Sup guys. I'm currently studying architecture and there's

I´ll start posting whatever info i find. Btw it has to be actual facts, like the materials used etc.

bush did it i seen it with my own eyes on nine elevel he walked with a another man then he took a phone out of his pocket and said " blow em up john" and then the rest is history my uncle was there with me and he saw everything too i swear to god bush did it he called some john guy and said blow em up john i was there i seen with my own eyes and my uncle did too bush was with another man walking around when he called someone and said blow em up john and the rest is history i seen with my own eyes i swear and my uncle did too

bush did it i seen it with my own eyes on nine elevel he walked with a another man then he took a phone out of his pocket and said " blow em up john" and then the rest is history my uncle was there with me and he saw everything too i swear to god bush did it he called some john guy and said blow em up john i was there i seen with my own eyes and my uncle did too bush was with another man walking around when he called someone and said blow em up john and the rest is history i seen with my own eyes i swear and my uncle did toobush did it i seen it with my own eyes on nine elevel he walked with a another man then he took a phone out of his pocket and said " blow em up john" and then the rest is history my uncle was there with me and he saw everything too i swear to god bush did it he called some john guy and said blow em up john i was there i seen with my own eyes and my uncle did too bush was with another man walking around when he called someone and said blow em up john and the rest is history i seen with my own eyes i swear and my uncle did toobush did it i seen it with my own eyes on nine elevel he walked with a another man then he took a phone out of his pocket and said " blow em up john" and then the rest is history my uncle was there with me and he saw everything too i swear to god bush did it he called some john guy and said blow em up john i was there i seen with my own eyes and my uncle did too bush was with another man walking around when he called someone and said blow em up john and the rest is history i seen with my own eyes i swear and my uncle did toobush did it i seen it with my own eyes on nine elevel he walked with a another man then he took a phone out of his pocket and said " blow em up john" and then the rest is history my uncle was there with me and he saw everything too i swear to god bush did it he called some john guy and said blow em up john i was there i seen with my own eyes and my uncle did too bush was with another man walking around wh

Well.... lets see.
they where open on the 4th of april of 1973 and as we know they went down on the 11th of september of 2001

>>744113259
Fuck that. Send him an email telling him you won't be attending the next class and that if he wants to waste students' time with retarded political debates, he can try teaching public policy instead of architecture.

Also, 9/11 clearly wasn't an inside job. None of the alternative theories presented make any sense.

Watch "Zeitgeist" on youtube.
theres a section on 9/11 which is pretty hard to ignore

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZUBR3mg_OQ

two words: jews did it

>>744114344
Its not only about political shit. He says that the... i cant belive im about to say it but: Jet fuel cant melt stel beams. That and that the structure was suppoused to be able to handle that kind of an impact

You can check out some engineering youtube videos on how it was physically impossible for the buildings to freefall without disintegration of the support beams. You can also read how flawed the NIST report actually was. It leaves out the conspiracy jargon and comes from the viewpoint of structural engineers.

>>744113259
Easy op sandniggers attacked us. Wake the fuck up stupid

File: Spire2m_ss.jpg (46KB, 825x314px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 825x314px

>>744113259
skyscrapers don't turn into dust and fall into their own footprint because it got hit by a plane.

>>744114793
Holy fuck, what a moron. Maybe you should go just to humiliate the cunt. If those are the strongest arguments he has, then you clearly don't have much to worry about.

>>744115036
Based on what? How many similar incidents exist?

>>744115147
I think i have a neutral stand on the subject, that's why i want to get as much info as i can to have an actual debate

>>744113259
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=24&v=fTHT7MXLef8

>>744115036
A. Did not turn into dust.

B. Did not collapse into their own footprint.

This is a retarded meme that is easily debunked just by looking at photographs taken immediately after the collapse.

File: lego set 91101.png (497KB, 1224x832px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 1224x832px

>>744113259
>architecture
>twin towers

that's engineering famalam you drawfags don't actually into real structure of materials
>let that be your de-bait

>>744114665
Off by one. Kys.

