WTC building 7

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's amazing how much time and effort credible researchers scientists have put into investigating this issue

Debunking the 9/11 myths and conspiracies

The World Trade Center
The collapse of both World Trade Center towers—and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later—initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC's structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.

9 11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Wow! I see their is also credible info on the Pentagon issue...

The Pentagon

At 9:37 am on 9/11, 51 minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, the Pentagon was similarly attacked. Though dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.

9 11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - Pentagon​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yep, even credible info on that other issue:

Flight 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane. Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them.
9 11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - Flight 93
​

I would like to take this opportunity thank EOTS for providing America with this opportunity to view credible evidence on such an important topic

thank you eots

 

[eots]

What was the motive for the all powerful conspiracy to secretly sabotage this building?

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

what does a video prove?

he denies and lies about multiple eye witnesses ,samples and photographic evidence of molten metal at all three buildings...just as they deny explosions recorded and wittnessed

who collected samples and photos?

 

[eots]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

it's what they do?

none of the conspiracy makes any rational sense

what does a video prove?

he denies and lies about multiple eye witnesses ,samples and photographic evidence of molten metal at all three buildings...just as they deny explosions recorded and wittnessed

who collected samples and photos?

...

again,
who collected samples and photos? This is the CDZ, please answer in a reasonable and rational way

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

what scientists and how did they get any supposed samples?

 

[SAYIT]

Yep, even credible info on that other issue:

Flight 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane. Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them.
9 11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - Flight 93
​

I would like to take this opportunity thank EOTS for providing America with this opportunity to view credible evidence on such an important topic

thank you eots

Yanno, we agree on pretty much nothing except this. I have spent much time trying to discern the reasons these 9/11 CTs continue 13+ years after the attack and years after their movement collapsed - like those skyscrapers - under its own weight.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Focus of the CDZ is Civil Discourse, regardless of the topic matter. Still, not all threads qualify for this forum. Some determinations are quick, some, are wait and see. If a thread is removed from this forum it is automatically trashed. Feel free to restart such a thread in a more appropriate forum. Understand that we are not here to run cover for propaganda or soap box preaching, be it left or right. Civil discourse is something we can each benefit from.

eots for you, does civil discourse involve respecting those who ask a question? I only ask because I respectfully ask you to provide names and you post videos or photos

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yep, even credible info on that other issue:

Flight 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane. Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them.
9 11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - Flight 93
​

I would like to take this opportunity thank EOTS for providing America with this opportunity to view credible evidence on such an important topic

thank you eots

Yanno, we agree on pretty much nothing except this. I have spent much time trying to discern the reasons these 9/11 CTs continue to bray 13+ years after the attack and years after their movement collapsed - like those skyscrapers - under its own weight.

Oh, I've always understood the basic psychology behind it.

 

[SAYIT]

Yanno, we agree on pretty much nothing except this. I have spent much time trying to discern the reasons these 9/11 CTs continue to bray 13+ years after the attack and years after their movement collapsed - like those skyscrapers - under its own weight.

Oh, I've always understood the basic psychology behind it.

Care to share?

 

[KokomoJojo]

The Focus of the CDZ is Civil Discourse, regardless of the topic matter. Still, not all threads qualify for this forum. Some determinations are quick, some, are wait and see. If a thread is removed from this forum it is automatically trashed. Feel free to restart such a thread in a more appropriate forum. Understand that we are not here to run cover for propaganda or soap box preaching, be it left or right. Civil discourse is something we can each benefit from.

eots for you, does civil discourse involve respecting those who ask a question? I only ask because I respectfully ask you to provide names and you post videos or photos

Kool!

1) I want to see pictures of column 79 (from you), and I want to know the chain of custody of the same.

2) I want to see video evidence of a plane that hit the pentagon, (from you), and the chain of custody for the same. I have only seen photo shopped smudges so far.




.

 

[lake avenue]

Fires which came from other buildings that were burning from jet fuel.

This page has a video of it happening.
Footage that kills the conspiracy theories Rare footage shows WTC 7 consumed by fire Daily Mail Online

If you are implying that WTC 7 was brought down by intense heat from the fires, YOU ARE WRONG.

