9/11: Were Explosives Used?

True or False: Only explosives could have caused the buildings to collapse on 9/11.

Download HD version for reposting: http://tinyurl.com/7rjrsjr

Keywords: 9-11, 9/11, Alex Jones, bombs, collapse, conspiracists, Conspiracy, conspiracy theories, conspiracy theorists, Debunked, Explosive material, explosives, hijackers, Pyrotechnics, September 11, skepticism, skeptics, twin towers, world trade center, WTC, WTC7

95 comments on “9/11: Were Explosives Used?

    • Amen Brother, only Explosives could have Collapsed that Minorly discomforted Building….those could have stood for another 200years without a collapse….EVER, not a single floor woulda budged without the Black Ops Interation(whatever Covert TEams are Employed, nowadays, whatever)…At least their giving the people some thing to hate them For(FEDERAL, World Govt..)

      • Lemme see if I understand your theory, WuShuPorkyPie:

        Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld wanted to help out some friends at Halliburton, who could make more money if there was a war. So they decided to kill thousands of innocent Americans, and blame it on some other country, to start a war.

        So they assembled teams of hundreds of covert operatives, to do the deed. The interviews went something like this:

        Rummy: Hey, commando guy, can you keep a secret?
        Interviewee: Sure.
        Rummy: Promise?
        Interviewee: I promise.
        Rummy: Would you like to make a little extra dough by slaughtering millions of innocent American men, women & children?
        Interviewee #1: No problem, sign me up!
        [or]
        Interviewee #2: No way!
        Rummy: Remember, you promised not to tell!

        Then they bought tons of of magical, silent, fireproof, airplane-collision-proof explosives & detonators for each building, explosives of a sort which to this day nobody has ever heard of.

        Then the commando guys crawled around the Twin Towers and WTC7 on 9-10-2001, planting bombs.

        And NOBODY saw them do it – they were THAT good. (And because 9/10/01 was a Sunday, and nobody in New York works on Sundays.)

        And they recruited a bunch of dumb Arabs to fly airliners into buildings, as distractions. (Those interviews were even more fun!)

        And the huge aviation-fuel-accelerated fires didn’t damage the magical, silent explosives and detonators, which worked perfectly when Cheney pushed the button on his remote detonator.

        And it all went off just exactly as they planned.

        They even managed to figure out in advance which floors the planes were going to hit on each of the Twin Towers, so they could plant the magic fireproof explosives on the right floors, so the buildings would collapse starting where the planes struck, to avoid suspicion.

        And they even managed to figure out in advance which one of the other surrounding buildings would be damaged and set ablaze by flaming debris from the Twin Towers, to provide cover for the subsequent controlled demolition destruction of THAT building, too.

        They really thought of everything!

        And they pulled it all off in just the 8.5 months they’d been in office, using government employees.

        And in the 12 years since, NONE of these hundreds of conspirators, nor any of the rejected interviewees, EVER had a pang of conscience and spilled the beans, because they pinky-promised to never tell, and pinky promises are sacred to black ops commandos.

        Dang, those government employees are REALLY good at what they do!

        But I just have one question for you, Porky.

        If U.S. government employees are THAT good, why they couldn’t even get a simple ObamaCare web site working with 2.5 years of work and hundreds of millions of dollars to spend?

        Do you think Bush Republicans are THAT much smarter than Obama Democrats?

      • Thanks! No blog, sorry. I do have a few web sites, though, like this one:

        http://sealevel.info/

        I don’t know whether to blame the “9-11 Truther” phenomenon on the appalling failure of American public education, or the appalling success of deinstitutionalization.

        • I blame a lot on the failure of our education system. When i see people claiming the moon “doesn’t look right,” there’s a problem with the basics.

          I believe these misperceptions all start with the very nature of the human mind. Our brains have been hardwired by evolution to fear the unknown and to seek out patterns. Michael Shermer calls this Patternicity.

          Education enters the equation when we think we’ve spotted a pattern – a correlation between two events, but we’re unable to explain the causal relationship. Our brains can’t help but fill that void with something – anything – in order to maintain a perceived understanding of our world.

          When our ancient ancestors did a dance and it rained soon thereafter, they thought they saw a correlation between the dance and the rain, but they couldn’t explain the causal relationship. So they simply attributed it to a god of some kind. Michael Shermer calls this agenticity.

