For the "truthers", my 2 cents on the "conspiracy"

[hjmick]

I would post a link to the Popular Mechanics article concerning WTC7/debunking the 9/11 bullshit conspiracies, but it would serve no purpose as you already know the "truth" so arguing further would be a waste of our time.

Hjmick, how the twin towers fell is not a big deal to me.

Although, Building #7 makes me wonder.

My focus of interest is; who actually flew the planes onto the towers?

And several unanswered questions concerning the plane that hit the Pentagon?

The mistake is mine. Apologies.

 

[Fizz]

Ok, I am new here, so I haven't had a lot of time to dig through all of the posts on 9/11 here so I figured I would start my own thread on what I "know" about building demolition.

As an architect, I have been part of the process to a couple of building implosions. Here's where the 9/11 conspiracy theories lost me from the start. There is no way possible for the buildings that fell to have been demolished via planted explosives, not without eyewitnesses to the setup of the explosive devices and their miles of demo chord that would have been required to detonate them.

The only way you can implode a building is to destroy the metal skeleton of the structure, this is done with explosive charges set into a well configured design of column placement through out the building, from the foundation up. Each of these charges are tied together with demolition chord and set to a single bank of detonators.

In the twin towers, there would have been weeks if not months of set up to do this. Each of the columns would have had to have its column cover removed, and any fireproofing removed from the area that the charges were placed. This isn't something that would be hidden from the public, or something that could be done in the evening and put back together before the next working day. The next step is to set the demo chord...the miles and miles of demo chord to connect the charges so that they could be triggered at a specific, well planned time for each charge so that the building could fall properly. This chord would have been strung and visible to the public. There has not been a single eyewitness report of this, in addition to the fact that the videos of the lower lobby during the fall of the towers clearly shows no such demo chord in place.

I have heard by some that the chord wasn't necessary today since there are remote frequency detonators. The problem with this is, it just isn't possible in those types of buildings. There would be too much static generated by the shell of the building to assure a perfect detonation of every charge for the buildings to fall the way they did.

I know this is hard for some of you to believe...but it's true. There was no huge conspiracy by our government or the building owner to drop the towers on 9/11, no matter how many times you tell yourself it had to be a conspiracy.

I'm more than willing to debate this subject all you want. I have a heavy duty flame retardant suite on, so feel free to flame away.

-TSO

Both Twin Towers went through many months of construction renovations and some of which was on the very support columns that failed on 9/11.

Part of the Construction renovations included the removal and replancing of fireproofing on the steel support columns.

Plus Both Twin Towers just underwent the biggest elevator renovation in history......the elevators shafts in the Twin Towers were located in the core where all the support columns were.

It gets much better and I can go into more discriminating details if you like with verifications.

Oh and demoliltions have come a long way with new technology and types of explosives.

Plus with todays wireless technology the miles of wire you speak of are no longer needed except for cost saving demolitions.

says who? YOU?!! you are a demolition expert now? you do realize that even the radios of the rescuers didnt work properly in the towers, right?

please explain the need to crash planes into buildings if there are already explosives in place. why not just blame the terrorists for the explosives? why go through the complicated and impossible task of adding thousands of potential whistle blowers to a needlessly complicated plot?

please explain how and why the explosives started exactly where the planes hit the building yet no demolitions were damaged as they all seemed to have worked correctly in your hoax.

 

[eots]

please explain the need to crash planes into buildings if there are already explosives in place. why not just blame the terrorists for the explosives? why go through the complicated and impossible task of adding thousands of potential whistle blowers to a needlessly complicated plot?

a spectral of epic proportions was requited to win support for wars of conquest..blaming terrorist for explosions would leave to many loose ends on how they were planted without complicity and your assumption thousands would be required is unfounded

 

[eots]

please explain where temperatures required for failure came from and why there is no forensic evidence of such temperatures being reached in the fire

 

[eots]

A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris

OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8[/ame]

 

[Fizz]

please explain where temperatures required for failure came from and why there is no forensic evidence of such temperatures being reached in the fire

i have evidence the buildings were on fire and were damaged structurally prior to collapse. where is your proof of explosives again?

seriously... how dumb do you fucking have to be to look at a building on fire and see it collapse and assume that the fire had nothing to do with the collapse without any evidence of a contrary scenario?

