Can two towers really have made these planes collapse?

very carefully

>>8035255
15 years later and I still don't know what to believe. A fucking plane and a little fire took down the world trade center? and it collapsed in like 10 seconds or something like that!

but at the same time... there is no way something like this could be covered up.

>>8035255
Yes. Long story short, get metal hot enough and it becomes putty. Mix that with the force of a plane impacting a building and there's more then enough energy to take a building down.

>>8035277
If you haven't already, you might want to check out the NIST reports; they go into quite a bit of detail that could convincingly explain why "a little fire" was a much bigger deal than you might think.

>>8035301
Available here, btw: http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/wtc_finalreports.cfm

>>8035264
>unreasonable request

the sadder fact is that so many people are/were willing to believe it was an inside job

america has done this time and time again

america wanted so bad to become a dystopian military state and go to war that they blewd up their own towers to make the people angry

pearl harbor all over again

>>8035312
I did the calculations myself. It works out, the energy dump was huge.

File: 1335318294085.jpg (26KB, 550x314px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 550x314px

>>8035314
>blewd up
wew lad

>>8035322
I calculated your moms mass and it's bigger than a a neutron star.

>>8035277
>A fucking plane and a little fire took down the world trade center?

According to the NIST report, even all of that wouldn't have collapsed it if the impact and debris hadn't damaged the fire-resistant insulation on the beams; that made them much more susceptible to fire damage than they ever would have been under normal conditions. If the insulation had been intact, the building would have been severely damaged but would probably have held up.

This is probably the only board on 4chan where this topic can be discussed without too many tinfoil hats so let's go for it

What I have trouble believing is that the jews would take down probably the most financially significant structure in the country for the purpose of justifying a war which would also cost more money. They probably could've achieved the exact same thing flying a plane into the statue of liberty, the Washington monument, the Lincoln memorial, or even the fucking whitehouse and saved hundreds of billions.

>>8035255
No, not at all.

I watched it on live tv when it happened. The instant I saw them start falling my entire world view was completely shattered. I knew instantly they had be rigged to fall like that and the planes had nothing at all to do with it.

Since I was watching it live, I also got to see on the ground interviews with a couple of engineers who specialized in build demos. They said there was only one answer and that it had been planned and done with explosives on the inside of the building. They looked and sounded angry.

About 20-30 minutes later the same engineers where up on a stage with a podium and lots of government types around them. They took turns reading prepared statements retracting everything they'd said only moments before. They looked and sounded extremely sobered and were shaky; and had that 1000 yard stare thing going on.

Then the 3rd building went down, perfectly.

>>8035346
did that really compensate for all the businesses' intellectual property that was lost? You'd think the people behind this would've had their own stocks in the towers

STOP BRINGING UP INSURANCE AND OTHER ULTERIOR MOTIVES

EXPLAIN IT TO ME, SCIENTIFICALLY HOW IT COULD HAVE OR COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED.

>>8035376
I was like 6 at the time, have any of those reports survived?

>>8035376
Cool made-up story, bro.

>>8035386
Conveniently, a lot of engineers spent an awful lot of time doing just that, in exhaustive detail.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/wtc_finalreports.cfm

tl;dr jet melt can't steal fuel beams

>>8035386
plane hits tower really really fast
many columns are cut
big fire weakens the rest
tower now has no support
tower collapses

>>8035255
>a little plane
also you're overestimating tall skyscrapers
shake them around enough and they fall apart like the shitty sand castle you built as a kid
if you were a giant and tried to pick up a skyscraper it would crumble in your hand

>>8035386
welcome to america
where buildings are constructed by the lowest builder
using a shitty workforce
and the cheapest materials available

>>8035420
*lowest bidder
god damn this awful technology

>>8035417
Can confirm I'm 2500' tall and tried lifting a tower once

File: gwb.jpg (32KB, 450x304px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 450x304px

>>8035314
>pearl harbor all over again

>>8035376
>I knew instantly they had be rigged to fall like that and the planes had nothing at all to do with it.


OK, assuming the Republicans DID engineer the attack, why would they plant explosives, and THEN fly the planes into it?
Why would they do ANYTHING differently than a plausible terrorist attack?
I can understand you might think it was a false flag attack, but why would you think it was a faked false-flag attack?

If Gee-Dub really engineered the whole thing, why fake any of it?

>>8035420
oh give me a break, in how many countries can you at least count on construction inspectors to not just be bribed by the builders? (not very many)

File: 1356494491686.jpg (29KB, 176x187px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 176x187px

>>8035444
>the republicans

and if you're asking why they used the planes instead of just detonating explosives on the inside, it's so they could fool the general populace. A sudden explosion is too suspicious, people associate it with secret agents and stuff instead of bloodthirsty towelheads

File: WTC.jpg (71KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 400x600px

>>8035286
>get metal hot enough
Micronukes in the basement. They didn't melt, they were atomized.
Calling it ground zero was an esoteric thing but the hideous asbestos complex had to come down and quick, it was going vacant fast. Unpossible to do safely with conventional demolitions so a false flag and not the first in America, what else could the powers that be do?
In fact Controlled Demolition who cleaned up were asked to quote the job prior to 9 of 11 and were like, no fucking way, undoable.

File: 1456441011273.jpg (51KB, 440x585px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 440x585px

Just remember this: WTC 7 fell without a plane even hitting it.

Do you think some faggot terrorists with butter knives as weapons hijacked a plane, and then crashed it, causing 2 towers to topple down like dominoes?

After all this the patriot act is born and so is the excuse to fuck the middle east up until its drier than sand.

Honestley I don't know what exactly happened but it sure isn't the story we are told because it makes no fucking sense what so ever

There was litterly molten steel at ground zero and the place was still hot for days after the attacks.

And do you know what they did with the scraps? They sold them to China ASAP instead of a through check.

>>8035314
Here's a (wew) for (You)

>>8035458
The cherry picking of that wave to make it look like something it isn't is literally the perfect metaphor for your entire dumb argument.

If you're mad, just vote Trump like everyone else.

>>8035453
>A sudden explosion is too suspicious,
And yet, hitting it with two airplanes also raised suspicions.
And if they really needed bombs to bring down the towers, then doing that would raise even more suspicions.
Nah, even if it was a false flag, the whole "demolition" story just doesn't wash.

>>8035455
The WTC didn't have asbestos, retard. The ad is simply saying large buildings take a long time to evacuate, thus you should have asbestos. God damn, you tinfoilers can't even read.

File: fireproof.jpg (18KB, 325x226px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 325x226px

>>8035255 If people weren't so hysterical about asbestos fireproofing the WTC would still be standing.


http://www.fireengineering.com/articles/print/volume-155/issue-10/world-trade-center-disaster/volume-ii-the-ruins-and-the-rebirth/fireproofing-at-the-wtc-towers.html

how did the beams become hot? i dont understand sorry for english i am espanol

>>8035803
an office fire that went out of control

>>8035811
could office fire real heat steel beam? i no think so, maybe it was in job?

The building didn't have a concrete core anyways lel
It was a steel lattice structure with the main supporting frame on the face of the building, which was badly damaged by the impact
Plus the weakening of the structure from the fire didn't help

People are fucking idiots
They didn't need to demolish the buildings manually for it to still be a cover up
The planes alone are enough to knock it down

>>8035814
>>8035803
Jet fuel melts steel beams

>>8035821
si but how did it melt so fast? plane only was in building for few second? sorry for english education really bad in mexico
i try to go to america legally but will wait for trump presidency

1.) You don't have to melt the steel, you just have to heat it till it buckles.
2.) The building was full of hydrocarbon plastics [computers, chairs, desks, tables, etc...] that acted as fuel.
3.) Since the building was sealed, it was a hotbox with an oxygen supply coming from only the holes left by the plane.

>>8035828
PLANE HIT TOWER
KABOOM MANY FIRES
MANY THINGS CATCHES FIRE
FIRE KEEPS BURNING
FIRE IS NOW OUT OF CONTROL
STEEL BEAMS LOSE STRENGTH AND BEND
COLUMNS SNAP BECAUSE NOT ENOUGH STRENGTH
TOWER COLLAPSES

>>8035277
>and it collapsed in like 10 seconds or something like that!
Not really.

