How does a building collapse in a perfect downwards demolition when the when the foundation and bottom support is compleatly untouched
Let me ask you a follow up question. Have you ever played Jenga? When one block on top gets removed does it all crumble to pieces?
Reminder that the twin towers and the 3rd WTC building (even though the WTC building wasn't even hit at all) was made with over 2 billon dollars of engineering and materials.
Even if we lived in a fantasy world where two planes could take down a multibillion-dollar skyscraper
How is it possible that two planes hit and three buildings collapsed
First tower, second tower, WTC building?
Did you expect the building to shoot out like a compressed spring when the top several floors basically blitzed the thing?
Show me an example of a building toppling over like Godzilla hit it or something.
>you're a fucking tool
>3 buildings collapsed
>2 planes hit
You just cant make this shit up
Thr planes stopped inside the towers, which were not built to hold up a fucking jet airliner inside of them
>110 storys high building holding hundreds of thousands of people, equipment and other assorted bullshit doesn't have the strength to an airplane a fraction of its size
Reminder that 3 building collapsed and there was only 2 planes
>perfect downwards
This is basic physics. To tip something sideways, you need a torque. The only external torque was an airplane, which is tiny in impulse compared to the moment of the building as a whole. As for internally torques, there weren't any of those either, since whole floors of structural steel failed uniformly, without preference for one side or another.
Only remaining force is gravity, which is straight down.
Protip: Don't learn physics from Godzilla movies.
man 9/11 conspiracy bullshit really makes me miss the younger days of the internet
it seems so innocent in retrospect.like people really thought they were going to change the world by sharing loose change
now we're in some kind of hyperweird mainstream internet culture war against the backdrop of the inevitable end of the free and open internet.
The third building caught fire when some burning ruble from one of the twin towers hit it, causing a fire to break out where the sprinkler system was located. Then, the combination of all of the firefighters dealing with the twin towers and the fire caused the building to collapse from the inside out. If you watch the video of it collapsing, you can see the middle of the roof go down first then the outsides.
Huh, TIL that skyscrapers are made of Jenga blocks! Doesn't really sound all that structurally similar to how skyscrapers seem to be built, but I'm no engineer.
WTC7 is the linchpin of the conspiracy, for me, in that it shows that there wasn't one.
I mean, think about it. The conspiracy's done at the highest levels in utmost secrecy. Years of planning, all the evidence in place to frame al queda (or manipulating them into taking part, whatever). Get the right people on the right plane, and have them go nuts. Shoot a missile at the pentagon and pretend it's a plane too because we kinda have a theme going here, and then cover that up too. Everything accounted for.
And then... WTC7. What happened there? They go through all that trouble to extensively plan every bit of it and they get to how they want to destroy WTC7 and then they're like... "Um... I don't know... we'll figure something out"?
I mean, come on! If WTC7 comes down via conspiracy, that means someone had to put bombs in there. That, right there, that's your cover! Have those people dress up suspiciously! Boom, suspicious people sighted, building goes down, no questions asked.
But no, apparently the plan the masterminds came up with is "I dunno lol"
popularmechanics.com
Tinfoil hat faggots need to be sterilized.
> yet no other buildings caught on fire
You do realize how much bullshit is spewing from your mouth right
Billions of dollars of concrete steel and titanium supports do not Melt Away in a basic fire.
there is a documentary explaining your exact question, the architect that designed the building made its like that to prevent two huge towers falling on other building killing more people.
Better yet. How and why did building 7 collapse? It was not hit by anything.
You do realize that building has four corners and that the planes hit the centers of the building right?
Even if one of the supports was destroyed multibillion-dollar buildings do not give out so easily. The main Corner supports when not even touched and even if a center support was somehow destroyed it would be impossible for a structure like that to collapse.
It's called progressive collapse or pancaking you fucking moron.
Please educate yourself.
you're right, it should have fallen just like a jenga tower
because the science behind them both is the same
you're a fucking idiot, stay in the basement
Hey, please show us your degree in structural engineering that makes you right and every other fucking engineer wrong.