 

[Toro]

Ok, I am new here, so I haven't had a lot of time to dig through all of the posts on 9/11 here so I figured I would start my own thread on what I "know" about building demolition.

As an architect, I have been part of the process to a couple of building implosions. Here's where the 9/11 conspiracy theories lost me from the start. There is no way possible for the buildings that fell to have been demolished via planted explosives, not without eyewitnesses to the setup of the explosive devices and their miles of demo chord that would have been required to detonate them.

The only way you can implode a building is to destroy the metal skeleton of the structure, this is done with explosive charges set into a well configured design of column placement through out the building, from the foundation up. Each of these charges are tied together with demolition chord and set to a single bank of detonators.

In the twin towers, there would have been weeks if not months of set up to do this. Each of the columns would have had to have its column cover removed, and any fireproofing removed from the area that the charges were placed. This isn't something that would be hidden from the public, or something that could be done in the evening and put back together before the next working day. The next step is to set the demo chord...the miles and miles of demo chord to connect the charges so that they could be triggered at a specific, well planned time for each charge so that the building could fall properly. This chord would have been strung and visible to the public. There has not been a single eyewitness report of this, in addition to the fact that the videos of the lower lobby during the fall of the towers clearly shows no such demo chord in place.

I have heard by some that the chord wasn't necessary today since there are remote frequency detonators. The problem with this is, it just isn't possible in those types of buildings. There would be too much static generated by the shell of the building to assure a perfect detonation of every charge for the buildings to fall the way they did.

I know this is hard for some of you to believe...but it's true. There was no huge conspiracy by our government or the building owner to drop the towers on 9/11, no matter how many times you tell yourself it had to be a conspiracy.

I'm more than willing to debate this subject all you want. I have a heavy duty flame retardant suite on, so feel free to flame away.

-TSO

Yes, Suave, good post.

The twoofers, like CreativeDreams, will argue that the towers were brought down by super-secret magic technology, and that simple wiring and charges are passe. One guy that one of these twoofers posted in a CBC video supposedly "proving" that 9/11 was an official government conspiracy stated that it would probably take 100,000 pounds of thermite to do the trick. Of course, he was skeptical, as most of us are.

Anyways, here is the description of the largest demolition ever. It took many weeks of wiring the building with dozens of people working full-time to set it up.

Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Buildings

Considering that the WTC was much larger, one would think that the demolition teams would have been much more ubiquitous. But when you are using super-secret magic technology, apparently you set up explosives in one of the largest structures on a planet in a weekend when they are "powered-down."

 

[logical4u]

please explain where temperatures required for failure came from and why there is no forensic evidence of such temperatures being reached in the fire

i have evidence the buildings were on fire and were damaged structurally prior to collapse. where is your proof of explosives again?

seriously... how dumb do you fucking have to be to look at a building on fire and see it collapse and assume that the fire had nothing to do with the collapse without any evidence of a contrary scenario?

A book told them.

 

[eots]

Come on toto you know controlled demolition inc was the company in charge of the spoliation of the crime scene and destruction of evidence during the WTC ..clean up......give it up...and it is not super secret technology fool ...it is patented technology and a reality..

 

[slackjawed]

Ok, I am going to go through this one more time;
Evil aliens abducted the planes, and all the passengers on 911. They had abducted humans before, to breed a super race of humans. Unfortuneately they abducted a midget, thus they were only able to breed a race of evil midgets. They had also abducted Elvis, but he was impotent and his dna was damaged by drugs, so all he was good for was training the evil midgets. The evil midgets were the ones that cleaned up the mess on the ground, killed a few people to make it look real and likely planted the explosives that actually took down the buildings since when they abducted the planes they could not have hit the buildings. (yes eots, that exactly why you don't see any wreckage in PA, it was all staged by the midgets.) Now that was just the beginning, the abducted plane passengers are being used to breed a race of normal sized super humans to take over the world.
Now all we need to figure out is how long it takes to breed, raise and train a race of normal sized super humans.
Now doesn't that just make much more sense than either the official story or the wired together theories that are casually tossed around by the conspiracy theorists?
Yes there is a conspiracy, but our government simply isn't smart enough or skilled enough to pull it off.
Therefore, it must be evil midgets, its the only thing that makes sense.

 

[candycorn]

Ok, I am new here, so I haven't had a lot of time to dig through all of the posts on 9/11 here so I figured I would start my own thread on what I "know" about building demolition.

