(
I also remember the news coverage on the day which initially reported that the fourth plane was shot down. They later changed the story to the brave passengers. Here's a thought- what if these skyscrapers were intentionally demolished to prevent the buildings from falling off and as a result create a wider area of damage In both these instances, there's a definite need to conceal the truth but, both these acts would be for the 'greater good'.
My question is, when will people get their priorities straight? Who's figured out the JFK assassination yet? It's been over 50 years, please someone tell me who shot em.
The conspiracy, imo, is overkill. High jacking multiple airplanes to cover up demolishing the towers.. Why? Why would you need to do that? How many people do you think it would take to execute the cover up of the plane high jackings? Now how many for the demolition of two buildings? Theres very few people in the world who even know how to coordinate such a demolition. We are talking about a very select few. There would be so much more obvious evidence imo.
There is a lot of evidence that points to a cover up but the American people are not necessary stupid but gullible
Also y a pancake y not fall to one side or other? Much cheaper as would only need to blow the bottom... Rather then thermite each floor on a timer and wreak a plane into it If it fell to one side or other it would have killed everyone in it and not so many would have escaped and the fall would have hit other buildings destroying them and be of the height where it hit would have still been like a massive bomb went off with debris shooting everywhere.
Right. Why take a plan that is already extremely complicated and risky, and then add more complicated and risky objectives to it when you could just blame the demolitions on terrorist anyways? Its beyond necessary and only creates more loose ends to cover up.
I've been listening to these theories for years and years, and I've listened with an open mind too. I never saw anything happen in any of the YouTube videos I watched that made it clear to me there was other foul play besides the planes for the two towers. And yes, I believe it is feasible for the towers to have collapsed in the aftermath of the plane strikes, you don't need steel beams to fully melt for that to occur. Tower 7 though... Yeah Cheese, I've always believed something happened there we didn't hear about. Bombs planted by terrorists? Who knows. I have a hard time blaming the government for this incident, especially seeing how George Bush handled the whole incident, he seemed completely genuine. I hate seeing jokes about him and steel beams, he doesn't deserve that rep for this incident at least. But what do I know, the governments screwed us before, who's to say what they would or wouldn't do. Regardless, RIP to the lives lost and to the people still facing health problems because of the tragedy.
Fascinating twist. Never thought of it that way. In either case, it would have required the towers be rigged with thermite in advance. There are record of Larry Silverstein giving an order to the NY fire department to "pull it," which means to initiate the controlled demolition. There's even a video of him confessing to giving such an order during a live television interview. How then does one reconcile that with the official NIST investigation report, which claimed that fire alone brought building 7 down? Does this mean that all high-rise buildings are rigged with explosives in case the building owner decides to "pull it"? Does this not raise safety concerns? Doesn't this call into question all official reports surrounding these events?
What I find most interesting is that every official investigation has found that fire caused the structural collapses. Not a single report even considered controlled demolition a possible cause of collapse. Proper scientific investigation requires that all possible causes be considered, no matter how likely. They didn't do that for 9/11. They picked the cause and then investigated the facts to fit their predisposed understanding of those facts. It's bad science. This supports my belief that all investigators had VERY heavy confirmation bias as a result of heavy manipulation by the mass media following the horrific events.
The floors fell down with force directed in toward the center at a rate of speed slighty slower than free fall because of weakened support sections on the corners and the towers' unconventional, tube in tube design. No conventionally built tower would've collapsed on itself because of fire.
Well said Cheese. When the nation is in grievance, fear, anger, sad, it is so easy to manipulate. Years have passed, look at the findings with open and rational mind. Only the Truth serve Justice to the victims of 9/11. May their souls Rest in Peace.
I'm sorry but it has gone way beyond justice for the victims. There have been multiple wars fought because of this. Nations have gotten destroyed. Any other truth now will be the 'most inconvenient truth' in history.