          Modern people still do the same thing. When people believe they see a correlation, but they are unable to explain the causal relationship, they instinctively backfill the void with modern day gods – governments, aliens, secret societies, etc.

          Education would alleviate these causal relationship voids or help people recognize that correlation does not always imply causation in the first place.

          Sorry for the long post. I’ve been writing all night and i just can’t stop.
          :)

      • Well, America used to lock up the nutcases in nuthouses. But the deinstitutionalization movement tries very hard to avoid that. If there’s any way to avoid institutionalizing a crazy person, they do (sometimes with the aid of medication).

        There are real benefits to deinstitutionalization. It maximizes individual liberty for crazy people. It might help reduce the “out-of-sight-out-of-mind” insensitivity of other people to the plight of the mentally ill. And it probably saves money, too, because nuthouses are expensive.

        But there are also some unfortunate side-effects of having more crazy people on the streets. Those side-effects include things like increased numbers of homeless people, “9-11 Truthers,” Alex Jones, Cynthia McKinney, etc.

    • Agreed. This website is loaded with bullshit. 9/11/01 was an inside job. Look further into the event, Illuminutti.com! You are deceived by the United States Government and the criminal cabal that runs it!

      • «This website is loaded with bullshit. 9/11/01 was an inside job. Look further into the event, Illuminutti.com! You are deceived by the United States Government and the criminal cabal that runs it!»

        You need to provide a little more evidence than just “i say it’s bullshit.” You’re word is meaningless. Facts. Get some facts.

    • As someone said on their facebook page. “When will these conspiracy tards realise that we have to trust the government and what they tell us?” And he meant it. You can’t argue with such a white out of belief that Pa and Ma are looking after them and always tell the truth. There’s so much evidence but, although most of them believe in their religious myths completely, they won’t believe anything that might rock their ‘safe little worlds’.

      • «As someone said on their facebook page. “When will these conspiracy tards realise that we have to trust the government and what they tell us?” »

        Aaaaaah yes, a conspiracist’s favorite friend – the straw man argument.

    • This guy see only conspiracies in these “Conspiracy Theorists” and not in our dear governements…
      it’s so sadly closed minded…and unfortunately is not the only one…this is very sad…so ego-normal people… so waste of energy…

      • «This guy see only conspiracies in these “Conspiracy Theorists” and not in our dear governements…»

        Gotta love the straw man. Where would you be without the straw man? Nobody said the government has never and will never engage in conspiracies.

  1. guys dont believe this bs for a second please watch the video the painful truth id like to see them try to disprove half that stuff

  2. Pingback: Was Alex Jones an alarmist 13 years ago or is he an alarmist today? « Illuminutti

  3. I’v e heard a lot of conspiracy theories about these 9/11 attacks. I even once heard that… some Muslims from the Middle East who were very p***ed of at the US hijacked some planes and flew them right into the side of the towers going 400 mph while half full of fuel, knowing full well that they would be killing themselves as well as a whole bunch of innocent people…

    Crazy, ain’t it.

    • That is some wacky crap right there!!! ROFLMAO! Who would believe such a thing??? I think it’s far more likely the government used CGI and a cloaking device (h/t: The Great Antagonizer) to make it look like the towers came down. Hijackers flying planes into buildings … *eyeroll* … *pffft* … typical conspiratorial nonsense. At least WE know better.

  4. Pingback: World Trade Center – Role of floor loss and buckling « Illuminutti

  5. Pingback: 9/11: Were Explosives Used? | Jericho777's Blog

  6. Intro by Miles Johnston, Stressing the Dangers
    We All Face From the Enemy within
    Our Ranks
    megawatts1066
    December 20, 2012

    In the 3rd of 3 important interviews, this first section with Joanne Summerscales and Dr. Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson is a highly detailed feature on Wood’s book, Where Did The Towers Go? Viewers are advised to see the 1st two interviews to get the full benefit of this technical interview. (See below for the addresses of the previous videos).

    The 1st being Anne Hess’s interview at the Breakthrough Energy Conference, the 2nd being Bases 12 with Andrew Johnson, and this two section feature with “Ammach: On The Road.”

    Intro by Miles Johnston, stressing the dangers we all face from the enemy within our ranks.