As an architect, I have been part of the process to a couple of building implosions. Here's where the 9/11 conspiracy theories lost me from the start. There is no way possible for the buildings that fell to have been demolished via planted explosives, not without eyewitnesses to the setup of the explosive devices and their miles of demo chord that would have been required to detonate them.

The only way you can implode a building is to destroy the metal skeleton of the structure, this is done with explosive charges set into a well configured design of column placement through out the building, from the foundation up. Each of these charges are tied together with demolition chord and set to a single bank of detonators.

In the twin towers, there would have been weeks if not months of set up to do this. Each of the columns would have had to have its column cover removed, and any fireproofing removed from the area that the charges were placed. This isn't something that would be hidden from the public, or something that could be done in the evening and put back together before the next working day. The next step is to set the demo chord...the miles and miles of demo chord to connect the charges so that they could be triggered at a specific, well planned time for each charge so that the building could fall properly. This chord would have been strung and visible to the public. There has not been a single eyewitness report of this, in addition to the fact that the videos of the lower lobby during the fall of the towers clearly shows no such demo chord in place.

I have heard by some that the chord wasn't necessary today since there are remote frequency detonators. The problem with this is, it just isn't possible in those types of buildings. There would be too much static generated by the shell of the building to assure a perfect detonation of every charge for the buildings to fall the way they did.

I know this is hard for some of you to believe...but it's true. There was no huge conspiracy by our government or the building owner to drop the towers on 9/11, no matter how many times you tell yourself it had to be a conspiracy.

I'm more than willing to debate this subject all you want. I have a heavy duty flame retardant suite on, so feel free to flame away.

-TSO

Yes, Suave, good post.

The twoofers, like CreativeDreams, will argue that the towers were brought down by super-secret magic technology, and that simple wiring and charges are passe. One guy that one of these twoofers posted in a CBC video supposedly "proving" that 9/11 was an official government conspiracy stated that it would probably take 100,000 pounds of thermite to do the trick. Of course, he was skeptical, as most of us are.

Anyways, here is the description of the largest demolition ever. It took many weeks of wiring the building with dozens of people working full-time to set it up.

Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Buildings

Considering that the WTC was much larger, one would think that the demolition teams would have been much more ubiquitous. But when you are using super-secret magic technology, apparently you set up explosives in one of the largest structures on a planet in a weekend when they are "powered-down."

What the demo-nuts never seem to address is that the very last thing you want to happen during a demolition is to have an outside influence effect the "drop". I have heard--never seen personally but heard of--the delaying of an implosion due to high winds. I do not know if that was because of the debris flow or if it effected the explosives themselves.

I have seen where a demo company spent a good amount of time fashioning a plywood "box" around the charge so that it wouldn't effect the wiring to other charges or the other charges themselves.

Also what the demo-nuts never seem to to mention is that when you have a substance like thermite, you have an inherent paper trail.

The manufacture of the thermite would have raised eyebrows; somehow it didn't.
The ordering of the thermite would have created a paper trail; somehow it didn't
The transport of the thermite would have required a hazmat certification; somehow it didn't.
The application of thermite would have required some expertise; somehow no world renown expert was enlisted.

All in all, the demo theory is the stuff of fairy tales and you probably should pity anybody sponsoring such a crazy notion; they are chemically unbalanced.

 

[Terral]

Hi Suave:

Who sent me here? ...

This is your reply to Post #16? So, all of that architectural experience says "Building Fires Took Down WTC-7" that was struck by no Jetliner ...

Keep up the good work ...

GL,

Terral

 

[TheSuaveOne]

So, all of that architectural experience says "Building Fires Took Down WTC-7" that was struck by no Jetliner ...

Actually, no I did not. The initial claims that fires took the building down by themselves were completely wrong. With that said, having the initial report being wrong doesn't make it some sort of dark conspiracy.

-TSO

 

[Terral]

Hi Suave:

Actually, no I did not. The initial claims that fires took the building down by themselves were completely wrong. With that said, having the initial report being wrong doesn't make it some sort of dark conspiracy.

Yes. You did claim that "Building Fires Did It" by attempting to debunk the only other explanation for what took WTC-7 down in mere seconds!