File: jet fuel cant melt steel beams.jpg (174KB, 1200x1151px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1200x1151px

>>744114793
tell him to stop being a newfag and post more traps

>>744115333
You really don't need to. Just ask what he thinks happened instead and pick apart his theory.

Was it explosives planted in the buildings? That would have required months of work and hundreds of personnel sworn to perpetual secrecy.

Was it cruise missiles? Then what happened to the planes? And the passengers?

Was it a nuclear device? Yes, I have actually heard that fucking theory, even though no nuke with that small of a yield exists.

If he's smart he'll just go with some wishy-washy bullshit like, "I don't know what really happened except that the official story doesn't make much sense." But he probably won't. I've met shitheads like him before. His pride won't allow it.

>>744114536
Zeitgeist has been throughly debunked from beginning to end. The whole thing should be in schools and then you should be taught why its bullshit after. The huge irony is that it trys to create a facts bases arguement for a conspiracy without actual facts.

OP. Point this out to your retarded professor.
There are only 3 basic facts you need to tell your professor
A) people quite rightly refer to similar buildings not collapsing due to fire. However this is a little misguided.
The fire in the Twin Towers was a Jet Fuel fire.
Burning at a little under 1000c.
A standard building fire where the fuel is stuff like say, plaster carpet and tables will top out at 600c

B)
People talk about buildings being able to withstand planes but this is also misleading.
Firstly the assumption is that the plane crash happens at landing not takeoff, without a full tank of fuel, secondly, the crqsh happens at a lower speed. The plane that hit the first tower was going about 500 mph. Pretty much full speed, especially at such low altitude.

C) the is the kicker when you take the above two facts into account.
Steel loses 90% (Ninety!!!!) Of its strength at HALF its melting point.
So at 800c its at 10% strength. The moment it gave a millimeter. There would have been so much momentum that it would have crashed down like a stack of cards. Which it did.

>>744115323
google it

>>744114793
Tell him that the jet fuel didn't melt the steel beams. It was a combination of the burning fuel and the damage from the impact that weakened them enough to cause the collapse. This has been known for over 15 years.

OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE AND REWATCH THE VIDEOS OF THE BUILDING FALLING!! YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE DEBRIS FROM A CONTROLLED EXPLOSION GOING OFF AS THE TOWER COLLAPSES!! JUST SEE IT WITH YOUR EYES

>https://youtu.be/ft2uIYucsXo?t=187
this is what i'm referring to

>>744115493
Thats a common misconception. In architecture we have to study both esthetical design and structural design

Kek. Seriously though the main support beams for the towers were taken and "disposed" of. Bush didn't mobilize the air force for almost two hours after the first blast, traces of thermite were found at ground zero, yada yada.

>>744115850
You google it. I'm not going to waste my time just because you're to lazy to back up your bullshit.

>>744115861
I can clearly see pancaking. Look at the building below the impact point, it is completely intact as the floors pancake on each other 1 by 1. It is crystal clear, just because some guy on youtube says it looks like CD doesn't mean it's so.

How was it an inside job if the towers got hit outside?

>>744114793
It doesn't need to melt the steel beams all I need to do is get within warping point which jet fuel does

Without a doubt an inside job, not the first time either.

>>744115861
Look up "pancaking" and "the accordion effect" and then slit your wrist.

Literally every conspiracy theory point regarding the collapse of the towers has been debunked for years.

>>744115845
Thanks, those are some actual valid points that Id like to use.

Inside yob.

>>744116256
No worries.
To me, most of what people talk about is completely irrelevant.
Those three points are both factually correct and hard to ignore

>>744116242
>Look up "pancaking" and "the accordion effect" and then slit your wrist.

This didn't take place. If it had, there would have been a PARTIAL collapse and a HUGE FUCKING STACK OF CONCRETE. What was observed was the DISINTEGRATION OF THE STRUCTURES, they were TURNED INTO DUST. They fell at near free fall speeds, no resistance, which is what you would have expected had they "pancaked". So you are dead wrong, shit head.