    This video series is best viewed in the following order:

    1. http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/page/21754.html

    2. http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/page/21755.html

    3. http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/page/21756.html

    4. http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/page/21757.html

    Maybe?…..Just maybe? Don’t know …but it’s worth a look see….just sayin.

      • Judy Woods is someone who proposed that the World Trade Center towers were brought down not by explosives (as many 9/11 Truthers claim) or by the sheer impact of two 767’s, but by lasers from space!

      • Actually…if you watch the video’s I posted….especially the last one…she said no such thing! Someone else said that about her to discredit her work.
        If you know anything about Tesla and his experiments….this is what she is suggesting brought down the Towers….

    • The famous Doctor Judy …. whose only claim to engineering expertise is her groundbreaking work in designing dental appliances.

      Of course, anyone can see the direct relationship of designing false teeth to the structural dynamics of a collapsing skyscraper.

      No wonder the reptilian shapeshifting aliens tried to silence her by arranging for her incarceration in mental health facilities.

  7. The buildings that did collapse were of exoskeleton frame design and not constructed as are older more traditional buildings. I recall that the Empire State Building was hit by a USAF bomber and the building integrity was in tact. I do not care for any of the newer buildings. Windows that do not open, drop ceilings, carpeting instead of solid flooring. Then people complain about indoor air quality. The World Trade Center swayed in the wind and needed to flex.
    The concept of ordnance being used for a controlled demolition is rubbish. I bring it up only when I need to turn the tables of suspicion onto the government for their dealings in other matters that aren’t too good.
    Aircraft jet fuel heated the steel that was not properly insulated when the fire took place. Softened steel, high static weight load, no internal structural skeleton, all resulted in collapse. Collateral damage to surrounding structures are attributed to shockwave weakening those structures.
    Why any sane person wants to build higher than, ten feet lower, of any fire department ladder truck reach capabilities, is beyond me. I always used to ask, then find out for myself, where the fire department ladder company is located before I traveled and booked a room, then confirmed the reach of the ladder. Once I was told only the 16th floor was available but not to worry because they had a “100 foot” ladder company. They did not. I went someplace else nearby and stayed on the second floor. I used to be a volunteer fireman and this stood in my head. I always think of egress in pitch black conditions, from experience on my hands and knees. People that work in those buildings have no thinking capabilities of egress, and the construction methods I do not care for.
    No demolition charges were used or found. Caring thoughts of many, but not substantiated, ever.

    • The bomber (actually Army Air Corps in 1945, not USAF) was relatively tiny compared to a loaded 757, and it was traveling slow — barely above stall speed, lost in the fog & looking for LaGuardia.

      I did a quick & dirty calculation once, comparing the weights & speeds, and came up with a rough estimate that the 757 impact at high speed carried over FIFTY TIMES the impact energy of that little B-25 Mitchell.

      The Empire State, unlike the steel Erector-set skeleton design of the Towers, is a reinforced-concrete structure with far more resistance to impact and, especially, to fire. Even then, one of the engines penetrated through the Empire State and landed on another nearby building.

      • For some reason, this reply never made it into my email, but all the same, EXCELLENT! There will be differences. The important fact, is that you, were capable of obtaining facts, and based upon facts, present an intelligent statement.

        Both my son and one of my son-in-laws were at the towers helping people right after it happened, both are in news clips. I found out that all of the “demolition” crap and setting charges nonsense, are attributed to LIUNA (Laborers International Union North America) Local-78, located on Fulton Street (#140?) on the sixth floor above the McDonalds, had an asbestos abatement and ventilation duct clean up, and their crews were the last hard hats seen leaving. I went to Local-78 and spoke to them, they are real good people.

        1945: US Army Air Force. They transitioned from US Army Air Corp by then.
        Great pick up on details. Exactly, what I am talking about. You are not ranting, but stating facts.

  8. An interesting video – but it really doesn’t cover the WTC collapse :

    Where are the exploisions in the basement ?

    Where is the molten steel pouring from the buildings ?

    What about the nanothermite and thermitic residues ?

    Were these buildings designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, as were buildings 1 & 2 of the WTC ?

    &c.

