Today I will remind them

Today I will remind them

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/TJNzaMRsN00?t=589
youtube.com/watch?v=sT9s3rTNcJ8&feature=youtu.be&t=3760
liveleak.com/view?i=7b6_1378926526
popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/
youtube.com/watch?v=9fQlC2AIWrY
youtube.com/watch?v=leyWQbgxnzI&t=265s
youtube.com/watch?v=UFc3DfPlvXw
youtu.be/A0wHeekgPqk
youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
youtube.com/watch?v=NecoBo0BhEk
twitter.com/AnonBabble

fake and gay

SHUT IT DOWN

Falsehoods and Latvia.

>Sup Forums has yet to disprove this image

>thinking that is steel

Explain the free-fall motion the towers exhibited leaf. Explain why the steel columns below the inferno collapsed despite not being heated.

youtu.be/TJNzaMRsN00?t=589

Here's your reply.

Thing is you wouldn't even need them to melt, you'd just need them to warp and they'd collapse under the weight.
The beams are a red herring, planes did take down the towers and perhaps they were aided by demolitions to make absolutely certain but what you need to look at is the pilots, their ties with the CIA and how nothing was done to stop them despite them being known as potential terrorists.
How the buildings collapsed is irrelevant, why they collapsed is what matters.

...

wasnt it hit by like a million debris falling from 400m or so, or however tall the twin towers were?

this.
Go talk to your fire department: Turns out that firefighters prefer going into burning wooden building than steel building.
Wood may burn, but it will keep its integrity a lot longer than steel.
Depending on the kind of steel, it may start to lose its toughness at around 100°C already, in the case of martensitic steel for example.

Wut

...

The trading that went on around airline stocks also signaled that something wasn't right.

>Explain the free-fall motion
i think you need to explain what this means first

every fucking time 9/11 come up i mention building 7 and have done so for at least 5 years and i've never got a rebuttal it's fucking insane how much it's dismissed

youtube.com/watch?v=sT9s3rTNcJ8&feature=youtu.be&t=3760

B-buh... Jet fuel CAN'T melt steel beams!

Free-fall motion when it collapsed. The bottom structures were still intact despite the top being weakened. What should have most likely happened was the smaller top of the tower falling off to the side while the larger bottom portion remained standing.

see: also:
liveleak.com/view?i=7b6_1378926526
popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

Like what it started to do before they brought the whole thing down?

Latvia is Australia's greatest ally. Be careful

This is the first time I've seen anyone mention that jet fuel doesn't have to melt steel beams, it only has to remove the temper from the steel.
However, there was a shit load of sketchy stuff about the day.

Yep, a fucking building comes down despite not being hit and NO ONE fucking talks about it because the truth that the government was directly involved in 9/11 is too uncomfortable for the fucking sheeple living in the USA!!!FACT!!!

It was a fire

the top collapses and buckles the bottom from the huge force exerted. pretty easy to explain.

9/11 conspiritards are why no one takes holocaust revisionism seriously

Ahh so that explains the diagonal cut on the steel beam. I always wondered about that part.

>This is the first time I've seen anyone mention that jet fuel doesn't have to melt steel beams, it only has to remove the temper from the steel.
Are you new to Truthers? It's brought up all the fucking time. That's why "Jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is even a meme.

16 years have passed since the towers fell. How long are we going to debate inconsequential minutia with shills? You don't have to over-complicate what transpired on 9/11. Two towers were hit by planes, three towers fell. The people with the power and resources to have the towers demolished and the plot covered up had all the incentive in the world to do it. No other steel-construction skyscraper has ever collapsed due to a fire. What is there to debate?

Wut

If you look at the footage, you see a clear free-fall motion where the top neatly descends near vertically. I have no idea how the top could have crushed the much larger bottom steel columns within the core.

you get the exact same effect if you hit steel hard enough with something.
Its called shearing. You can see it in small with punch-presses.

>Are you new to Truthers?
Tbh, yes. I thought that meme was literal.

There was no force exerted on the top (except gravity) great enough to crush the bottom. At best the weakened top should have rested on the intact bottom portion, or at worst the top should have slid off the tower leaving the bottom still standing. Watch the link.

...

The fuck is with the temperatures? How does an open air diesel fire burn at ~2000 degrees?

>ppl blaming kikes, dune coons and the govt
It was fucking MANBEARPIG

>My cartoonish understanding of physics is more accurate than that of engineers and physicists

How many levels or irony are you actually on right now? You should probably lurk more.

The tower wasn't designed to handle the forces exerted on it, especially not in its damaged state.

Melting AND shearing. Seems like this beam suffered a bit of both without deforming first.

>Should have
Literally what is your basis for what the tower should have done?

youtube.com/watch?v=9fQlC2AIWrY

...

...

...

DELET THIS GOYIM DO IT NOW OR YOU'LL BE TALKIN TO MY LOYYYA YOU FILTHY BASTID

>hot American twins get penetrated

Imagine you have a 15 meter steel pole, and you drive 5 meters of that pole into the ground. Then you take a blow torch and heat a portion of the pole that is 3 meters below the top to 2000 dF. What would happen to the entire pole?