Jenga blocks on merely a comparison
But here's the thing they know that stupid people like you are willing to believe whatever the government tells you. Because the act of saying anything that contradicts the plot line story perpetuated is seen as an insult by most American sheep.
People are willing to believe whatever they want if they are told in fear.
Oh yeah and a sloppy Story Only means that they're mocking us.
You still haven't explained how two planes hit 3 buildings collapsed built with over two billion dollars
jew lightning.
>four corners
Ignorance is bliss, ain't it? WTC 1 and 2 were an innovative structure held up primarily by their skin. Corners didn't matter much for structural support.
>one of the supports was destroyed
If it were just one gone, the building wouldn't have collapsed. There were a couple of floors *all* of whose posts failed simultaneously. Not surprising if the temperature were anything like homogeneous on the floor.
Yet you still can't disprove me
I'll show you my Civics engineer degree when you show me yours
I think I've made my point in this thread
>WTC 1 and 2 were an innovative structure held up primarily by their skin. Corners didn't matter much for structural support.
Where is your fucking source, did you make the building? A multibillion-dollar building does not have one structual source because it's a multibillion-dollar building and that's fucking retarded.
Im calling bullshit you shill
Can't admit that anybody knows more than you, can you? Sad.
You got that source user?
Yeah it must be the illuminati, because jenga toootally = stuctural engineering of gigantic fucking skyscrapers.
Disregard him. Just another brainwashed millennial that knows everything.
I'm sure this has been brought up already, but HAARP's role in this thing gets overlooked a lot. Directed earthquakes within a few meter range anywhere on the globe (2004 tsunami, 2008 china, 2011 japan 5 meltdown event). Debunkers want to talk about all the impossible stuff to throw people off. What about directed weather force using ionospheric manipulation?
Let me guess, you also think Obama is jacking off two your 2 tb of cp on you PC, right?
HAHAHAHAHA
> I'm just gonna make sure that this building is designed so that when it ever collapses totally, it will do so in a downward motion
This post right here disproves you, you fucking moron.
I'm putting no effort into convincing Sup Forumstards of facts. Look it up yourself if you care.
No sense in pissing in an ocean of piss.
That doesn't mention how its support structures are made at all your full of shit.
Your such an obvious shill
Where's that source user?
Reminder that this
Has already been disputed
Just look up Hussein bin Obama and Ramzi Yousef Indonesia madras connection. This goes deep.
So if people are willing to believe anything, why bother coming up with a conspiracy in the first place? Just bomb the stupid buildings and you're done, make up whatever excuse you want.
What I'm pointing out is that the conspiracy's entirely top-notch and then... what, they give up?
> Oh yeah and a sloppy Story Only means that they're mocking us.
So your thinking is the conversation went a bit like:
"How do we explain WTC7?"
"Eh, we won't bother, it'll be funny."
"Funny? We spent how much money and are killing how many people to make this work, and you're going for lulz?"
"Sure! It'll be hilarious!"
"Okay, how about this - you know the guys we've got going into WTC7 to blow up the place?"
"Yeah."
"Why don't we just claim they're terrorists and that they did it?"
"Not funny enough. Dress them up like clowns or don't bother."
Progressive collapse usually does not lead to clean, perfectly vertical collapses. In order for that to happen a single central main element must fail, or all radial iterations of the failing element must fail at the exact same time or very nearly the same time. Twin towers did not have central supports, and the odds of any ubiquitous, simultaneous radial failure of elements is unbelievably unlikely, even if a plan crashes into it. All independent demo experts consulted on this matter have confirmed that this looks suspiciously like controlled demo.
You making up a lot of bullshit but you still haven't explained how to 3 buildings Collapse by two planes
Holy fuck you idiot, There is a link in the fucking thread that explains all of that and you just fucking ignore it. God damn you conspiracy fucktards are so god damn stupid its fucking mind boggling.
Please an hero, youre too fucking stupid to be allowed to live and reproduce.