File: WTCfire.jpg (25KB, 486x640px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 486x640px

>>8035277
>a fucking plane
a big plane flying overspeed with lots of fuel
>a little fire
you call that "a little fire"? it covered floors
>it collapsed in like 10 seconds
if you actually listen to the collapse you'll notice it lasts 15 seconds for the south tower, and almost 20 for the north tower
>there is no way something like this could be covered up
correct, we're not highly advanced creatures with unbreachable security, the truth would've come out by now

File: Bush.jpg (511KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1280x720px

>>8036048

>>8035255
>no one notices OPs wordplay

Which is more likely:
>A terrorist cell setting up explosives in the WTC and just blowing it up.

Or US leaders:
>Setting up explosives
>Flying planes into the WTC, and one into Pennsylvania
>Fabricating evidence linking the attack to al'Qaeda
>Fabricating a lot of al'Qaeda itself
>Failing to fabricate evidence to link Saddam's Ba'ath party to the attack

Why wouldn't the US just blow up a building? If it's so obvious that it was a controlled demolition, why would they make it look suspicious by sending two planes into it?

Hell, if they can cover something like that up, why wouldn't they just nuke a small town and say it was a weapon sold to the terrorists by Saddam?

These conspiracy theories are so cartoonishly inane to me that I'm inclined to believe anyone who takes them seriously has an intellectual disability.

>>8035458
>so is the excuse to fuck the middle east up until its drier than sand.

Oh, you mean to tell me that they not only needed an excuse to go to the Middle East, but that it needed to be a risky controlled demolition leading to the destruction of two economically important buildings and 3000 deaths?

This is a central premise of a lot of these conspiracy theories: That the planes merely hitting the buildings wouldn't be enough to justify the events that followed. If it were, they would have left it at that, with no need for the control demolition.

Well, okay. But what about THE INVASION OF IRAQ THAT HAPPENED LESS THAN A FUCKING DECADE EARLIER THAT REQUIRED NO ATTACK ON US SOIL!?

File: controlled_deconstruction.jpg (33KB, 1000x320px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1000x320px

>>8035255
All modern skyscrapers are prepared for controlled symmetrical deconstruction. They can be made to retreat almost into their own footprint to limit collateral damage. Thanks to modern metastable intermolecular composites the 'vaporization' of steel is a well established procedure. Pic: old school technique.

File: termite.jpg (1MB, 1856x1728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1856x1728px

Since no one has explained you retards how this is possible in scientific terminology i shall expand my wast and brilliant mind to incorporate you dumb fucks into understanding how its possible for a plane to take down a building like this, using Scientific explanations.


High speed impact of Aluminium & Jet fuel

into a Steel frame (Iron+carbon)

an exothermic reduction-oxidation started around the inner support structure melting the steel structure at close to 2500 °C

this is why you could see the melted remains of t he buildings when they cleaned it up.

aluminium+Iron(III) oxide+jet fuel= Thermite

File: GeeDub.jpg (45KB, 620x350px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 620x350px

>>8035453
>>>8035444 (You)
>>the republicans
Are you implying it was the democrats?
Or perhaps there's some non-party-affiliated government officials we don't know about?
Remind me who leapt into action passing the patriot act and testifying before congress about going to war in Iraq?
It sure wasn't Al Gore.
Even if it wasn't a false flag, the Republicans in particular took advantage of the climate of fear and patriotism the attack produced.

>>8036135
In the following example, elemental aluminium reduces the oxide of another metal, in this common example iron oxide, because aluminium forms stronger, more stable, bonds with oxygen than iron:

Fe2O3 + 2 Al → 2 Fe + Al2O3
The products are aluminium oxide, elemental iron,
and a large amount of heat

>>8035255
Interested to see what some of you think about this, it was published in December of 2001 by the JOM: http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html

I'm not an engineer but AKAIK, it all checks out based on what I know in regards to the statements of physical chemistry, load relief of the hot steel, etc.

The part I'm unsure about is the collapse of the building itself. The publication says that the top floors collapsed first, and the force caused a domino effect which collapsed the building directly downward due to the high inertia of such a tall and heavy structure. The problem I see with this is that the velocity of the collapse itself seems too high (maybe just to me?) considering each floor-collapsing event would require a great deal of energy to buckle the subsequent portions of steel that were not heated to the point of load relief -- and my intuitive understanding is that the falling mass would lose a great portion of its velocity. If you watch videos of the collapse, the buildings fall with near terminal velocity.

Not trying to continue shit-storming about conspiracy nonsense, but hoping someone can prove how or why it happened the way it did.

>>8036067
>if you actually listen to the collapse you'll notice it lasts 15 seconds for the south tower, and almost 20 for the north tower
The collapse itself came about a half hour after each plane hit.
And the planes were both fueled for flying non-stop to the west coast.

>>8036121
>But what about THE INVASION OF IRAQ THAT HAPPENED LESS THAN A FUCKING DECADE EARLIER
I with you Anon, but you're wrong on this particular point.
We counter-invaded Kuwait because Iraq invaded them first.

>>8036142
>the velocity of the collapse itself seems too high (maybe just to me?) considering each floor-collapsing event would require a great deal of energy to buckle the subsequent portions of steel that were not heated to the point of load relief -
The top 20-30 floors fell onto the floors below.
Once that happens once, each floor's beams aren't going to hold for a second or two, wobbling like something out of a road-runner cartoon.
Think about how much 20-30 floors of a skyscraper weighs, and the fact that they fell at least one floor's distance before impact.
What I saw on T.V. makes perfect sense to me.

>>8035346
Aren't all bankers Jewish? It would be a giant loss of assests.

>>8035346
The asset was worth more than the insurance cover, payout just meant the hit wasnt quite as bad as it could have been

>>8035407
>tl;dr jet melt can't steal fuel beams

I hate that meme with the passion of a thousand suns. If you can't melt steel with petroleum, you need to git gud because it is not that fucking difficult.

Again:
1.) You don't have to melt the steel, you just have to heat it till it buckles.
2.) The building was full of hydrocarbon plastics [computers, chairs, desks, tables, etc...] that acted as fuel.
3.) Since the building was sealed, it was a hotbox with an oxygen supply coming from only the holes left by the plane.

>>8035491
> just vote Trump like everyone else.

I already did.

Voting for anyone else is constitutional suicide.

>>8035803
yo tango el gato loco fuego en mis pantalones.

>>8036133
that's a fucking chimney
not a giant skyscraper

>>8036110
> why wouldn't they just nuke a small town and say it was a weapon sold to the terrorists by Saddam?

because nobody would believe that the terrorists would target a small town you daft cunt

File: v4Q10BM.jpg (166KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1000x662px

>>8035255
That actually looks incredibly weak compared to modern skyscrapers.

One WTC has a 14,000+ psi concrete core, with walls a meter thick. Some of the taller buildings going up in Asia have super columns the size of truck cabs, surrounding the building perimeter.

The fact is, most skyscrapers pre-9/11 were just seriously under-built.

File: 036772023-big.jpg (454KB, 1280x856px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1280x856px

>>8036249

>>8035458
This. The collapse of WTC wasn't even mentioned in the main report, despite being the home to the 2nd largest cia office. Youd think thats worthy of mention. Look more into WTC 7 and youll find it held more than just offices.

The planes destroyed a lot of column supports.

The now excessive dead loads from the undamaged floors above can't be supported anymore.

The towers collapse downward from the impacted areas.

I also doubt that any published codes of practice from the time the towers were constructed factored in errant aircraft. Of course, I have no proof of that.

>>8036272
>I also doubt that any published codes of practice from the time the towers were constructed factored in errant aircraft. Of course, I have no proof of that.

WTC was designed to withstand impact from smaller aircraft at low speed with little fuel load, since there was precedent for that in the plane that hit the Empire State building. That plane was lost in fog looking for the airport.

Concrete and steel can crumble over time with a simple fire, doesn't even have to be jet fuel.

>>8036268
>connect the dots
>there's a conspiracy between the dots
>it's obvious /do your own research /think for yourself
There's a fallacy here, I'm sure.

>>8036160
>petroleum
>jet fuel

>>8035255
>little planes
Please die conspiracy fag

>>8035255
Only thing I don't understand is the Pentagon. The damage just doesn't seem to match with the impact of an airliner.

Any /sci/entific explanations?

>>8036268
>The collapse of WTC 7 wasn't even mentioned in the main report, despite being home to the second largest CIA office

Why would that have anything to do with it? The report was to explain why the towers fell on a structural level, not why anybody flew a plane into them. NIST does this kind of report every time a big American structure unexpectedly collapses, the same way the FAA exhaustively analyzes airline crashes. Unless there's some unusual thermal or mechanical properties of CIAnium that need to be factored in, that's not the sort of thing that would even warrant a footnote.