>>744116035
The first two points are meaningless. The second is outright false.

https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-iron-microspheres-in-9-11-wtc-dust-as-evidence-for-thermite.t2523/

To believe that a conspiracy of such magnitude necessitating the involvement of hundreds if not thousands of people was pulled off without a single one of them breaking silence is an exercise in the highest level of stupidity. I immediately judge conspiracy theorists as idiots just based upon the level of disconnect needed in their logic to believe what they are spouting.

>>744116509
>This didn't take place. If it had, there would have been a PARTIAL collapse and a HUGE FUCKING STACK OF CONCRETE

Explain to us exactly why pancaking wouldn't lead to a complete collapse.

>>744115845
What about the argument that the plane shouldn't be able to reach that speed at that altitude?

>>744116509
You really think a building of that magnitude wouldn't collapse into dust?

You should look up "the psychology of conspiracy theorists" to get some insight into your broken mind. What you're suggesting isn't just implausible, it's irrational. And it's sad you'll never have the mental capacity to see that.

>>744113259
>I'm currently studying architecture and there's a profesor that said we will be debating the twin towers incident next class. He thinks it was an inside job.

really hope there exits a professor with enough balls to do this

>>744116856
There are idiots with degrees in every field, so I'm sure they do exist.

>>744116856
Yup, mine.
Anyway, here is a lil report on what i have found so far.
The two towers where designed by Minoru Yamasaki on 1960, they had 110 floors each.
The towers had two principal lobbies, wich gave acces to the people to express elevators wich then led em to local elevators, reducing the space needed for elevators hole in a 70-60%

>>744113259
I believe there wasn't even planes hitting the towers but instead the government used high-tech holograms to simulate the planes hitting the buildings after then using explosives on the supposed planes entry points as well to collapse the structure

>>744116791
It was decending.

What do you think is the answer if it wasn't possible???

They knew it was going to happen.

>>744117221
You may be trolling - but there are literally people out there who take this one step further and believe that the towers never existed and were holograms in the first place.

>>744114344
The professor is saying it was supposed to be able to handle the impact. How many times must we go through this? it was meant to withstand the accidental impact of a 707 era jet that might have gotten lost in the fog on the way to la guardia or kennedy. That is not the same thing as a 757 slamming into the building with a huge load of fuel and at 500 mph, and yes a plane can go that fast, get over it.

>>744116791
It's not like it got up to that speed at that altitude, they were at speed then dropped altitude. That's just fucking logic.

>>744113259
just follow the money. just ask yourself how expensive would have been to knock them down because of the asbestos

>>744117187

forget the engineering perspective and look at the insider trading. this should be the #1 point of any skeptic.

>>744114860
99% of structural engineers believe the NIST report fyi

File: 11.jpg (38KB, 931x960px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 931x960px

>>744115808
A building next to the twin towers that wasnt even fucking hit collapsed for no fucking reason

Not an inside job

All the higher ups that were supposed to be there that day werent there

Not an inside job

First skyscraper to ever fall from a plane crash

Not an inside job

Mfw

>>744117343
Were the people that died in the towers also holograms?

>>744113259
How would an architect know shit about whether a plane would bring down a building? They barely even take entry level math courses.

>>744113259
Jet beams cant melt steel planes.

>>744117493
Or never existed - one or the other.

>>744117731
Wow. The amount of twisting and contorting required to keep the mem going is amazing i must say.. just wow.

>>744117860
Meme*

>>744117539
Not really, we have some classes where they teach us about structure and the materials, resistance, etc

>>744117918
WTF is 'resistance' exactly?

>>744117860
maybe the grieving families were also holograms

>>744117995
It's what you have to knowledge

>>744118041
Crisis actors. Same ones used for Sandy Hook.