  9. … and Pennsylvania and Pentagon and building 7 and no airforce and detonations and 4 flyrouts out of radar and Silbersteins decision and insurancemoney and hijackers alive and Israelis filming and all evidence sold to China and media knew building 7 in advance and confiscation of Pentagonfilms and how concrete buildings without steelbeams collapse and so on.

  10. This video is a joke, these shoddy concrete buildings, what type of building is the method used for? Are any steel framed high rises? NO! WTC 7 would be the largest building in 33 states, these are lo rent apt buildings. Even if your comparing this demolition system to a collapse that occurred do to fire, it only proves the demolition theory even more, every single support has to be removed simultaneously to accomplish a free fall collapse, or are you going to argue that it wasn’t a free fall collapse? Like the NIST did, until they realized that anyone with a stopwatch and a calculator could prove them wrong. Either way, this completely does not come close to proving anything. I’m sorry but to think that this event occurred as the official narrative says, is laughable at best. The author has clearly dug a whole so deep, and inset this debunking narrative so far into his own personal ideology that he will die before he admits he is wrong, just like older people and JFK, or dozens of other conspiracy theories that come to be proven true. Since you or I don’t truly know definitively what happened just fess up to the remote possibility that this was not the first and only time a steel frame building collapsed into its own footprint, neatly. The idea that WTC 7, that fire weakened steel causing gravitational collapse occurred without help from anyone is an insult to the profession of controlled demolition.

        • You mean the nut jobs that represent less than 1% of all the Architects and Engineers in this country?

          Even the American Institute of Architects want nothing to do with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

          Scott Frank, head of media relations for the American Institute of Architects, said of Richard Gage and his organization (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth), “We don’t have any relationship with his organization whatsoever.”

          The accusations of Gage’s organization are the typical hodgepodge of pseudo-scientific claims. Along with other esoteric and debunked technical arguments, he says that melted steel was visible at the Ground Zero site proving that the fires burned too hot to have been caused by jet fuel; that because the buildings collapsed at “near free fall speed” there must have been a controlled demolition; and that traces of a thermitereaction found in the World Trade Center debris proves that explosives were used.

          All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

          Source: http://illuminutti.com/2012/08/24/architects-shy-from-trutherism/

      • MIB wrote, “You mean the nut jobs that represent less than 1% of all the Architects and Engineers in this country?”

        It’s actually much less than 0.05%, MIB. There are estimated to be more than 2 million practicing engineers in the USA, alone, plus many more who are retired.

        Plus, of course, there are a lot more than that in the rest of the world (note that “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth” does not limit their membership to just the USA).

        For comparison, the prevalence of schizophrenia in the USA is estimated to be about 1.1% of the adult population. If there are ~3 million practicing & retired engineers and architects in America, there should be about 33,000 schizophrenic engineers & architects. That means there should be plenty of opportunity for growth for “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.”

  11. Could you provide links to the “peer reviewed papers” you cite that have debunked 9/11 claims. Each paper specifically.

    Furthermore, NIST did not test for explosives nor did the report explain what happened once the towers began to collapse. That seems like pretty poor science to me.

  12. For the purposes of this comment, I’m not going to express an opinion on the truther vs. 9/11 Commission debate one way or another. I only want to comment on this post specifically.
    This video is almost completely useless with regards to adding any value to the argument. The fact is that it contains no actual research, scientific data, correlation to observed facts etc. It’s embarrassing to the anti-truther argument. Even worse, it can be applied to either side’s argument. You could just as easily argue that this video shows that the explosives theory is even more plausible as it means that explosive charges would have had to be applied to only a few floors rather than most/all of them as the current ‘truther” theory goes. You simply have to analyze the building and where you would apply the hydraulics, you plant explosives instead.
    The point is that it’s a complete failure of the “correlation does not equal causation” rule and proves nothing for either side of the debate.

    At the very least there could have been a comparable analysis of the videos to calculate the acceleration and velocities of the collapses to build a model of the rates for this type of demolition. Then it can be compared to the extensive work done in this area by the truthers to see if there actually is any correlation.
    My guess is that this was not done because whoever came up with this theory realized that it would not help their argument as either:
    – The curves are different, which means this argument does not apply to the actual observed events and is moot.
    or
    – The curves do match, in which case this evidence proves nothing as it is unable to differentiate between a hydraulic collapse and an explosive collapse*.