Also, yes, the collapse of WTC 7 was mentioned in the main report as something they needed to address. They just addressed WTC 1 & 2 first; it took them about three more years to get 7 pinned down to a confident answer.

The number one argument against 9/11 is that the government isn't that smart.

Seriously, anyone that thinks the government is part of an illumanati conspiracy has NEVER worked for the government or known anyone who has worked for the government.

>>8036819
jew neo-cons were looting money and destroyed the records with a false flag

>>8036847
Rly? Thank you for that insightfull explanation.

>>8036139
>>8036135
Dont you DARE to bring something like science into this! I'l let you know that i have done my research, and my degree in Social Studies and straight C's through HS makes me more than capable to see through the lies spewed forward by so-called "structual engineers" and other government-planted sheeple. I'm on to you, filthy Jew-Reptiles, hiding behind fronts like NASA and Montesanto.

>>8036819
It was a bomb, I think they didn't even find the plane remains

>>8035339

Well a conspiracy is done by a few not the big mass.
What I find weird is why some Saudi terrorists would choose the WTC. It seems to be such a weird target. Wouldn't you rather attack White House or the Pentagon or the Empire State building to spite America? What do some sandniggers know about the stock market, trading and world finances?

>>8036837

I also don't believe it was the entire government, but it's also stupid to assume that there were mo inside contacts or that it wasn't long planned from someone within the US.
How the fuck do you even plan an attack like that? How do they know where to fly? How do they even know how to fly?
There needs to be someone smart that pulls all the strings and I don't believe it was Osama bin Laden. He was just some dumb mercenary who was probably fucked over by string puller

>>8036983
>or the Pentagon
....................

File: seismic.jpg (15KB, 351x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 351x300px

>>8035255
>Can two towers really have made these planes collapse?

NO

but demolitions can
see;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W54
for decades old info.

and demolitions big enough to bring down WTC 1 & 2 vertically into their own footprint would leave a seismic record... and it did

>>8037013
>seismic readings after impact

>>8036992
>How the fuck do you even plan an attack like that? How do they know where to fly? How do they even know how to fly?

lol what? What about it do you think would be difficult to plan?

>ok guys, we get on these flights and hijack them at time X, then crash them into these landmarks

9/11 was not sophisticated, it was just unexpected

>>8036983

Hard to tell if this is b8....

>>8037024

Tachyon bombs, bro.

>>8035255
clearly the answer is no
i am a certified expert in planes crashing into buildings

>>8036819
>The damage just doesn't seem to match with the impact of an airliner.

>Based on my extensive dataset of airlines crashing into buildings

>>8035255

The 9/11 truth movement has been hijacked, the real conspiracy is how the government allowed the terrorists to hit 3 out of 4 targets, and the only missed target was because of civilian intervention.

No illuminati, no thermite, no holograms, just instead of stopping something that they had advanced knowledge of they decided to allow it to happen and utilize it as a catalyst for war in the middle east.

the only proof you need to show that it was an inside job/made by israelis is the anthrax letters

oddly enough no one talks about this

does Bruce Ivins look like a radical islamist to you ?

>>8035255

There is no such thing as "indestructible," no matter how marvelous the engineering is.

There is such a thing as a "graceful failure," though, and that was what the WTC was designed to do: collapse into its own footprint if it was ever destroyed, to minimize the damage to all the other structures nearby. At this, it succeeded beyond even the engineers' wildest expectations, with only WTC 7 taking enough damage from the initial collapse to fall down hours later, instead of every skyscraper on Manhattan Island falling one after another like the world's biggest domino rally.

>>8037039

That's not a conspiracy, unless you consider the open and above-board actions of a literal army of propagandists a "conspiracy." The Bush Administration didn't intercept any of the planes for the same reason it let Iraq fall into a quagmire: they were so afraid of what the media would tell the voters about them shooting down hijacked planes that they chose to let them go, and ended up causing more death and destruction as a direct result.

That's why people are turning to Trump, against the will of both the Republicans and the Democrats. The mainstream GOP might be an unwilling slave to the media, but they're still a slave; all the media has to do is threaten them with accusations of "racism" and they fold like a cheap suit. Whereas Trump eats up all the abuse the entire international media empire can heap on him, and just keeps stumping on like it's nothing.

The choice really is either Trump, or an eternal Orwellian nightmare.

>>8036983
>Pentagon
Man, have i got news for you....

>>8036952
You mean, besides all the plane-parts laying around it? Like the big-ass jet engine on the lawn? Or the cctv-cam in the parking lot actually filming the plane as it hits?

>>8035387
I've not tried to look for them. I was at work when it happened and everyone just stopped working and went to the boss's house to watch everything on a big screen tv. I'd love to have had a recording of the entire day.

>>8035444
How would I know or care? I haven't the slightest clue as to why something like that would be done. I know how buildings are demo'd and that's it. Also, you are putting a lot of words into my mouth I didn't say.

>>8036136
>(You)

...You are false flagging your own posts.

>>8036983
>What do sandniggers now about the stock market, trading and world finances?

If you're talking about the Saudi's, they know quite a bit.

>>8037043
Neither tower collapsed into its footprint. Debris was scattered all over and severely damaged many buildings

File: nuke.jpg (52KB, 756x394px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 756x394px

>>8035516
>The WTC didn't have asbestos
Wut? lol. That's what they are blaming all the cancers on, not the radiation from the micronukes.

>>8037097
WTC 1 and 2 were pulverized into microscopic dust with nothing left except little stubs in the ground.
Some loose ejected girders were fired blocks away sure, but the bulk of the material was turned to dust.

This will be common knowledge but unfortunately long after the perpetrators have departed this earth. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful force.

File: wtcRubble1.jpg (51KB, 350x220px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 350x220px

>>8037187
U wot?

>>8037200
looks like my future xD

>>8037241
Perhaps, but it sure as shit doesnt look like "microscopic dust"

>owner of the tower coincidentally insures the towers
>week later, two planes fly into it

>>8037260
There was a huge dust cloud as the tower collapsed. Watch literally any video of it.

File: granite.jpg (79KB, 712x534px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 712x534px

>>8037200
That's like 1/100 of the building at most.
The really fascinating parts are below that rubble though. The towers were stuck with huge pilings into solid granite, not many pictures got out before they quickly filled it all in and paved it over. Granite is an intrusive igneous rock native to those parts and scraped clean by many ice ages. The granite directly under WTC 1,2 and 6 were metamorphosed. This kind of reformation only occurs under a miles of mantle or with subterranean nuclear detonations. The US military since the above ground test ban has become an expert of sorts in this form of bomb detonation! The desert is full of those holes now.

>>8037280
>coincidence = proof
>>>/x/

File: groundZeroAerialMarked.jpg (781KB, 1401x1400px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 1401x1400px

>>8037298
Of course there was?

>>8037301
>The granite directly under WTC 1,2 and 6 were metamorphosed
Source?

>>8037280
And loses a shit ton because the asset was worth far more than the insurance payout

>>8037314
dust is bad for your lungs.

>the towers fell with a free-fall acceleration - there was no resistance from the lower stories, just like a controlled demolition.

>nano-thermite was found in the dust

>debris scatter far from the buildings - gravity acts downward...

>shekelberg goldstein or whoever owns the place made billions of it

it was planned

>>8037367
>thermite is aluminum and iron oxide
>plane made of aluminum, steel supports made of iron
>gee I wonder why there's thermite, must've been false flag

>>8037367
>it was planned
Yes, I agree. It was planned by Osama bin Laden's crew.

They had WTC rigged for demolition but then in an unexpected turn of events terrorists also flew planes into the buildings.

>>8037389
xkcd pls go

>>8037367
>gravity acts downward
I can't believe this, this is too crazy.

How long have they been hiding this one from us?

>>8037396
>NEWTON WAS A FALSE FLAG

Wasn't there some shit like Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth that wanted a more thorough investigation but was ignored by the government? Was that just a meme or were their calculations and shit legit?

>>8037367
>the towers fell with a free-fall acceleration
No they didnt, its easily visible in the videos that they do not

>nano-thermite was found in the dust
Prove it

>debris scatter far from the buildings
This is the opposite of what you expect from a controlled demolition

>shekelberg goldstein
He lost more in the asset than he gained from the payout

>>8037407
There are tens of thousands of architects and engineers in the US. It's pretty easy to find a few who believe stupid shit.

If you look hard enough you can probably find creationist biologists.