>>744114860
>viewpoint of structural engineers

Yeah it comes from people with facts backed by science rather than a bunch of tinfoil hat wearing faggot basement dwellers

File: 1501994442405.jpg (115KB, 1068x812px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1068x812px

>>744113259
follow the shekels.

>>744118088
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Nobody speaks of 'resistance' in mechanics of materials. Important terms are terms such as "elastic modulus or young's modulus", "ultimate strength", "yield strength", "strain", "creep", etc.

"resistance" is meaningless, unless you're talking about electrical engineering.

"I refuse to answer stupid questions."

>>744113259
Silverstein.

>>744117407
Any self-respecting structural engineer would quickly realize that there's no way to make any objective determination on the response of the system without access to any engineering drawings.

>>744118323
Yeah, sorry if i dun goof'd ya, i've studied civil engineering and we didn't talk about resistance but of static, then again i quit that shit because i didn't like it

>>744117443
>A building next to the twin towers that wasnt even fucking hit collapsed for no fucking reason

The building was connected to the WTC towers by a walkway bridge. The initial collapse of the two main towers severed the water mains in a several block area, fires started from materials that dropped from the tower's collapse kindled fires which structurally weakened the steel beams which caused it to collapse.

OP needs to consider that fireproofing of structural members were quite inadequate to modern standards, although they met the fireproofing to the IBC at the time of design and build.

>>744117995
>>744118323
sorry, i may have used the wrong word. What im talking about is the resistance of materials, like how much weight they cant take, and the flexibility of concrete, metal, etc.

>>744117371

Yeah, just make shit up, right? Because some faggot posts a video on youtube, thats all the proof you need right?

>>744118957
Well im trying to get any info, but mostly facts that can be proven. so yeah i need to look both the engineering and then i guess i can look a lil in the theories everyone has

>>744115808
>hundreds of personnel sworn to secrecy
>what is the CIA

>>744119149
the engineering is
>they weren't fucking designed to take a plane hit
>skyscraper fires are crazy shit

t. engineering fag who watched backdraft once

>>744113536
+

>>744118942
You're still not making sense. "How much weight a material can take" is meaningless. You should probably stop discussing topics you know nothing about.

>>744118448

Thats summarized in the engineering report by NIST, any external engineers should be able to come to a rational conclusion by a government national laboratory which has been reviewed and commented on prior to publication.

>>744113259
Building 7
/thread

https://youtu.be/hgrunnLcG9Q

Try to debunk this.

I'll wait.

File: 6d2.jpg (53KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 600x600px

>>744114793

>>744119377
Will use that point, thanks.

>>744119585
Underrated post

What if like 9/11 never actually happened? It's a psyop. Just like 7/11.

If they collapsed due to fires, how come all the ash, that covered people in the street in seconds, wasn't hot and didn't burn anyone?

>>744119149

https://www.nist.gov/engineering-laboratory/final-reports-nist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation

Fair enough, jet fuel can weaken steel enough for it to break, but then what made the steel actually melt then?

https://youtu.be/OmuzyWC60eE

>>744119377
Ummm yea they were designed to take a plane hit. Sorry to inform you.

the buildings were definitely made to take the hit. Empire state building was hit by a plane in 1945 didn do shit

>>744119495
Okay, maybe that´s bait but ill bite.
By howw much weigh a material can take i mean the force it can support, its not the same in a house than in a big building. Concrete is way stronger but a house full made of concrete would be too expensive, also a normal house doesnt need that much strenght cuz it will be two stories. thats why we use bricks

>>744120125
I hit your mom with my dick.

>>744119919
Wasn't ash. It was pulverized concrete and drywall, neither of which burns.

File: im out.png (616KB, 755x665px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 755x665px

>>744120290
>>744119919
alright when the trolls start to believe themselves I'm out

>>744119919

http://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=101028

The ash came from the fires. Hot fires will occasionally burn things not normally burnable.

Reconstruction of the Fires in the World Trade Center Towers. Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (NIST NCSTAR 1-5)

Planes get fucked up at the airport in a bad hail storm. Building should cut through plane, not the other way around.