1. Controlled Demolition. << My Explanation.
2. Building Fires/Debris. << Official Cover Story LIE.

These are the ONLY two (2) explanations for that took WTC-7 down into its own footprint. Since you do not stand with the architects and engineers at AE911Truth.org, and the scholars at ScholarsFor911Truth.org, then you stand with Official Cover Story "Building Fires/Debris Did It" LIARS. Period.

If Mr. Suave wanted to add a 'third' hypothesis (none exists), then we would have seen that in the OP of this thread ...

GL,

Terral

 

[TheSuaveOne]

As I actually stated, building debris, sonic damage and fire were the reasons for the collapse of WTC7. The video I provided proved that the claim that the building fell in 6.6 seconds was completey incorrect.

-TSO

 

[candycorn]

As I actually stated, building debris, sonic damage and fire were the reasons for the collapse of WTC7. The video I provided proved that the claim that the building fell in 6.6 seconds was completey incorrect.

-TSO

I feel it is strange that people discount two major passenger jet crashes when talking about WTC7. Almost as if the seismic event of the crashes and the collapse of two of the largest structures known to man within a hunded feet or so meant nothing.

Pretty easy to see why the "movement" has been DOA for 8 years now.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Ok, I am new here, so I haven't had a lot of time to dig through all of the posts on 9/11 here so I figured I would start my own thread on what I "know" about building demolition.

As an architect, I have been part of the process to a couple of building implosions. Here's where the 9/11 conspiracy theories lost me from the start. There is no way possible for the buildings that fell to have been demolished via planted explosives, not without eyewitnesses to the setup of the explosive devices and their miles of demo chord that would have been required to detonate them.

The only way you can implode a building is to destroy the metal skeleton of the structure, this is done with explosive charges set into a well configured design of column placement through out the building, from the foundation up. Each of these charges are tied together with demolition chord and set to a single bank of detonators.

In the twin towers, there would have been weeks if not months of set up to do this. Each of the columns would have had to have its column cover removed, and any fireproofing removed from the area that the charges were placed. This isn't something that would be hidden from the public, or something that could be done in the evening and put back together before the next working day. The next step is to set the demo chord...the miles and miles of demo chord to connect the charges so that they could be triggered at a specific, well planned time for each charge so that the building could fall properly. This chord would have been strung and visible to the public. There has not been a single eyewitness report of this, in addition to the fact that the videos of the lower lobby during the fall of the towers clearly shows no such demo chord in place.

I have heard by some that the chord wasn't necessary today since there are remote frequency detonators. The problem with this is, it just isn't possible in those types of buildings. There would be too much static generated by the shell of the building to assure a perfect detonation of every charge for the buildings to fall the way they did.

I know this is hard for some of you to believe...but it's true. There was no huge conspiracy by our government or the building owner to drop the towers on 9/11, no matter how many times you tell yourself it had to be a conspiracy.

I'm more than willing to debate this subject all you want. I have a heavy duty flame retardant suite on, so feel free to flame away.

-TSO

Your obviously another disinformation agent plant cause your full of lies.Not only do the laws of physics prove your full of bullshit and hot air but hundreds of architects and engineers around the country as well as demolition experts dont accept the official version either.First responders and firemen and witness testimonys prove your full of hot air.nice try agent.

btw agent,this post below with those links there prove you are full of hot air and lies as well.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...ion-proves-9-11-inside-job-4.html#post1871937

 

[LA RAM FAN]

OK. I'll begin !
You are an architect.
You don't know jack shit about demolition and it's very likely you can't even change the blades on a planer.
STFU
OH !
Have a lovely day !

well said.btw disinformation agent, Terral is a demoliton expert and unlike you, tells the truth about the collapse ,knows something about demolitions and doesnt ignore witness testimonys.

 

[TheSuaveOne]

hundreds of architects and engineers around the country

LOL, what less than 1000 around the world...do you actually know how many registered architects and professional engineers there are? 1000? LOL. Nice try.

-TSO

 

[Fizz]

OK. I'll begin !
You are an architect.
You don't know jack shit about demolition and it's very likely you can't even change the blades on a planer.
STFU
OH !
Have a lovely day !

well said.btw disinformation agent, Terral is a demoliton expert and unlike you, tells the truth about the collapse ,knows something about demolitions and doesnt ignore witness testimonys.

Terral is more likely to be santa claus than considered an expert in ANYTHING!!