Because the specific motivation employed justified to the USAmerican public our involvement in the middle east war over oil, which is a resource that some groups in the USAmerica desperately want (but do not need).
Bullshit link, already disproven
You mad :]
You mad :]
Fuck off samefag.
Don't argue with him he's nothing but a paid shill
You ......mad......:]
I don't see why anyone is still arguing. People who believe in this shit conspiracies won't be convinced otherwise no matter how much proof you present. Don't you know, they're all structural engineers with more experience and knowledge than the ones who all said how the buildings collapsed.
not arguing, just presenting a possibility that makes sense.
*discuss*
Please explain how it was disproved, ya know besides you just saying so.
All this talk about planes and collapses that just put insurance money in the pockets of the jews takes away from the potential talk about what exactly "hit" the "pentagon" that "day". I say rail gun slug based on the 3 grainy "security" camera frames that were released. I've calculated that "it" had to be travelling at over 21,0000 mph.
You don't need to crash planes into WTC to get a war started over oil. Hell, if dubya's any guide you don't need any reason whatsoever! Claim there's WMD's. Done. That's what a populace that believes anything the government tells them gets you, no need to blow up a thing.
>> 714484917
I'm not trying to explain a thing about it. I'm just trying to picture how the conspiring went down. If you don't like the bullshit I'm making up, go ahead and write your own script! I'd very much like to know why you think they didn't bother coming up with a story for WTC7. Bound to be entertaining.
I mean, the bombs are *right there!*
It's not in the link bitch
Clearly you aint got shit. Im outtahere
Great argument there buddy, and yes everything discussed in this thread is in that link. Stop being so assblasted that it disproves your stupid little conspiracy theory.
Sources? Where do you think you are reddit? Also where the fuck are your sources? if that's what you need to make an argument.
Your ass is blasted pal.
Assblasters took down WTC.
Too accurate for sand people.
Seriously? You're going to try and make the argument that not only did the government do it but they did it with weather control?
They weren't trying to start the war. The war was already going.
They were trying to get the public to approve of our involvement in the war; nobody supported US involvement until terrorists "made it personal", then everybody was like "yeah kill those goat fuckers" and the US could get involved and start doing sketchy shit without anyone batting an eye because the middle east "deserved it".
They needed to do something drastic, and perpetrated by middle eastern terrorists in order to get the US on board. The specific what wasn't important. It could have been a severe train bombing, it could have been a massive hacking scheme, etc... whatever they just needed something that would get a lot of people pissed off. The thing they chose was a really good choice because it barely interrupted nyc's economy at all, but it got serious global attention and pissed all USAmericans off to almost no end.
>Twin towers did not have central supports,
I dont believe you.
What are elevators for 500
obviously shopped. buildings aren't made of clear.
Those are the elevator shafts, sheathed with two layers of drywall. Some supports, there, buddy.
ITT: faggots ignoring inconvenient facts in order to hold onto their ignorant feeling of superiority.
Hey man don't be so mean to yourself
>
now we're in some kind of hyperweird mainstream internet culture war against the backdrop of the inevitable end of the free and open internet.
I'm not alone. Except....do you hate the world because of this pattern of nonsense?
There were 43 steel core support columns in the middle of the buildings running from the bottom to the top. Ignore the facts at your own peril.
Haven't we all agreed already that it was Obama and the Jews?
But we didn't need any of that for Iraq, just the we-say-so of the government and off everyone went. That, to me, is a sign that they didn't need it for Afghanistan, either.
Regardless, I can see how they might not have realized the utter gullibility of the populace and orchestrated an attack. That I get. I just don't get it being plotted perfectly at some points and then they just forget the rest.
"Hey, they bought the planes thing!"
"Sweet! And what about the 'terrorists plant bombs in WTC7 story?"
"That was Frank's job."
Fucking Frank. Always slacking off.
nope. watch the videos. the 3rd building falls at random while the other one is falling.
it doesnt even have time to catch on fire, let alone burn long enough for the entire thing to come down
diamond is the hardest metal.