    I would still like to see this analysis done by someone just for curiosity’s sake as it could also essentially eliminate acceleration curves as a useful point of argument for both camps.

    *Based on the fact that the truthers have already done the work to show that the fall acceleration curves of the observed events of 9/11 do in fact match that of known explosive demolition collapses.

    • Controlled demolition of a skyscraper, whether via explosives or Vérinage, always works the same way: one or two stories are collapsed, and gravity destroys the rest of the building, as the falling mass of the upper stories exerts collision forces that no building could possibly withstand. That’s also exactly the same thing that happens when a plane crash & fire destroys one or two stories of a skyscraper.

      In either case, the laws of physics dictate that the building will collapse at nearly free-fall speed. Here’s an analysis:

      http://www.burtonsys.com/staticvdyn/

      In other words, “the curves” tell you nothing, and the Truther nuts who think that the speed of the Towers’ collapse is evidence of controlled demolition are just plain idiots.

      In fact, the Truthers are not merely stupid, they are certifiably insane.

      Consider this: the videos of the Towers’ collapses show that both of them collapsed where the planes struck and the fires raged. That means the Truther nuts’ hypothesized magical silent explosives would have had to have been planted on exactly those floors, which would mean that the perps would have had to have known in advance exactly where the planes were going to strike the buildings, which is obviously impossible.

      Also, someone would have had to have someone planted hundreds of explosive charges in both of those busy buildings without ever being noticed, which would be very nearly impossible, and they’d have to be completely confident of their ability to do so, which is obviously impossible.

      Also, hundreds of co-conspirators would have had to have been willing to commit mass murder for no apparent reason, and all of them would have had to have kept the secret for over a dozen years, with none of them ever having a crisis of conscience, which is also impossible. (Remember Franklin’s observation, that “three men may keep a secret, if two of them are dead.”)

  13. We all saw the first tower get hit head on,keeping most of the fuel on the inside. The second tower was hit off to the side with much of the fuel(the fireball) burning outside of the building. Yet,the tower that was hit second was the first to fall. Explain that. The film made by the Frenchmen, who filmed the first plane hit,interviewed Larry Silverstein and he said they decided to “pull” WTC7. Amidst all the chaos of that day,we are supposed to believe that all the plans were made to pull the building in just a few hours? Explain that. How about the firefighters last words on the tape released by our government? Those words…..”there are bombs going off”. Explain that. The buildings in your video are steel reinforced concrete buildings. Where are all the steel girders in your video,like we saw from WTC? No it doesn’t “look familiar”. A steel building that may collapse from the”pancake theory” should have U shaped girders. Where are these from WTC? They are all straight!!! Look at the pics!!! Jet fuel cannot melt steel and it is not hot enough to bother thermite. The laws of physics don’t lie. Also, Isaac Newton’s law of gravity anyone? All one has to do is look 8-10 stories below the crumbling of the building and you can see the charges going off. All the lives lost on that day and in the wars that followed…deserve the truth, and the criminals behind this event need to be tried and hung. Need more? See if you can answer these first,without your usual BS. Facts only please.

    • Hey, “factsonlyplease,” if you care about facts why do you repeat so many obvious lies?

      Re: “Explain that” (the fact that WTC1 lasted longer than WTC2).
      A: It’s probably because WTC2, the second tower to be struck (the first to collapse) was struck lower, by a faster-moving plane. So there was more damage to the building and to the insulating protective coating on the steel, and there was more weight stressing the damaged section.

      Re: “Pull”
      Nobody “pulled” WTC7 down. They pulled out the firemen who were in the building which was burning out of control, as it showed increasing signs of instability.

      Re: “bombs going off”
      The loud bomb-like sounds reported were well in advance of the buildings’ collapses. They were not just a couple of seconds before, as would be the case if explosives caused the collapses.

      Re: “U-shaped girders” and “pancake theory”
      That’s such incoherent gibberish that I can’t even tell what you’re trying to say.

      Re: “Jet fuel cannot melt steel”
      That’s just a lie. Fires do commonly bring down steel structures. That’s why the structural steel is generally sprayed with fire-resistant insulation (if it’s not encased in concrete).
      The zinc on galvanized steel melts at just 420 °C.
      Structural steel weakens severely at 600 °C.
      Aluminum melts at 660 °C.
      The NIST did a small house fire test and measured 1360 °F (738 °C) in under 5 minutes! A large building fire boosted by a jumbo jet full of accelerant would get much hotter.
      A modest grass fire was found to reach 920 °C = 1688 °F.
      A big forest fire can reach 1200 °C = 2192 °F.