>>744113259
It definitely was fishy, and the official story has obvious falsities.

Next.

>>744120125
It took a hit from a plane going half the speed and that weighed a tenth of the jets that it the towers

>>744120125

The Empire State Building was a cement building with rebar strengthening it. Essentially the cement was the fireproofing to maintain the structural strength of the building.

>>744120464
Yeah because a plane weighing thousands of pounds moving at hundreds of miles an hour would have no effect on a stationary building. Do you even physics?

>>744120464
Depends on how fast they're going though. I crashed into a tree at low speed in my car and totally fucked the front end. It looked like I went head on with a tractor trailer. Walked away like it was nothing. Then there are people that crash at high fucking speed and die but their cars don't look that fucked.

>>744113259

> /b
> actual facts

lel

>>744120077

Sorry nigger,

British consulting engineer Professor Alastair Soane said today: "They were extremely robust buildings and built to withstand a tremendous amount.

Hijacked planes devastate World Trade Centre and Pentagon 11 Sep 2001

"But this was of course a completely abnormal situation and one which would not have been envisaged by the people who built it. The strength of the towers was enormous but they would not have been designed for aircraft strikes.

>>744120464
oh goodness, it's all about velocity, the same way they are so worried about space debris hitting the ISS. A simple bolt with a high enough velocity relative to the space station will go right through it.

Why can't we just say people ded.

>>744120540

oh, because you saw a youtube video it must be a conspiracy, right?

>>744120464

a boeing 767 weighs ~350,000 lbs x speed = energy that the structure had to absorb which it never was designed for

>>744119919

The fires at WTC burned for quite a while after the disaster:

Ground Zero stops burning, after 100 days

Shares
24

Staff and agencies

Thursday 20 December 2001 06.59 EST
First published on Thursday 20 December 2001 06.59 EST
One hundred days after the suicide attacks that brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Centre and killed nearly 3,000 people, the final fires have stopped burning at Ground Zero.

For months, acrid clouds of smoke from the site could be smelled several miles away in Brooklyn and upper Manhattan. The fires, fuelled by documents and office furniture, had been so strong they needed a near-constant jet of water sprayed on them.

"You couldn't even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there," said Tom Manley, a firefighters' union representative. "It was like you were creating a giant lake."

At times, the flames slowed the work of clearing the site. Flare-ups would occur from time to time as demolition and rescue crews exposed the debris to the air.

But for the 75 firefighters at the site daily, working without the flames only makes the job of finding human remains a bit easier.

"It'll be a lot less of a hindrance now since the smoke's not there," Mr Manley said. "But the emotional state stays exactly the same. Just being down there is emotional."

Clearing the site is expected to take another six to nine months, with work focussing on the seven floors of compacted rubble underground.

Small hot pockets continue to be discovered and a fire engine remains on standby at the site. Though the flames are out, the New York fire department still considers Ground Zero an active fire scene.

>>744119783

I didn't watch your video. I am sure rummy made so much money from Halliburton and the Iraq war that he is set for life many times over.

>>744121320
Except the buildings were designed to accept that much force.
>Aluminium sheet-metal can't melt steel I-beams.

>>744121736
Who the fuck is rummy?

>>744120055

NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory since there is conclusive evidence that:

the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and;

the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors.

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

>>744121739
We've already been over this. Pay attention.

The towers were designed to withstand the impact of a 707, which was the standard commercial airliner of the time.

A Boeing 767 is larger than a 707. More weight means more momentum. More momentum means more energy transferred to the tower upon impact. More than they were designed to withstand.

Are you following? Because I don't know how I can make it more obvious.

>>744121108
cuz they holograms

>>744121967
Rummy is a nickname for Donald Rumsfeld, who was Secretary of Defense under George W. Bush.