Steel structure framed buildings simply DO NOT collapse due to fire.

except they do, I literally just gave you all the facts and temperatures that would cause this event to happen. if you don't like facts then I guess what you've said is true

There were radom office fires contained to a few floors..none of the little forensic testings shows temperatures from fire required for failure..no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever collapsed due to fire and none of this would explain a free-fall collapse

no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever been hit by debris from another building while the integrity was challenged by fire. if you're trying to tell me that 275,000 pound planes travelling at 430 MPH (north tower) and 500 MPH (south tower) and ramming into a skyscraper would not cause debris to hit adjacent buildings, then I don't know what to tell you.

The fires burned out of control, this made floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat that was originally disturbed by debris, this triggered the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled, pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.

NIST determined damage from falling debris was not a factor in the collapse and fire alone was the cause, NIST found the loss of column 79 under any circumstace would have intiated the collapse sequence

That's directly copied from their report, soo...

 

[lake avenue]

It's clearly obvious this discussion is over, it's been proven time and time again there was no conspiracy to the attacks on September 11, anyone that thinks so is ignoring fact and purposely being ignorant.

 

[eots]

what scientists and how did they get any supposed samples?

what scientists and how did they get any supposed samples?

Just like NIST and FEMA most of the evidence is film,photograph and eyewitness accounts..the difference is NIST denies and excludes all evidence that did not fit their predetermined conclusions.. the list of top level scientist and military, is far too many list..'
This brilliant woman explains clearly all that is wrong with the NIST report for any thinking person wanting to know

 

[eots]

It's clearly obvious this discussion is over, it's been proven time and time again there was no conspiracy to the attacks on September 11, anyone that thinks so is ignoring fact and purposely being ignorant.

you did not even come close to proving anything but your gulabilty

 

[Carla_Danger]

jet fuel can't melt steel beams

... but it can heat it enough to weaken it's structural integrity.

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength, which requires much less heat.

"I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

buildiing 7 had random office fires

Why are loons like you still furthering these silly conspiracy theories?

clean debate zone..doubt you can handle it

Shouldn't this be in the conspiracy section?

 

[eots]

If you are implying that WTC 7 was brought down by intense heat from the fires, YOU ARE WRONG.

Steel structure framed buildings simply DO NOT collapse due to fire.

except they do, I literally just gave you all the facts and temperatures that would cause this event to happen. if you don't like facts then I guess what you've said is true

There were radom office fires contained to a few floors..none of the little forensic testings shows temperatures from fire required for failure..no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever collapsed due to fire and none of this would explain a free-fall collapse

no steel framed building before or after 9/11 has ever been hit by debris from another building while the integrity was challenged by fire. if you're trying to tell me that 275,000 pound planes travelling at 430 MPH (north tower) and 500 MPH (south tower) and ramming into a skyscraper would not cause debris to hit adjacent buildings, then I don't know what to tell you.

The fires burned out of control, this made floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat that was originally disturbed by debris, this triggered the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled, pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.

NIST determined damage from falling debris was not a factor in the collapse and fire alone was the cause, NIST found the loss of column 79 under any circumstace would have intiated the collapse sequence

That's directly copied from their report, soo...

ssssooooooo..all you wrote about 500 planes and debris is just rhetoric ....and even though no plane hit wtc 7...they can not fly 500 mph at sea-level

 

[eots]

jet fuel can't melt steel beams

... but it can heat it enough to weaken it's structural integrity.

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength, which requires much less heat.

"I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

buildiing 7 had random office fires

Why are loons like you still furthering these silly conspiracy theories?

clean debate zone..doubt you can handle it

Shouldn't this be in the conspiracy section?

why so you can use endless strawmen..instead of facts ?

 

[KokomoJojo]

Shouldn't this be in the conspiracy section?

nope, the OP is a demand for evidence and says nothing about a conspiracy.

in fact if anyone tried to post ct crap it would be off topic in the clean debate section.

We want facts and evidence