      Here’s a nifty video about how to make a knife from a mill file. Note that it doesn’t take much of a fire to soften the steel so much that it bends under its own weight (probably about 900 °C):

      Here’s an article about a freeway ramp bridge that collapsed when a burning gasoline tanker truck overheated its structural steel:

      http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Tanker-fire-destroys-part-of-MacArthur-Maze-2-2575285.php

      • Your answers hold no water. Stop comparing apples to oranges. I will post more later as time permits,if I have time to waste…..very busy now. WTC7 was pulled. There were no firefighters in that building…period!! Larry Silverstien had to cover his blunder. FEMA, NY times and Popular Mechanics all revealed no firefighting efforts. The “pancake theory” doesn’t make sense? Read the 911 commission report.

        • 1. Do you now accept the proven fact that building fires get plenty hot enough to catastrophically weaken structural steel? I.e., do you now accept that the 9-11 Truther sites which claim the opposite are lying?

          2. There were no effective firefighting efforts going on in WTC7 because there was no available water supply after the Towers collapsed. But firefighters do much more than just fight fires — which is why hundreds of them died in WTC2, none of whom were fighting fires. Here’s the proof that they ordered the firefighters withdrawn (“pulled”) from in and around WTC7, and that that’s what Silverstein was talking about:

          http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

          3. Silverstein (not Silverstien) and the NYFD didn’t “blunder,” because, as they feared, WTC7 did eventually collapse, because of the uncontrolled fires raging within. If they hadn’t pulled their people from in and around the building, more of them would have died.

          4. I don’t know anything about a “pancake theory,” but you 9-11 Truthers sure are good at waffling!

          5. Referring back to point #1, are you familiar with Luke 16:10? (If not, then look it up!)

          • Fire can weaken steel. Many survivors on the floors of the point of impact have claimed that the fires were not that big,that is why they are alive today. In 1975, WTC1 caught fire and burned on floors 9-14 for 3 hours and no structural damage! Not even a single truss needed to be replaced. I have spent a lot of time researching this from every angle to try and believe the official story. Not buying it. The FEMA report stated that there was no manual firefighting efforts in WTC7 and the scene commander stated that all personnel were removed by 11:30am, as reported by the NY Times. The building fell 6 hours later, and the roof caved in a few seconds before the collapse, a trademark of controlled demolition. All 3 buildings registered between 2.1 and 2.3 on the Richter scale seconds before the collapses began, and nothing while they were falling, another trademark. There are countless people(firefighters,policemen,paramedics and regular “joes”) who said they heard multiple explosions, and all of the networks reported explosions in the first few hours. Why wasn’t the collapse of WTC7 not shown on tv over and over like the other two? That would really awaken the masses and blow the lid off of their story. The term “pull” is never used for an evacuation order. Ask any firefighter. There were not any raging fires within WTC7. The term “pancake theory” has been used by the federal gov’t since the beginning. You never heard of it? I think you are lying. If a steel frame building were to collapse under its own weight then the steel beams would be bent and twisted. Where are they? Every picture I have seen only shows straight steel beams. Maybe a few that are slightly bent. Where are they?!?! These beams should be bent into a “u” shape. Building 6 was absolutely pummeled by falling debris and was totally burned out, yet the steel structure remained intact, and was not brought down until much later. It also was built with much thinner steel. All of the evidence was quickly removed before any real investigation took place. This is illegal. Yes, I am familiar with Luke 16:10 and next time I hear or read this verse it will remind me of you.

            • And by the way. I am willing to build a similar structure(WTC1 or 2 or 7) from toothpicks and Elmer’s glue(on a much smaller scale) with missing sections representing the planes impact(not for WTC7) and drop 100 pounds from 8 feet(my max reach) directly on top to show that the structure will not collapse below the point of impact. Hmmmmm,motivation for a you tube video? Are you a betting man? Care to put your credibility on the line? On this website? For the whole world to see? Let me know. I am ready and motivated. We all need to know the truth. Any more bible verses for me regarding truth? I hope you are “studied up”. I have some for you.