>>744115443

Are you underage or some shit? I saw that fucking thing collapse into itself

File: 1487819462600.gif (2MB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x169px

>>744113259
>i need to bring actual facts about the twin towers
>comes to /b/

>>744121987
>the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else
Fires have never caused sky scrapers to collapse and other office fires have burned for much longer and much hotter.

NIST got a lot of things wrong, they said it collapsed 40% slower than freefall even though it collapsed much faster.

TL;DR (((NIST))) can go fuck themselves and so can (((you))).

>>744122361

I believe this person to be a nigger that places more weight in youtube videos placed there by other equaly ignorant people than an engineering analysis conducted by a US standards agency (NIST)

>>744115808
Yeah they do. Meant for wartime bridge demolition. Weighs app. 200 pounds when assembled. Not really man portable but any vehicle will do.

>>744122361
The footprint of a building is defined as the area bordered by the outer edge of the building's first floor. Significant amounts of debris landed well outside of this defined area.

Did not collapse into its own footprint.

I just wanted to thank everyone for helping me with this one, i will make sure to try to refute whatever the professor comes up with.
I knew i could count with you,
BROFIST*

Just read the entire Wikipedia page to him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

File: WTB7.jpg (84KB, 785x510px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 785x510px

>>744118876

>>744122653
Smallest dialable yield for a SADM is 10 tons of TNT. That would create a much larger blast than what was seen on 9/11.

File: biting-political-commentary.jpg (44KB, 468x404px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 468x404px

>>744122102
The 767s were also flying at twice their top speeed for that altitude. In all, it was a day for the laws of physics to take a vacation.

>>744121739
>Except the buildings were designed to accept that much force

NIST investigators were unable to locate any documentation of the criteria and method claimed to be used in the impact analysis of a 707 even though claimed by the NY/NJ Port Authority.

And if it wasn't documented, then it never happened and its all heresay.

>>744123343
Sorry but that's been debunked as well. Try again.

>>744117275
>>744117358

It's not about how did it get to those speeds, its about how did two assholes who could barely fly keep a plane from ripping it self apart while navigating it into a target not much wider than the plane.

>>744122550

You are insane and only want to believe what you make up:

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

>>744122550

You might want to get some mental health care, stay off the drugs and quit watching videos posted by other niggers on youtube.

>>744123426
The architects were interviewed afterward. They gave specific details concerning the buildings' resistance to impact. State-of-the-art arguments (707-vs-767 etc.) offer only negligible differences: the newer planes weigh only slightly more than the older ones but travel slower, thus less force, and presented a thinner shell.
One of the most commonly shown videos of the second impact shows the nose of the plane exited the adjacent side of the building with its nose completely intact. Must have been an Acme Industries 767. Meep-meep! says the roadrunner.

>>744115808

>some wishy-washy bullshit like, "I don't know what really happened except that the official story doesn't make much sense." But he probably won't. I've met shitheads like him before. His pride won't allow it.

Totally agree.

Yes, I had arguments with building officials before, with the genius statement of "I just don't feel comfortable" no measure of engineering or scientific proof will satisfy people like this.

>>744115845

A. The jet fuel was burnt off within minutes. The 9/11 report confirms this and states the building collapsed due to office fire. Lets say the building did lose its structure from the fire. The part that wasn't on fire should also been able to hold up the parts above it as well considering it wasn't on fire. Building 7 also collapsed and the fires weren't that bad as nothing but falling material hit it.

Furthermore, there was molten iron seen falling from the building before it fell and it was flowing at ground zero "like a foundry" according to so people working at the site.

B. I have never heard anyone make a claim that they didn't take the fuel into account. Also, the high speed thing is another matter of discussion as some believe that a commercial aircraft would have ripped it self apart at that speed and altitude.

C. Even if the building lost 90% of its structure it should not have fallen like that. The top should have fallen off and came crashing to the ground. The floors below it should have been able to hold an unstable weight just like it did before it fell. But instead all three buildings came straight down in free fall.

>>744123488
"Barely fly" is debatable. Both hijacker-pilots had logged hundreds of hours in both simulators and solo flights.