>>8037420
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lists_of_creationist_scientists

>>8037367
> thermite
> aluminum and rust
> in a decades old building
Imagine that

>>8035314
Its the opposite, if you actually went to look for information instead of the 1st link from google, you'll find your answer

>>8036837
They're gonna tell you the incompetency of the government meme is a myth created by the Illuminati to put to sleep the sheeple.

>>8035322
so it was 36kg right?

>>8037314
It's Manhattan blue schist. It hasn't been granite for a long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan#Bedrock

>>8037516
These are the same people who think that Anne Frank's diary being written in ballpoint pen is proof that the holocaust didn't happen. Reason doesn't work on them, because if a source appears to be non-crazy they'll reject it.

>>8036152
NO beams in outer areas of flors in Towers: steel trays holding concrete for floor plates, trays attached to out wall panels (i.e. no steel + concrete frame in outer areas) and to the inner core (lifts, fire stairs) where there WAS steel + concrete frame as seen in most buildings.
This technique sped up the construction, which was significant because NYC was charging mega-bucks to builder for tying up the city streets. This made the Towers relatively rare in tall buildings, and would have been known to Bin Laden, who studied architecture in the USA. Probably the reason the Towers were targeted, as they COULD be felled by jet impacts + fires, unlike conventional steel + concrete buildings.

>>8035407
It doesn't fucking matter that it can't melt it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA

http://youtu.be/AdIkTNnnBFo

Long watch but worth it

>>8038027
Based Blacksmith

>>>/x/ BTFO

>>8035255
Please look at pic.
There are NO 'girders' or beams in the outer floor areas. WTC towers used unconventional design to speed up construction. The outer shell was panels assembled like a jigsaw, with enough strength to hold up steel trays linking shell to inner core (which DID use conventional girders of steel & concrete, beams etc).
This method probably made the towers a target, as a single jet impact would be unlikely to collapse a normal tall building, but with WTC towers, once the shell is breached, the integrity is compromised and the overall strength suffers - like if you place a heavy weight on an intact drink can, then puncture or deform one part of the can, the weight may then crush the can.
Also see this below:
"NO beams in outer areas of flors in Towers: steel trays holding concrete for floor plates, trays attached to out wall panels (i.e. no steel + concrete frame in outer areas) and to the inner core (lifts, fire stairs) where there WAS steel + concrete frame as seen in most buildings.
This technique sped up the construction, which was significant because NYC was charging mega-bucks to builder for tying up the city streets. This made the Towers relatively rare in tall buildings, and would have been known to Bin Laden, who studied architecture in the USA. Probably the reason the Towers were targeted, as they COULD be felled by jet impacts + fires, unlike conventional steel + concrete buildings."

>>8036249
Tenants in one of the towers were unhappy with how much the steel trays filed with 3 inches depth of concrete which formed the floor plates. The floors 'bounced' as people moved around or heavy trolleys moved. The second tower had twice as much - 6" - of concrete to try to reduce this.
Fast building method, but created 'points of failure' where the trays hung on brackets or similar on outside shell wall and inner core.

>>8038027
Ever melted plastic over a flame? Before it gets liquid, it gets soft, doesn't it? Easy to bend?
Well, steel (all materials that can melt maybe?) acts the same way. And the softening does NOT need the steel to be exposed to melting point temperatures: look it up, iirc, a temp of 60% od melting point is enough for the steel to lose a lot of strength. All the demos of steel NOT melting in a kerosene fire are missing the point. All the cries of "But molten stuff was seen in the WTC!" also miss the point that there were lots of other materials that could melt at lower temps in the WTC: aluminum; copper; plastic; non-structural metal fittings.

File: BANE.jpg (51KB, 533x344px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 533x344px

>>8035444
Perhaps I wondering why republicans would blow up a building, before throwing a plane into it....

>mfw

>>8038064
That's what the guy in the video said.

Or are you this same guy>>8038027

>>8037742
Wait, is that a thing? The Anne-Frank part?

>>8035255
yes those two towers made those planes collapse into debris

learn to proofread

>>8037024
Lrn2time-after-collapse fgt pls

>>8037742
>These are the same people
No, they are not "the same people", fgt pls

>>8035255
Biggest giveaway was lucky larry not going that day for his dentist appointment.

File: timemap.gif (110KB, 600x445px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 600x445px

>>8035516
>The WTC didn't have asbestos, retard.
>>8037066
>Or the cctv-cam in the parking lot actually filming the plane as it hits?
This board really needs IDs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwzT0QnwtTE

>>8038188
>cctv
Wait, are you arguing against me or with me? I honestly cant tell

>>8038199
>couldn't find his ass with two hands and a flashlight

>>8038202
Okidoky....

>>8038212
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8

You can watch this video from 3:50-4:40 and believe ***with all your heart*** that some "terrorist" (with only a few hours of flight training) flew a plane into the Pentagon (the ***Military*** headquarters for the most technologically advanced Military the Earth has ever known) and not only managed to fly a few feet above the ground in a ***757*** keeping perfect control of the aircraft, but didn't even scratch the grass with ***either engine*** in the process.

Wew lad.

>>8038202
I can't tell what your point is either

>>8038226
Of course you can't.

>>8038219
I know this will probably fall on death ears and you will just call me a "government sheep" or something, but anyway...
Its more plausible than "secret cruise missile secretly launched by secret government plane" striking the building, all the while also leaving behind a bunch of aircraft-parts and witnesse, and a full passenger jet somehow taking of, flying a tracket rute (as your pic showed), then magically dissapearing over land, and not actually slam into a building.
Both are possible, but one is a hell of a lot more possible than the others. Unless you think all the people on the plane were fabricated. And their relatives were gov.agents and actors. And the airport where they took of from was run by gov agents. And on and on and on.

>>8038226
I think thats his plan.

>>8038242
>"secret cruise missile secretly launched by secret government plane"
Where exactly did I say that? Where did I imply that?

>>8038249
Well, what is it you think hit the building then?
"Secret cruise missile" is the #1 idea that the "Truthers" flock to, but if you dont subscribe to that sort of mental gymnastics then i apologize

File: 1459289547815.jpg (54KB, 540x472px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 540x472px

>>8036235
>He explains why it would fall and a picture as a example
BUT ITS NOT A SKSCRAPER!!#<KLD:!@ED!QD
you dumb nigger its they way they are built.

>>8038257
Fuck you, asshole. That's my point.

You don't know what actually happened any more than anybody else does. You weren't there. Planes? Missiles? UFOs? The official story is obviously bullshit, but you'd jump to equally ridiculous "conclusions" about someone just for questioning it?

Fucking idiot. You think the official line of misinformation is any more valid than unofficial line of wrong information? Just because you believe something doesn't make it true. Same goes for a lie.

>>8038269
>The official story is obviously bullshit
>obviously

>>8038271
Just this week it's come to light that Saudi royals played a role in funding the attack. You don't know a goddamn thing and neither do I.

Fuck off with your "certainties", idiot.

>>8038274
>>>/pol/

>>8038278
Not an argument.

>>8038274
>Just this week it's come to light that Saudi royals played a role in funding the attack.
No. This week, nothing has come to light except that there's a 28-page paper about 9/11.

>>8038282
No, you're right.

Just a secret our government's been keeping from the American people concerning 9-11. Why should this sort of thing alarm anyone, right?

>>8038292
Regardless of whatever political fuckery went on, only a rank moron would argue that anything other than a plane flew into the pentagon

> some towelheads who can't even speak proper english simultaniously hijacked two planes and somehow managed to get through the airport security with guns and crashed planes for no reason
Thats the biggest most dumbest conspiracy theory right there.

>>8038358
They all spoke perfect english and none of them carried guns. The worst they had was box cutters. And what do you mean "no reason"?

>>8035255

Actually that's a pretty good picture detailing why they collapsed. The lack of a concrete core and the fact that the walls bore a lot of weight are reasons why it collapsed when both those two elements gave out.

>>8038269
Right. Consider my apollogy redacted. I'd take Truthers any day over your retarded rambling.

>>8038359
Well they didn't have reasons like getting millions of dollars worth of insurance money for property destruction for buildings. The only outcome of 9/11 was america entering Iraq to steal the oil, which resulted with muslims dying in middle east, american soldiers dying in the war as well american people dying under the collapsed buildings, and Larry Silverstein and some other oil jews getting millions of dollars out of it.
> no it wasn't, it was the moozlimz with no guns did it
LMAO

>>8038367
> like getting millions of dollars worth of insurance money
Why do people insist on repeating this idiocy? The wtc was worth a shitload more standing up than the insurance payout.