              • That’s a wonderful idea! Please take lots of pictures!

                Or, better yet, do you have a video cam or smartphone, to take video footage?

                What are you going to use for the 100 lb weight?

                You needn’t replicate the WTC Towers, nor the damage to them. No structure airer than a solid chunk of wood and glue will withstand your proposed test.

                BTW, I recommend that you do your experiment outside, on the driveway or sidewalk, because a 100 lb weight dropped indoors could do serious damage to your floor.

                Also, wear safety goggles, in case something shatters and throws shrapnel.

                Have fun!

            • Thank you for admitting that the Truthers’ claim that demolition must have been used because “fire can’t melt steel” is a lie.

              Guess what? The claim that “survivors on the floors of the point of impact” said the fires “were not that big” is another lie. Didn’t you see the footage of desperate people jumping to their deaths, to avoid the slower and more painful fate of being burned to death? Do you really think they would have done that if the fires “were not that big?”

              And did you watch the “how to make a knife from a file” video? To collapse under its own weight like that, the mill file’s strength obviously declined to something little stronger than Play Doh.

              Did you see how small the fire was, which did that the mill file? Now, how do you think the infernos in the WTC skyscrapers compared to the fire which heated that mill file?

              You need to internalize the fact that liars lie. The likes of Alex Jones and his “Truther” buddies can’t be trusted, period. You should not pollute your mind by listening to the people who you know lie to you.

              You KNOW that they’re lying about fires being unable to destroy steel buildings, and they repeat that lie incessantly: http://bit.ly/1tdNyNj So you should STOP listening to anyone who says that. It is a fundamental error to think, “So they lied about X, they still might not be lying about Y or Z.” When you’re dealing with a proven liar, you should not waste your time or brain cells considering ANYTHING they have to say.

              Here’s another example. You read somewhere that “the roof caved in a few seconds before the collapse [which is] a trademark of controlled demolition.” But that’s wrong, too. The center collapsing before the perimeter is simply an indication that the progressive structural failure began near the center of the building, which is what you’d expect if that’s where the fires were. Controlled demolition teams do that intentionally to try to minimize the “footprint” of the collapse, but the “Truthers” who claim such a collapse is evidence of (magically silent) controlled demolition are lying. Again.

              As for the “explosions” heard, that’s to be expected when there’s a fire. Lots of things explode. Anything from oxygen bottles to cans of hair spray go “boom” in a big fire. But unless those explosions are immediately followed by a building collapse, they didn’t cause the building collapse. In controlled demolition, the explosions all happen in the last few seconds before the building comes down (which obviously didn’t happen at the WTC). The “Truther” are lying. AGAIN.

              The same is true about the order to pull out the firemen from in and around WTC7. Do you think Larry Silverstein has been trained to not use the word “pull” when talking about pulling out firefighters? Really? PLEASE think about these Truther lies. They are SO ridiculous!

              And as for the bent and twisted steel, is this mangled enough for you?

              http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/workers-stunned-eerie-face-world-trade-center-steel-article-1.1535813

              • Is that the best you can do? One piece of twisted steel? They should all look like that. Fact is,99% of them were straight. Look at any pics of ground zero and point out more pieces like the one you showed. Oh,wait….you can’t!!! Most of the people that jumped showed no signs of burns and probably couldn’t breathe. A whole lot more smoke than flames. Read my earlier post again. I said that the explosions took place seconds before the collapse began. I didn’t read about the roof of WTC7,like you claim, I saw it…in real time. I am sure that Mr. Silverstein also refers to a group of people as “it”. I will however take your advice and not listen to people repeating lies,like what you are doing here. I will never believe anything you say. How convenient that you are the only one(in your mind) telling the truth and everyone else are liars. Very telling. Funny how you automatically think I am an Alex Jones fan. He is running a business and I am not interested. There is a whole lot of better people to get info from. Putting words into someones mouth may work on most….not me.

                • FOP wrote, “Every picture I have seen only shows straight steel beams. Maybe a few that are slightly bent.”

                  So I fixed that. I showed him a photo of a thoroughly mangled one.

                  Now FOP says, “Is that the best you can do? One piece of twisted steel?”

                  Well, you’re welcome anyhow, FOP.