File: 911 conspiracy.jpg (136KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 640x960px

>>744123651
This is what is now being referred to as "historical truth". Meanwhile, hundreds of other architects and engineers, who weren't strong-armed into agreeing with the party line, continue to recommend the scientific method over derision and bullying: http://www.ae911truth.org/
>The government has a vested interest in lying to the people.

>>744116157

That's what you need to have a localized collapse in one area. That's not what you need to bring down a whole building in it's footprint in a freefall.

If you could set a building on fire and have it fall like a controlled demolition then they wouldn't be paying motherfuckers to do it.

>>744124171
>hundreds of hours in both simulators and solo flights
…flying commercial jet aircraft below their safe altitude.

>>744122691

Yeah, sure, it wasn't literally in its own footprint 100% but it was way too close considering it was a strike to one side of the building.

>>744122634

So you reject hundreds of videos from a bunch of different sources, with a bunch of documentation raising a lot of question that is supported by hundreds of experts in their field all because its on youtube. However, you rather accept one report, from a government group that can not be question, can not be peer reviewed, and will not expand on any inconsistencies in their report.

>>744123963

NIST investigators were unable to locate any documentation of the criteria and method used in the impact analysis and, therefore, were unable to verify the assertion that "... such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building...."

>>744124124

You are delusional live in a fantasy world.

>>744118876

I think you might be wrong about that sky bridge. Building 6 and a road were in between building 1 and 7.

In any case, steal buildings don't collapse into their own footprint because of a fire.

That apartment complex that just went up in Europe somewhere burned like a son of a bitch and it didn't come down.

>>744125396
Why even reply. You need the last word?

All you are telling me is you have no counter argument and all you have left is a silly insult.

>>744125144

Totally, NIST is a very credible organization. For example, you could show me 1000's of videos on youtube on this subject that might have been authored just for their entertainment value only. They have no credibility except in the fringe, tin-foil hat mentally unstable community.

>>744116769

Everything I see from "Pancacking" shows that the internal structure would have been left standing but it wasn't.

Either way, the pancacking theory doesn't take into account the speed the towers fell. If every floor hit the one below it there would have been resistance. There wasn't and the most likely explanation is that several floors had their beams cut to remove the resistance.

>>744125479

Its structure was built much later, fireproofing to structural members was much more stringent. Its water mains weren't impacted by a loaded airplane, so the structure managed to stay stable by the better fireproofing applied to the structure and the cooling effects from the fire mains.

Quite simply, had the fire mains on the WTC not been severed, the buildings might not have collapsed.

>>744116628

The Manhattan project involved over 100,000 people building cities and working in the desert and that was kept a secret.

>>744124644
>>744124171

I'm just going off of quotes I have read by the people who trained them.

>>744125479

Two pedestrian bridges connected the main World Trade Center complex, across Vesey Street, to the third floor of 7 World Trade Center.

>>744117343
That's crazy. everyone knows that the CIA used a Nicola Tesla dooms day weapon to disintegrate the towers.

>>744113259
Jet fuel can't melt steel beams
>hurr durr conspiracy meme
The towers were made to take an airplane. Trace amounts of thermite. Steel beams were found that look like they were tampered (cut at a degree). And WT7 fell for no god damn reason at all.

Hundreds of Demolition experts have looked at the footage and have stated that it looks exactly how an actual demolition job would have happened.

>>744125885

the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards

>>744126532
>Hundreds of Demolition experts

Again, you just can't wrap your little mind around scientific fact.

>>744113259
Inb4 (((JOOOS)))

>>744126652
>scientific fact

lol, Pancake theory? yeah, cause that's easier to wrap my mind around.