>The only outcome of 9/11 was america entering Iraq
A ground war with american forces is exactly what islamic extremists wanted and continue to want

File: R3X0i.jpg (43KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 480x270px

>Going into an obvious bait tread filled with conspiracy-rambling

>>8038369
Stealing tons of oil and getting millions of dollars worth of insurance money is more than enough to build 5 more of those retard. Who are you kidding ?

> A ground war with american forces is exactly what islamic extremists wanted and continue to want
oh noes fox news showed some crazy muzzies in towels. it must be the islamists !!!11!

They know they would get wiped out instantly against USA forces and they are even aided with USA weaponry which regularly shows up in news from middle east and russia. If you read more than one source you'll see that things are different than what your favourite tv channel tells you. If they wanted to attack America in a meaningful way, why wouldn't they arrange an attack to the white house or something ?

>>8038378
>Stealing tons of oil and getting millions of dollars worth of insurance money
Not for larry it wasnt. He lost a good deal of wealth when the towers fell.

>They know they would get wiped out instantly against USA forces
They are religious fundamentalists who believe they are genuinely fighting the armageddon war. The dont believe its is possible to lose. Also they did try for the white house on 9/11

>>8038381
> gains literally ridiculous amount of insurance money
> gives america a reason to attack the oily goldmine
> he lost a good deal
And as I said, what he gained a lot more than he lost.

> religious fundamentalists
> armageddon war
its nice that you use big words for fearmongering, but the literal fact is that they are uneducated dumb cave dwelling people with the only source of weaponry is whoever aids them. And if they meant to attack, they would have brought down the white house just as easily as its much simpler than crashing 2 buildings simultaniously.

>>8038387
>And as I said, what he gained a lot more than he lost.
He literally did not, his net worth went down as a result of the attack.

>ts nice that you use big words for fearmongering
They are religious nuts who think they are fighting the war at the end of the world. They are on god's side, everyone else is on satans side. They dont believe they can lose. If they had 10 guys with sharpened sticks against the US russia and china combined they would still think they would win

>>8038369
never mind that the port authority Of New York and New Jersey the entire complex and did not take out insurance but renewed it as required by law. but yeah 1000+' buildings in New York don't have to carry insurance but against catastrophic failure don't require insurance but a 72 pinto with rust holes does. Why are we talking to /pol/? do what /k/ does and send them to /trash/ then if they want to proceed they have to look through pony porn to find it.

>>8038391
I have no idea what you are trying to say

>>8038389
I don't know how just saying "no it didn't" is supposed to make up for the enormous insurance money he gained out of it.

> They are religious nuts who think they are fighting the war at the end of the world.
You're just describing jihadists over and over again without making any connection to what would they gain out of attacking the buildings.

>>8038395
>I don't know how just saying "no it didn't" is supposed to make up for the enormous insurance money he gained out of it.
The insurance payout was not worth as much as the building was intact. It is literally that simple

>You're just describing jihadists over and over again
Their goal was to provoke america into invading the middle east, so that muslim who did not believe it was possible for them to lose soldiers could fight americans. Thats what they got out of it, a ground war with america

>>8038396
For fucks sake the insurance ALWAYS pays out dozens of times more then what you're gaining out of it, which increases exponentially with larger structures. Thats the entire point of insurance. Which is why he gained a ton out of it. I can't believe you've never even heard of what insurance scam is.

> Their goal was to provoke america into invading the middle east
Thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life. You would sound more serious if you talked about ufos or something

>>8038406
>For fucks sake the insurance ALWAYS pays out dozens of times more then what you're gaining out of it
No, it does not. Its worth noting he only got 3/5 the payout he wanted and he was obliged under the terms of insurance to rebuild the trade centre.

>Thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life
So? Why do you expect reason and sanity from religious fanatics? Why do you think ISIS tries so hard to bait america into bringing back their troops?

>>8036193
> holding faith in a nearly three hundred year old document and a form of government thousands of years old shown continually to fail and be absolutely chalk full of corruption

>>8038410
> Its worth noting he only got 3/5 the payout he wanted
I know he got less than what he argued for but even that is an enormous money and as I said is enough to build those buildings all over again. Not to mention WTC was built in 1968 and old buildings cost a lot more in maintenance. Especially safely demolishing a building costs ridiculously huge amount of money, compared to throwing planes at it.

> Why do you think ISIS tries so hard to bait america into bringing back their troops?
> ISIS attacks all the muslim countries around
> They mutilate muslim women and behead other muslims
> They attack Syria, Turkey and many other middle east countries
> They don't even touch Israel.
> theyre provoking lol
Why is ISIS is doing exactly what Israel and America wants in middle east ? If they are fearless crazy warriors, why don't they even attempt to attack their mortal enemies and advance to Israel ? But rather attack everywhere else ?

You should really stop citing """facts""" from news channels. There isn't a more biased bullshit machine than American news.

>>8038434
>I know he got less than what he argued for but even that is an enormous money
An enormous dollar value that was less than what the towers were worth, and he had to spend it all on building more towers

>There isn't a more biased bullshit machine than American news.
I'm not american, I dont watch your "news"

>>8038393
you cannot have a build of that size and potential loss without having insurance? No bank would give you credit and Very few governments would allow it? I missed the word owned and there is a place on this board mods can send threads to called /trash/ in is worse then deletion.

>>8038219
This video answered my question >>8036819

Thank you.

Also: I didn't know it was possible to actually have an informative YT video without some raging tin foil hat voice over.

File: 1449685372048.gif (427KB, 200x198px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 200x198px

>WC1 hit by plane, building falls
>WC2 hit by plane, building falls exactly the same way
>WC7 plane was prevented from reaching its intended target, building still falls exactly the same way

File: image.jpg (13KB, 170x181px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 170x181px

>>8036992
those terrorists probably just trained on flight simulators, and it should be pretty easy to visually fly it though a huge fucking building.

The incompetence of both the government and airport security is really unbelievable though.

>>8038663
Wtf, those bastards destroyed three toilets.

>>8038690
Fucking barbarians. Still, no-where near as many as OP's mum have destroyed

>>8038690
There were 4 planes. Only 3 made it to their destinations (WC1 WC2 and the Pentagon were hit.) The 4th plane never made it to WC7. The people who planned the attacks and demolition of the towers didn't realize that the WC7 intended plane had been counter-hijacked and crashed in PA. So, they blew the WC7 charges on time and the building collapsed.

>>8038709
implying i give a shit about your bathroom conspiracies. You keep that shit (pun intended) to yourself

>>8038663
If WTC 7 was supposed to be hit. And the government was in on this conspiracy, then why did they shoot down the plane?

File: 1454199557183.jpg (55KB, 402x386px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 402x386px

>>8037742
>believes in holocaust

>>8037024
>>seismic readings after impact
you really think a plane can have that great an impact?
>mfw idiot thinks a plane crash will show on a seismometer 60 km away from crash

>>8038354
>evade
>ad hominem
>etc., etc.
I never argued that. Not once did I even imply it.
>>8038366
Once again: not an argument.

>>8038785
>then why did they shoot down the plane?

They didn't.

>United Airlines Flight 93: a Boeing 757 aircraft, departed Newark International Airport at 8:42 a.m. en route to San Francisco, with a crew of seven and 33 passengers, not including four hijackers.
>As passengers attempted to subdue the hijackers, the aircraft crashed into a field in Stonycreek Township near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 10:03 a.m.

>>8038712
Welcome to the thread and 4chan, newfriend.