                  There were no controlled-demolition-like explosions heard in any of the three skyscrapers under discussion. All three collapses were captured on video and audio recordings, but none of those recordings recorded anything that sounded remotely like controlled demolition explosions.

                  This is what controlled demolition sounds like:

                  • 1991, One Meridian Plaza,Philadelphia. 38 story steel frame building burns for 18 hours completely gutting 8 floors. No collapse. 1988, First Interstate Bank building. 64 story steel frame building burns lower floors for 3 hours completely gutting 8 floors. No collapse. Both of the buildings had massive flame completely engulfing multiple floors in their entirety,and no structural damage. 1975, WTC1, burned floors 9-14 for over 3 hours and no structural damage. Donald Manning, Chief Engineer and General Manager for LAFD said of the LA fire, ” In other cities, the building would have become a charred SKELETON (caps added). Try dropping a concrete block from any height you choose and see if it turns to pulverized dust when it hits the ground,as what happened at WTC. All 287 columns would have to have weakened to the point of collapse in an instant to cause the telescoping as seen in WTC1. Asymmetric damage cannot result in such a symmetric result. A steel wood burning stove doesn’t shatter due to prolonged exposure to fires. A gas stove with a flame hotter that any building fire doesn’t collapse on itself. A fairly well built house of cards likely won’t collapse top to bottom. Good job on the lone piece of steel. They should ALL look like that!!! So don’t pat yourself on the back too much.

                    • Wow, you really do like to believe every wacko lie you hear, don’t you, FOB?

                      Now it sounds like you’re even doubting the fact which we had already established to your satisfaction, that building fires (even without vast quantities of aviation fuel as an accelerant!) can very easily get hot enough to severely weaken structural steel and cause failure of steel structures. So tell me: why do you think that structural steel is routinely coated with fire-resistant insulation, in high-rise buildings?

                      Also, have you started the construction of your toothpick-and-glue model, yet? Photos, please!

                    • How can I be believing”every wacko lie”,when I don’t believe yours? I never agreed that”building fires can very easily get hot enough to severely weaken structural steel and cause failure of steel structures”. There you go again,putting words into my mouth. Re-read the post. Every building uses fire retardant materials throughout to help keep fire from spreading. You claim my previous post is full of lies but, you don’t say what the lies are,nor offer any evidence to back your claim. The previously mentioned fires are FACT. You choose to ignore that(although the LA fire gutted 4 stories and not 8,my bad). Back in the fourth grade we were offered extra credit if we wanted to build something out of only toothpicks and glue. There was also a prize involved for the best entry. I won easily. I still have this piece today and at 225lbs.,not only can I stand on it,I can jump on it and it won’t break. Very simple idea and very easy to make if you give it a little thought. As for the pics,you never accepted my challenge,probably because you would never admit that you were wrong. My purpose for posting here was not to debate with you or try to change your mind. Merely to offer factual evidence to anyone willing to research it themselves. Judging by some of the content here,I feel most people would not read down this far,and frankly,it has gotten boring. I am convinced that you are either getting paid to do this or are a sicko who get his “jollies” by steering people away from deciding on their own. Your video link of the Ocean Towers is a steel reinforce concrete building,with the windows removed which would amplify the sound,and different charges are used on this already weakened building. Comparing apples to oranges again. There is plenty of video out there(from the networks) which you can hear it all.

                    • “Fire can weaken steel,” you said. But now you don’t believe that?

                      Or you don’t believe weakening the structural steel in a building can cause it to collapse? Or what?

                      I asked, “why do you think that structural steel is routinely coated with fire-resistant insulation, in high-rise buildings?”

                      You answered, “Every building uses fire retardant materials throughout to help keep fire from spreading.”

                      Wrong. The insulation sprayed onto structural steel doesn’t keep fire from spreading, because structural steel doesn’t burn.

                      Care to take another guess?

                      This is an open-book quiz. Feel free to look it up, anywhere you wish.

                      When you’ve answered it (correctly), the answers to some of your other questions should be obvious.

                      BTW, if you value your 4th grade toothpick project, you’d better not drop a 100 lb weight on it from a height of eight feet.

                      What challenge do you think I never accepted? Perhaps I was unclear. I very strongly encourage you to perform the toothpick demolition experiment that you volunteered to do! (But do it safely: outdoors, with safety glasses.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s