Were you trying to
>greentext?
Correction those were elevator shafts elevators stairwells and possibly some extra internal supports
Implying one plane can destroy all those supports in your claim please you just proved my point
43, not 1. and these 43 supports were supposedly encased in a concrete pillar.
Again with the symmetrical radial failure argument: it's extremely unlikely even given the circumstances.
No it was Bush you 12 year old
That was the joke........nice quads.
>when OP has no idea what confirmation bias is
>yes
Oh yeah I forgot that people sometimes pretend to be retarded on here.
Thx
Barack Obama is an alien from Uranus and he destroyed the twin towers with his butthole death ray. Try and prove me wrong faggots ;)
I felt the same here user.
>sees loose change
>feel like i just stumbled upon a grand conapiracy
>be 10 years older in college studying social psychology with an emphasis on cognitive bias research
>realize I was an idiot
We didn't need to acquire it for Iraq because everyone in the US already hated the entire middle east. We didn't need acquire it it for Iraq because we already had it.
The WTC7 thing got swept under the rug pretty goddamn well, but even so with something like this there are lots of possibilities for things to go wrong. Damage control almost never ends up being clean, and can sometimes be manipulated to actually silence dissenters, as you seem to be doing.
Also also, you're assuming you can conceive of a plan and it's purpose that is likely beyond your expertise in almost every imaginable way, and every unimaginable way.
Amazing. Oswald managed to take down all three twin towers with a single magic bullet. Million to one shot.
Because the planes didn't cause the collapse, the burning jet fuel did. And the third building went down from a host of factors, including burning rubble falling on it.
And before you start "jet fuel can't melt steel beams," I must remind you that it is more than hot enough to turn those steel beams to play-doh.
>supposedly encased in a concrete pillar.
no. that was misreported by the BBC. They were not:
Nonetheless, the original claim I was responding to was that the buildings had no central support and it is a claim that is demonstrably false...as I have shown.
Have you even heard of the fake moonlanding/oswald connection?
Yeah but when the weight of the top of the building is forced through all the floors it's gonna collapse stop being dumb
>I must remind you that it is more than hot enough to turn those steel beams to play-doh.
Actully the temps of jet fuel don't get high enough, not even in special chambers
No jet fuel was in the third building cus nothing hit it. Watch the video. Its not even on fire when it collapsed
Your full of shit and a shill
No, but at this point I would not be surprised to learn that Oswald had a hand in the Lincoln assassination.
I think there was something more going on with the towers, but as a blacksmith I can tell you that holding a piece of iron in just bed of charcoals will very noticeably soften it.
>All supports on sepperate sides and corners of the building melted by one plane
You are so full of shit dumbass.
If were talking about WTC then that didn't even catch on fire. Watch the video you retarded shill
> there are lots of possibilities for things to go wrong
Not planning ahead is not one of those things. The conspirators wanted to destroy WTC7. They knew they wanted to do this. They planted bombs to accomplish this. And then they... what, forgot?
I'm not trying to silence dissenters, I'm trying to figure out what the hell they were thinking. Again, the bombs are right. there. Say terrorists planted them. That is literally the only thing that needs to be done and you've got it covered.
Why didn't they do that?
Well good thing there was no Charcoal in the towers huh?
>Actully the temps of jet fuel don't get high enough,
structural steel loses half its strength at 600f - the fires in the WTC were estimated to be at least twice that. No steel melted. No steel had to melt for the joist connections to become so weak that they could not hold their load.
not hot enough to 'soften' this woman
Dude with the weight of the top and all the people moving around in it I think it'd fall
If you look at how the outside walls were put together, and look at the slow motion video of the collapse, you will see that it peeled like a banana, with each floor collapsing down as it did.
At least I did not say "central support". I said "single central support" which will have a different destructive dynamic than multi-support central support. See symmetrical radial failure.
>If were talking about WTC
if you talking about WTC7 then you are high on crack. It was damaged significantly by the collapse of WTC1 and caught fire and burned unfought for 8hrs. Try facts. They are useful.