>>8039056
>you didn't get the joke
Maybe next time actually reading the posts before calling anyone newfag

>>8039052
>actually believing this cover

>>8036983
>>8036983
>>8036983
Terrorists aren't idiots bud, Bin Laden came from a wealthy Saudi family so I assume he'd know a decent amount about finances and the world economy

>>8039075
> Bin Laden came from a wealthy Saudi family
> And he moved into a triplex cave
stop repeating media narrative garbage like a parrot retard

>>8039078
Jesus fucking Christ dude

File: Victor Isai Mazariegos 10.jpg (87KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 960x960px

>>8035255
Is that the World Trade Center? Such mapping is possible with some massive Computer Science programming and database use. However, if the project of making the planes "collapse" or "fall" or something like that was doable in a short amount of time then it was a particularly easy task. A short amount of time is considerably not that important - with or without the use of computers. Given the relevant use of computers and programming either pen and paper Geometry or electronic or analogic linear mapping or some vector use, I do think that a philosophically unimportant group of individuals was relevant to the case. As in "two towers" do you particularly mean two desktop computers? Possibly. Consider how corrupt and totally malevolent the present U.S. government administration is. Barack Obama in 2016 by his own intent directly and willfully uses radio technology and new Mathematics to inflict harm on people. Apparently he has a history in the CIA of California or Southern California, particularly the Los Angeles, California region of the U.S. and the San Francisco, California CIA area and also the Viriginia or Massachussetts area. Possibly the New York area CIA as well. By induction, I do think he is logically and consequentially relevant to the 9/11 NY incident. It certainly doesn't seem like an accident. It seems like a perfect Calculus or U.S. History student would know specifically why such meme shows that the polarity of whatever individual responsible for the attack is not particularly known with reference to his or her work in the 9/11 area problems.

>>8035339
WTC was a big money loser, and the huge amount of asbestos insulation used in construction meant that it's demolition would have been more expensive to tear down than it was to build.

Cheaper to crash a couple planes into it, demo it, then claim the whole thing was a terrorist attack.

As a bonus you can drop a "plane" on the Pentagon at the same time and destroy the evidence for the billions of dollars that had been defrauded from the American tax payers, and start another cash cow war in the middle East.

All in all everyone wins, except for the first responders and a few million camel fuckers in the Middle East.

It was a brilliant plan, and executed damn near perfectly.

>>8035376
>I watched it on live tv when it happened. The instant I saw them start falling my entire world view was completely shattered. I knew instantly they had be rigged to fall like that and the planes had nothing at all to do with it.

Yup, and all the underage "experts" on /sci/ will call you an idiot.

>>8035458
>>8036268
The fucked up thing about WTC 7 is that
1) the BBC announced it had fallen 15 minutes before it actually had
2) it was still standing in the live video behind the reporter as she made the announcement
3) when the BBC was confronted by EVERYONE about this astronomically unlikely coincidence, they claimed they had "lost" all their video footage from 9/11

Yes, that's right, the BBC lost all their video footage from the most important news event 50 years. Seems legit.

File: 5.jpg (19KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 600x600px

>>8039088
>Given the relevant use of computers and programming either pen and paper Geometry or electronic or analogic linear mapping or some vector use, I do think that a philosophically unimportant group of individuals was relevant to the case.

should be

*Given the relevant use of computers or programming with either pen and paper Geometry or electronic or analogic linear mapping or some vector use, I do think that a philosophically unimportant group of individuals was relevant to the case.

Addition: If they were philosophically unimportant then they certainly were not Christian. Homosexual laws by Barack Obama in 2008 to April 29, 2016 and spikes in teenage to adult violence in terrorist activities are not particularly in coincidence with some type of Christian or Christian derivative progressive Democratic set of beliefs. So the individuals involved do seem non-Western or particularly non-Western by their atheistic behaviors. I do think that, presently, Geometric and Numerical Statistical Analysis of the fixed populations of the U.S. and groups that visit the Western hemisphere from about 1940 to April 29, 2016 would show who did what "terrorist" or "extreme" attack either by legal or of some type of philosophical ideology.

The attached picture is a picture of me, Isai, and I've never actually been a Democratic Party member of the U.S. nor do I intend to do so. I particularly right and I am a pure Mathematician and a protestant Christian Baptist. I run track.

>>8039108
>The attached picture is a picture of me, Isai, and I've never actually been a Democratic Party member of the U.S. nor do I intend to do so. I particularly right and I am a pure Mathematician and a protestant Christian Baptist. I run track.

I am particularly right.

>>8039093
I think the real genius was the WTC 7 obvious controlled demolition. As a red herring, it completely side tracked all inquiring minds away from the far more spectacular and suspicious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 by vertically shaped nuclear blasts into large falling top sections.

2 aluminum airliners half full of kerosene, 7 enormous concrete, asbestos and iron structures!?
Unpossible on the face of it. Too bad every Constitution in the west had to be dismantled, probably to ensure silence on the matter from those with inside knowledge and second thoughts. There was a flurry of assassinations soon after not to mention all the people on the planes and trapped inside the towers above the impact points as all stairwells were simultaneously blown out, elevators shut down and communications jammed. Me thinks that's why many started jumping instead of waiting for a rescue, they knew.

>>8039100
and this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPzAakHPpk

It looks like you guys have not solved the problem "Two Towers and the 9/11 New York Terrorist Attack" if you haven't yet figured that although the event was important the individuals who made the event were not important according to any sharp rule.

Such lack of nobility only perpetuates more corruption and decreases the production of proof documents in Mathematics and the Sciences. Otherwise, the connectivites and real map groups are not particularly conducive to work or nice food or nice shoes.

I'm not saying the government did it directly, but is it too far fetched to believe they turned a blind eye to an apparent threat to shift the battlezone - I'm not even bringing up the profitable business that is war here - To make america safe, simply take the war to somewhere else by marking some easy-to-identify, already suspicious people as enemies and proceed

>>8035516
Top ironing XD

>>8037043
>the WTC was designed to do: collapse into its own footprint

Any sources for this? It makes sense, but I've never seen a credible source mention it. Why isn't this mentioned in the NIST report?

>>8037384
>steel supports made of iron
No, steel supports are made of steel.

Where did all of the pure iron microspheres (a telltale sign of thermite) come from. There was litterlly tons of it in the dust.

>>8037420
>I know better than the experts

A few high profile experts spoke up, but they were fired from their jobs and blacklisted. The rest took the hint and shut the fuck up.

>>8039426
source?

>>8039303
It took me until the 2nd paragraph to realize this is bait.

>>8039305
>but is it too far fetched to believe they turned a blind eye to an apparent threat to shift the battlezone
1 - "Blind eye" would be an active choice. There's no possibility that the government could keep it under wraps.

2 - No evidence for that

>>8039100
>the most important news event 50 years
I know 9/11 is big for you Americans, but come on, it's not the falling of the Berlin Wall.

>>8039625
The Berlin Wall meant little given that by then the West was even more Marxist than the East.

>>8039100
So to be clear, you believe the government clued in the BBC to their "plot"? Does that make any sense?

By 2 PM, the fire department knew the building was going to collapse and they relayed this information to reporters. The BBC reporter likely flubbed up their words and said "has collapsed" instead of "about to collapse". Again, nothing strange about it. Reporters have made much larger brain farts. And to top it off, she said "details are VERY, VERY sketchy".

See? A simple explanation that uses evidence, and doesn't require nonsensical speculation.

Bumpity bump

>>8035255
A small group in the Nixon administration couldn't hide a bug in a hotel meeting room... But a plot as intricate as crashing 2 planes into the world trade center, 1 into the pentagon, and 1 in a field in Pennsylvania, then rigging the busy and highly populated world trade center with explosives, presumably needing a team of hijackers, a team of explosives specialists, a team that orchestrated the whole plan, none of which has been whistleblown in 15 years, is at all probable? And what would the government even gain from this? Aside from killing 2,000 people, businessmen and taxpaying citizens, we got the war in Iraq, and the patriot act that really didn't benefit the government in any significant way?

>>8039706
They'll just cry "shill"!

>>8039706
You sound like a fucking idiot

>that really didn't benefit the government in any significant way?
"The government"? Does the "The government" think? No, its people in specific spots who benefited & organized these pointless mid east wars.
Specifically neo-con jews. The same ones who were behind 9/11.

You are talking up some nonsensical contrived scenario about what happened, who said another about explosives?

>>8039774
Not him, but:

>Specifically neo-con jews. The same ones who were behind 9/11.
Prove it.

>You are talking up some nonsensical contrived scenario about what happened, who said another about explosives?
That's the mainstream denialist position, so there's nothing wrong with what he said.

>>8039625
>big for you Americans
Uninstalled almost every Constitution in the west. Those took centuries to install. They are gone forever as will be obvious under the new age dark ages soon enough if not already.

>>8039796
Looks like you've expanded to conspiracies of the future, not just the past.

>>8039796
what? no it didn't

>>8039796
>>8039816
How many western countries even have constitutions? Mine doesnt

>>8039827
Where do you live?

>>8039831
NZ

>>8039844
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_New_Zealand

>>8039853
The first line of that page is "There is no entrenched law that forms the New Zealand constitution"

>>8039706
It's called "compartmentalization".

>>8039856
Oh yeah? Then why is the Wikipedia page called "CONSTITUTION of New Zealand".