>>744113259
Jet steel cant melt fuel beams

>>744113259
After researching project Northwood, it's really not too far fetched to believe it was an inside job

One of the most out of control jobs in history. It caused international paranoia and began data collection en masse for "your safety"

>>744126897
You do know what conservation of energy is? Oh right you dont. Tomorrow walk infront of a bus and see when it hits you if it stops

>>744127081
Project Northwood was a CIA black project rejected by Kennedy to attack Americans to validate war on Cuba

>>744120939
I have seen video of one of the building designers specifically say they designed the building to take multiple strikes from the largest plane of the day.

>>744113259
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3xi9rNrQlXo
Nigger

File: IMG_20170623_165839_665.jpg (251KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1080x1080px

All you need to know

>>744113259
I've been a licensed Architect in California for 21 years and I never went to school for anything related. We do coastal residential projects and specialize in problem jobs others can't get approved. Many of the kids we get in here have degrees in architecture though. They always remark about how nothing they learned in school was useful in this job. A lot of great high concept spatial design stuff that's pretty in art museum exhibits.

An architect is 3/5 lawyer, 1/5 accountant, and 1/5 memorizer of code overlays. And add another 1/5 of CAD wizard and construction documents drafting or you won't make it past two weeks.

>>744127348
>largest plane of the day.
Also just because its designed doesnt mean it was designed right

>>744127514
And 1/5 drunk and forgetting the fucking point

>>744127348
do i have to repeat? the worse case scenario invisioned at the time was a 707 lost in the fog on approach to one of the NY airports, not a 757 or a 767 at 500mph with a full fuel load!

>>744115894
>>744115493

Yeah, it's only shitty universities that only teach aesthetical design

>>744127832
I saw vids of bush sneaking ariu d the rrade center in the 70s. Long term consoiracy

>>744113259

anon should record all normie friends reacting to the redpills
>post here for lulz

The only way to solve this is with science. Let's build 2 replica towers. Blow one up in a controlled demolition and ram a plane in to the other one. See what happens. ???. Profit.

>>744127603
How about the fact that the owner bought tons of insurance right before the towers got trashed or the fact that the buildings had "repairs" being done in buildings a few months before the attack. Perfect time to plant the charges. Everything ive heard makes it seem like it was planned.

>>744124549
>freefall
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

>>744127348

The Port Authority of NY/NJ can't even come up with any documention that ANY plane strike analysis occured (they claim it was for a single 707, definitely not multiple plane strikes).

Which means it potentially never happened, its hearsay. So once again you are quoting a video without any scientific basis.

>>744127920

Have another drink anon, you a wino or meth head living on the street?

>>744129107
>Everything ive

pfft....

>>744113259
>actual facts about the twin towers and stuff
>planes flew into the buildings
>they caught on fire
>they fell down

>>744129656

Not willing to read and comprehend a nationally recognized institute, but willing to blindly follow a dubious website?

File: image.jpg (59KB, 950x181px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 950x181px

>>744115588
My fucking sides

>>744130011
Oh wow a few hundred architects and engineers said 9/11 is an inside job.There's plenty of people with degrees related to biology that don't support evolution. Guess evolution ain't real.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

Here you go, debunk the fucking math. Surely DA JOOZ must have paid him to write this shit.

>>744115845
>trys to create
>trys
half_retarded.jpg

>>744120125
Ram a car from the 40s into a car built today and see which one holds up better.

>>744130790

Please note from your WTCREPORT.pdf:

I do not believe that we need to invoke anything as extreme as the melting
of structural steel in the WTC to explain why the towers collapsed

>>744130790
>There's plenty of people with degrees

Name one

File: 295.jpg (20KB, 552x521px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 552x521px

>>744115588

>>744131820
masons

File: 1469763750919.jpg (54KB, 600x745px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x745px

>>744113259
lol. Architects.

Couple things. Yes jet fuel doesn't melt steal beams. This is a fact.

HOWEVER.

The towers weren't made of one continuous steal beam. The weak points are the joints. If enough of these joints give way from impact plus heat I can easy see a situation like the collapse happening.

>>744131820
https://dissentfromdarwin.org/scientists/

>>744126549
Sounds good to me. Case closed