The core was the main weight bearing part of the structure

DELETE THIS

>video cuts to different shots and skips to 3 minutes instead of just being one sped up shot
good goy

building 7 was the only building in a city filled w/ buildings to be hit with debris.

other buildings, closer to the actual towers fell.

youtube.com/watch?v=leyWQbgxnzI&t=265s

that literally does nothing

worry about the rapid vapor evaporation they use to control and manipulate the weather systems.

...

No. The top falls the length of the weakened portion after it buckles. Even a small distance of that much weight falling is enough force to cause a domino effect for the lower portions to fall. Considering the building is symmetric along it's length it's completely reasonable to expect it to fall straight down rather than slide off.

>literally countless videos of engineers talking about how the WTC towers were designed to take a direct hit from a fully loaded 707 and not collapse

Plane flew from behind camera guy. At top speed that plane would cover a mile easily within 6 seconds.

Lewd.

Jewish physics were happened on 9/11. Just like the holocaust stories we know so well.

Your not an engineer or physicist

stop posting edited gifs/clips that dont show the full collapse

youtube.com/watch?v=UFc3DfPlvXw

just listen to harley guy, he gets it. he saw it with his own eyes
youtu.be/A0wHeekgPqk

>WTC 7 came down totally on its own by fires and debris
>Reporters claim it's come down while still clearly on camera
>Strangely, we lose the feed immediately after
>OMG LOL we lost the footage!
>Cracks down the center and collapses into its own footprint
>Later, Larry Silverstein says they pulled it
Just coincidence, goyim!

Unfortunately, for the MIC, WTC7 fucks up the entire narrative. They oopsied. We caught it.

So misconceptions about structural design it is then

Problem with this is, there IS evidence of steel beams MELTING. See:

and let me clarify, I'm not saying whether there were explosives or not. I'm just saying "it should have slid off" is a bad reason to go and try find other factors.

youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

you mean after the firefighters had alredy cut though it to get rid of it, right?
Because thats what on your picture.

read the my next post, with the links. They have a better explanation.

And your explanation as to why they would risk so much for a few buildings is...? I mean aside from "for the evulz".

Wow that's not a plant at all!

Watching one of the related videos of all the various news channels before/during/after. Even after the first plane everyone seems kinda calm because no one expects it's actually a terrorist attack yet, they just think it's an accident and eventually they'll put the fire out.

It's still surreal because I pretty much woke up at 11 or so to my friends banging on my door telling me the WTC was gone.

They cut it you retard.

that it was. It was not however designed to handle the heat generated by the kerosene burining along the core of the building.

I've been on pol so long that I thought this was proof that there was no way to burn 900,000 Jew bodies at Triblanka in a few months on steel train rails.
Guess it's time for a break...

Well the fucking claim was that the bodies were self-fueling in their own incineration after a few logs were lit beneath them, so I mean it was always a stupid story.

>Towers were designed to take a hit from a different aircraft

Which burned hot enough to melt steel. OH FUCK WAIT we're sticking with "there was no molten steel" still, right?

I also know how to use you're and your

>by Arianne Cohen
>Cohen
just fuck off already

again, read the thread dipshit.
You do not need to actually melt steel to render it unusable. There is a whole process dedicated to weakening steel without melting it: soft-annealing

>I judge a book by its author only

WTF is a 'm', hot cocoa and medic flag dude?

I've always been curious about this. They look blatantly cut, but I've never seen anyone claim that these photos were of actual cuts made by people who admitted they were (for example during cleanup). That's very believable. I've just never heard it. It also doesn't explain the molten material literally pouring out of the towers.

No. YOU read the thread, dipshit. There WAS fucking molten steel. That's the entire problem.

BTFO

So explain this
youtube.com/watch?v=NecoBo0BhEk

no there was not, dipshit.
unless you mean this picture here: which was taken after the cleanup had already started.

pic related you ansi-heathen

>It also doesn't explain the molten material literally pouring out of the towers.
the towers were full of MILES of metal vents.

So what burned hot enough to melt the steel into molten?
Will anyone answer this question seriously?
There are videos that show molten metal flying out of windows.
So if jet fuel cannot melt steel beams:
1. The metal was not steel
2. Something burned hot enough to melt steel OTHER than the jet fuel
But we agree, without a doubt, that there was molten metal flying out the windows.

...

NO! DELETE THIS! I can't shitpost my conspiracies!

>my sides
classic murrica.

steel did not melt on a large scale. It was however weakened a lot by the heat.
Also, whenever anyone says "jet fuel cant melt steel" this is bullshit.
Give a perfect thermal insulation, even a USB-heater could melt steel or even Tungsten.
Flame temperature (which is what people mean when they talk about jet fuel burning) is measured in equilibrium condition, meaning that all heat can freely leave the flame and surrounding area.

So you admit that jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, they can only weaken them.
You fail to explain how molten metal exists then.
Anyone else care to play my game?
What caused the molten metal we see in the videos?
Its only been 16 years, someone should have a answer, right.... RIGHT?!?

aluminum, maybe copper probably. Piping isn't iron.

Bump this thread.

where do you see molten metal please???

From the video here

It was stress. Something about both the design wasn't right. The stress from initial entry must of caused all other surviving supports to undergo significant warping. If you look at the videos. The building collapsed downwards below entry followed by the top portion disappearing at into the cloud as each floor at contact was smashed into successive floors..

It's obvious you believe the official story on the NYC attacks, does that also mean you believe the entire 9/11 event was not a false flag/inside job and that the official story in it's entirety is 100% legit?.