Checkm8

>>8039862
Do you have any idea the amount of people that would have to be in on the conspiracy?

Bumpity bump

Looks like the conspiratards have given up.

>>8039928
chemistry is not science, the thermite was added on its own by the evil NWO lizards

>>8039958
0/10 b8

>>8039970
at least I tried desu :(

>>8039977
It's ok f a m.

I just want to debate denialists. I don't know why they're being cowards.

>>8039981
I say it is best that you do not anger them or else they go to /x/ and make all of their tinfoil-fags come here and ruin the quality of the board further than it already is.

>>8035255
>engineering marvel
If I had a penny for every "engineering marvel" that got obliterated by wind, earthquake or an iceberg I would probably have a few.
But no, jet fuel cant melt steel beams, but it can significantly weaken them. As for the "people saw molten metal in the pile of rubble", it was probably just red hot metal.
Also, every time a hurricane shows up in a hurricane area you americans always seem equally surprised when your paper mache buildings crumble.
Im going to blame this on americans being retards and using the cheapest methods and materials for everything.

>>8039983
/sci/ is fine overall, when it comes to conspiracy theorists. There's usually never more than one thread on the first page.

But what IS killing /sci/ is all the damn math homework. That rule is never applied.

>>8039990
>Im going to blame this on americans being retards and using the cheapest methods and materials for everything.
That's actually exactly what happened. A combination of using low-cost materails and trying to meet the deadline is why the building was weak.

>>8039990
http://www.egr.msu.edu/firestruct/Fire%20Research%20PhD/Stress%20Strain%20Temperature%20Relationship%20for%20Steel%20by%20Poh.pdf
Proof of this Anon's claim.

>>8035255
Yes. I do not believe we orchestrated it or anything like that.

I suspect we knew it would happen though.

>>8040031
>I suspect we knew it would happen though.
This is the ONLY thing conspiracy theorists can reasonably put forth. The intelligence community were somewhat aware of an attack plan, but I don't know about the details.

>>8040031
if you mean "knew it would happen" as in "this building is pretty good if nothing unexpected happens to it ever", then yes.
just like when you build houses in a hurricane area you go "these houses pretty good if we don't get any hurricanes"

as a civil engineer, it's not complicated to calculate the "accedental load" of airplanes or car bombs but these are normally the loads that result in the most amount of reinforcements and will raise the cost significantly.
and I know that as a contractor it is tempting to just assume nothing bad will happen and as a result save a ton of money. but I based on the fact that you build almost lighter than air buildings in hurrricane areas I don't think you americans can be trusted to make buildings meant to stand

>>8035435
ily

>>8039659
Sure that explains the news video, but of doesn't explain why WTC 7 collapsed in the first place.

>>8036399
I think onus probandi, post hoc ergo propter hoc and argument from incredulity all apply.

>>8040154
Huge bits of tower 1 fell into it.

>>8040052
No, as in suspected the attack would occur.

>>8036553
Eh, it's not as different as you think. Jetfuel is kerosene (which is just diesel with less wax). The different JPs are just kerosene with different additives.

>>8036837
http://phys.org/news/2016-01-equation-large-scale-conspiracies-quickly-reveal.html

>>8039990
>Also, every time a hurricane shows up in a hurricane area you americans always seem equally surprised when your paper mache buildings crumble.
What the hell are you talking about?

File: trade-01_3321412k[1].jpg (142KB, 858x536px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 858x536px

The steel weakened - YES. The upper half of the building came down - YES

But why did the bottom half of the building collapse into itself perfectly? Thats where shit doesnt make sense.

File: World_Trade_Center_Site_After_9-11_Attacks_With_Original_Building_Locations.jpg (2MB, 2992x2242px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2992x2242px

>>8040635
>But why did the bottom half of the building collapse
Because the top half fell on it

>into itself perfectly?
It did not

I am no engineer (rockets and aviation is my thing) but there Is weak points and the planes left the building structurally unstable. It was time that made them fall. And fire helped speed up the time

File: hurricane david.jpg (276KB, 798x543px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 798x543px

>>8040252
>wow what a horrible unforseen event
>if only there was a tougher material than plaster

Does anyone have any calculations?
Does anyone have theories back by mathematical rigor?
Does anyone have any real numbers?
Do any of the people posting have degrees in chemistry, physics or engineering?

File: 1385996124487.jpg (63KB, 686x619px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 686x619px

>>8040666

>>8040747
Why didn't the fire burn or bend the steel in the Madrid building ?

>>8040747
Jet fuel burns hotter than regular office supplies
Also a direct hit from an airplane fucks up the structural integrity of the building
Also American engineering

>>8037384
NANO THERMITE doesn't occur naturally, you fuck.

>>8040640
It fell as perfectly as any demolition does. Watch the replay.

>because the top fell on it.

Ridiculous. This is a science board you cant just throw around speculation as if its factual.

The building was being held up by its steel and concrete. For the top half to have fallen it would have to overcome the weakened steel AND also the concrete supporting it all around (apart from that one corner with missing concrete.

If the steel and concrete were not enough to support it it would NOT come crashing straight down as the replay shows. It would of fallen toward the side where there was missing concrete support.

Ever seen how a tree is felled? It falls in the direction the cut is made, not straight downwards.

>>8040747
>Windsor tower: 106 meters
>WTC towers: 415 meters

hmmmm

>>8040801
Windsor tower also had a concrete core.

>jet fuel can't melt steel beams
>What is creep deformation?

/thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXb5M8qKrjw

>>8040792
Not him but

>The building was being held up by its steel and concrete. For the top half to have fallen it would have to overcome the weakened steel AND also the concrete supporting it all around (apart from that one corner with missing concrete.
You talk about speculation, and then you do it yourself? The walls of the Towers were NOT concrete-reinforced. Neither were the columns.

>>8040879
Geologist here, I know creep on geologic time scales, things like Solution Creep and Dislocation Creep which take thousands to millions of years to deform rock.

I'd be curious to learn about other, faster creep you'd be referring to. I know of plastic deformation of rock at great temperature and depth but I wouldn't call any of that behavior 'creep'.

Maybe I just can't stop thinking like a geologist.

File: wtc_collapse3[1].gif (129KB, 640x578px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 640x578px

>>8041115
The concrete around the building is going to hold weight up. it doesnt need to be speacially reinforced or what not.

The fact is there was intact concrete and other structural items holding the building up.

Only 1 side of the building had the flames and structural damage.

It should of fallen sideways instead of straight down.

Look at the pic.

File: blasthole.jpg (70KB, 720x542px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 720x542px

>>8041116
What you make of this? Could this pattern form naturally? Some think it's a micro nuke blast crater which was forced straight up into the collapsing tops of the big towers.

File: coreconstruction.jpg (47KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 640x360px

>>8041168
>The concrete around the building is going to hold weight up. it doesnt need to be speacially reinforced or what not.
>The fact is there was intact concrete and other structural items holding the building up.
I don't think so. Here's an actual picture of the core sub levels, instead of your drawing.

>>8041198
I dont even know what you are trying to get at. There was concrete everywhere but where the plane hit, and there were also hollow tubes.

Also not every hollow tube was under the direct intensity of the jet fuel flames.

Steel and concrete was weak on one corner, and stronger on the rest.

It should not of fallen straight down.

>>8041210
>There was concrete everywhere
No there wasn't, you dumbass. You keep saying that WITH NO PROOF.

>>8041210
And I don't know why you keep talking about "fell straight down". They didn't . Pic related

File: 54ca71eff188e_-_wtc-tower2-collapse-0808.jpg (59KB, 470x319px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 470x319px

>>8041210
And I don't know why you keep talking about "fell straight down". They didn't. Pic related

The buildings only used concrete for floor plates you retards.
The structure was entirely steel.

When the steel failed, the concrete plates fell down on each other causing a cascading failure of the steel holding up the floors below.

>>8041243
This

>>8041225
>>8041238
>>8041243
>>8041250

There were concrete around the steel tubes and central column.

There was Steel in the middle and around.

Only one side of the building was damaged.

>>8041254
The central core, pretty much only held the weight of the elevators.
The perimeter was what held up the buildings, and the planes took a large chunk out of it. Add in the heat weakening the rest of the steel and it's pretty easy to see why it failed.

Those buildings were horribly designed from an engineering standpoint.

>>8041260
There was no reason for it to buckle straight down the way it did.

>>8041254
>and central column
[Citation needed]

>>8041267
See >>8041238

>>8041274
That is only one part of the way it fell. If you take the entire fall as the average, it went straight down.

When dealing with these kinds of hypothesise you cannot take a snippet of information as representative of the whole.

>>8041277
Shifting the goalposts.

What does that even mean? You say it fell straight down. I give you a picture that shows it falling at an angle. Then, you say "on AVERAGE, it fell straight down". The fuck does that even mean?

>>8041285
If you cant comprehend scientific methodology stop talking to me.

File: 1385996072290.png (1MB, 722x1126px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 722x1126px

>>8040769

File: Untitled.png (9KB, 512x1080px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 512x1080px

>>8041267
Chain reaction.

Collapse starts at level where the plane hit. Top part of building falls onto floor below. Steel structure fails under the weight, then everything falls onto the next floor. Repeat until building is gone.

It's really not that complicated.

>>8041287
>scientific methodology
>9/11 denialist
>denies the proof I presented
>unskeptical and dogmatic in his false conclusions
>"scientific methodology"

>>8041288
The Usce Tower is 377 ft, while the WTC towers were 1300+ ft.

Also, it probably used concrete for fireproofing unlinke the WTC towers.

>people ITT really think the government blew up the towers
>the US government

these people can't even deliver the mail, or find an 80 year old man on a dialysis machine. and you guys think they can orchestrate something like this? lol

people who believe in this shit are the ones who are scared to death that the world is completely out of control, so they concoct these theories because its less frightening to think that someone, somewhere has a good grip over all the goings on of the planet. even if they are malevolent.

File: 1281454.jpg (629KB, 1400x934px) Image search: [Google]

629KB, 1400x934px

Three pictures too illustrate why 9/11 was the day physics wen AWOL for a day.

THIS

File: wtc1stplanejustbeforeitcrashes.jpg (55KB, 790x805px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 790x805px

>>8041310

Flown into THIS

File: 344558.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>8041310
>>8041314

Caused THIS.

Now isn't that fucking spectacular?

>>8041310
>>8041314
>>8041318
What's your fucking point?

>>8041310
>I can't understand how large complex collisions are different from small simple collisions.
>Everything sufficiently large should be indestructible.

File: 1di7_TwinTowers.jpg (83KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 800x600px

>>8041319
It's absolutely impossible for a plane... even a fully loaded commercial jetliner to fly into a 500.000 TON steel and concrete structure and cause a collapse like that.

A massive 75-ish floors where intact underneath the crashsite on one tower, and a whooping 90 on the other. Completely undamaged. Why the FUCK would all of a sudden give? That part of the structure was already DESIGNED to carry the weight ABOVE it. Why didn't the upper part simply roll off of the lower undamaged part like you would totally expect what would happen if upper and lower parts actually would've been severed.

>>8041321
Everything as large as a world trade tower is indeed pretty much indestructible.

>>8041340
500,000 tons is heavy as fuck.

It's a miracle the towers didn't fall down on their own.

File: sdfsdf.jpg (11KB, 237x213px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 237x213px

>people still alive on the actual FLOOR the plane hit
>brings down MASSIVE steel skyscraper

File: wtc_-_twin_towers_-_plane_1_attacks.jpg (9KB, 355x265px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 355x265px

>>8041340
Other perspective... plane for scale.

>>8041340
>It's absolutely impossible for a plane... even a fully loaded commercial jetliner to fly into a 500.000 TON steel and concrete structure and cause a collapse like that.
That's funny because just about a year before the attack the CIA expressed concerns that you COULD bring a building down this way.
And if it really were impossible, then why would a false-flag attack use this approach?

>Why the FUCK would all of a sudden give?
Because of the shock of 20-some floors falling like a multi-thousand-ton hammer.

Yeah that ball I throw in your faces hurts as much as when u touch it stationary. Nope sorry once the momentum started that's it. If you bored work out the math. I aint gonna. But once 1st floor collapses It brings the whole weight of building above it down at a speed of roughly 3m/s so take the weight above it multiply by 3 and that's the weight that hits the floor below the one that collapsed. Yeah it aint made to take 3times the original weight of that above it. The figures are rough Im just giving a rough idea of why once one floor collapses the ones below don't really stand a chance. Not to mention the first floor that would of collapsed was mostlikely one above the impact floor as heat rises so the floor above would of collapsed first in my thinking as more heat there and its collapsing onto a floor that's already weak which collapses onto another weak floor and so on for a few levels then its the momentum and the floors below got no chance.

File: science_inside.png (25KB, 391x527px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 391x527px

Nano-thermite or super-thermite is a metastable intermolecular composite characterized by a particle size of its main constituents, a metal and a metal oxide, under 100 nanometers. This allows for high and customizable reaction rates. Nano-thermites contain an oxidizer and a reducing agent, which are intimately mixed on the nanometer scale.

>>8036992
>How the fuck do you even plan an attack like that? How do they know where to fly? How do they even know how to fly?
As someone who has actually flown planes before, albiet smaller Cessna 172's, the flying part isn't actually hard. Especially with all the fancy electronic control systems modern airliner jets come with. It is usually the takeoff and landing part that is hard, but the terrorists werent planning on doing either so whatever.

>>8041318
Do you understand how speed works? Even a particle of sand can fuck shit up provided it's going fast enough. A 333 Ton object flying at 925km/h isn't exactly going to hit the side of the tower and comically slide down like a paper airplane

File: Chips_of_thermitic_material_WTC_small.jpg (18KB, 399x303px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 399x303px

>>8041368
found in ash

>>8041382
it does this >>8041351
And it wasn't going 925km/h , at that speed the plane would've been thorn apart by the think atmosphere so close at ground level. Think more like 600 km/h.

And if you think severing just a floor's worth of structural beams ( which neither plane actually even did) is enough to bring the entire building to a collapse why is actual building demolition such a science?

If an airliner takes out a WTC tower you should totally be able to fly >>8041375's cessna into one of those smaller buildings on this >>8041340 photo and cause it to collapse.

>>8041404
>If an airliner takes out a WTC tower you should totally be able to fly >>8041375's cessna into one of those smaller buildings on this >>8041340 (You) photo and cause it to collapse.

hahah this entire sentence sums up 9/11.

Hijack a commercial airplane, fly it into anything smaller than a wtc tower, make it collapse perfectly into its own footprint.

wtf are those professional demo teams even doing, just ram an old written off airliner into it.

>>8041404
>why is actual building demolition such a science?
Because when you demolish a building you don't want it destroying anything around it.

>And if you think severing just a floor's worth of structural beams ( which neither plane actually even did) is enough to bring the entire building to a collapse
I can't even begin to explain how dumb this sentence is

>>8041414
>then why is actual building demolition such a science?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8VjFBPQm2k

>>8041413
Because you could ram airliners into those kinds of towers all day and they would still stand for 1000 years.

Being an old fag I remember the great 11 of 9 shows that morning on the TV. After the initial shock wore off I immediately started wondering what they were going to do after the fires were out. When the first building magically disintegrated I was like, wtf! Then the second almost identically I was like, OK, this smells funny. By the time WTC 7 went down at the end of the day I knew a false flag was on. A new Americna Reichstag. The patsy perps were already being labeled only hours after the first hit, not even time for an investigation. Arab Muslims? Obviously Christfags did it, smells like...the Papacy. In hindsight, it could have been no other entity. Nothing has that much power except the Papacy with their billions of minions, history of crusading, Inquisitions with torture and so on.

Welcome to the new age dark ages!

>>8041595
You put it quite nicely.

File: 1461325352632.jpg (1MB, 1057x1821px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1057x1821px

2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS ANNOUNCED BY DONALD RUMSFELD LOST ON SEPT 20.

Files allocated to said monies were on the same floor that the plane hit the first tower and in the same building within the pentagon that a plane hit.

No pictures of the supposed pentagon attack on the same day.
Months prior to the attacks construction crew worker were supposedly reported by wtc residents to be working on the elevator shafts.

Everyone who wants the 28 pages to be released gets denied, and those who say they want to release them decide not.

Biggest event in modern america that sparked the destabalization of the middle east and 1 war, don't forget the 2.3 trillion $$$ that were announced the previous day as "missing", shits probably already been used on god knows what.

>>8035314

If you read history you find out that it is not an unusual tactics.

These are not exact similar exampels, but first ones that came to my mind. I know there are more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

Here was no actual destroying, but just accusation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelling_of_Mainila

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh3qUmNxC6E

there was no need for bombs. those would have been pretty fuckin noticeable too