Remembering 9/11

[Jubee]

This is molten steel.....no, aluminum, bahhh, they all look the same don't they?

 

[Jubee]

So Newton's 3rd law took a break that day, firefighters are stupid and don't know anything about a structures composition and in turn, what metal could look like in a foundry.



So, what happened at the pentaCON (thanks you know who) lol


How come a building for the military, doesn't have any videos of this huge plane that attacked it? I would guess it has a ton of cameras for surveillance.
But that said, it's amazing how much, or very little damage the plane did to the building.

And no footage? Really? LOL
Look at the damaged area, it's so narrow, I mean, either the wings blew up into fine particle dust and vanished, or the building is so strong, it absorbed the wings and they are now part of the structural integrity of the building.


Man, what a fucking day that 9/11. So many improbable things happened all at once. lol

 

[GPIDEAL]

In the video, one person mentioned the explosion coming from the freight elevator, the other said it came from a mechanical room.

Makes sense. The elevator shaft and many ventilation shafts run from the basement levels to the top floor and roof. I suspect the plane hit, and forced a lot of hot air from the fires down the shafts within a fraction of a second, and it blew out access doors and things on the shafts in the lower levels. And, they heard that before they heard the plane hit because of the time it takes for the sound to travel.

And, if they heard this explosion and the ensuing noise, how could they possibly know the exact second when the plane hit. They would have been a little distracted with all the screaming people and the glass smashing out.

Exactly.

 

[GPIDEAL]

So Newton's 3rd law took a break that day, firefighters are stupid and don't know anything about a structures composition and in turn, what metal could look like in a foundry.



So, what happened at the pentaCON (thanks you know who) lol


How come a building for the military, doesn't have any videos of this huge plane that attacked it? I would guess it has a ton of cameras for surveillance.
But that said, it's amazing how much, or very little damage the plane did to the building.

And no footage? Really? LOL
Look at the damaged area, it's so narrow, I mean, either the wings blew up into fine particle dust and vanished, or the building is so strong, it absorbed the wings and they are now part of the structural integrity of the building.


Man, what a fucking day that 9/11. So many improbable things happened all at once. lol

The cameras on the corners could simply be looking down with the middle part out of view. As for that middle camera, God knows. Maybe the plane hit the DVR inside the building and destroyed the record, but we do have footage from a ground level surveillance camera. The speeding plane is just a blur.

Don't forget that there were witnesses who saw the plane fly into the Pentagon building.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Figures, another corporate owned mainstream media outlet. Shocker that they'd dispute anything or anyone that questions what happened on 9/11.

Match your link with http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/

I'm actually looking for www.debunking911.com which was a great site, but for some reason, is offline.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Its close.....its the difference in weight and although the bowling ball is grossly different, it delivers the same result.

There were more bottom floors than top floors, so it's not just difference in weight. It's not simply a matter of a heavier block on a small mass below. There was a unique destruction.

Was it because the disconnected top floors peeled back the outer load bearing walls as they descended below, due to the weak floor to wall connections caused by the fires?

 

[GPIDEAL]

You need to consider the initial amount of mass dropping and the weight rating for the first undamaged floor.
From there you add the additional mass from each floor added to the mix and you will see the increased failure rate as it occurs.
Also the structure will be bowing outwards as the more failures occur. this changes the dynamics of the structure and further weakens the skeleton of the building.

There problem here is people are seeing this as a clean vertical collapse and not structural failure caused by the upper structures collapse due to terrorist attack.

I think this is key!

(Like I said, not exactly like a bowling ball falling on a lighter sub-structure, more like structural failure at a key connection point and just enough weight to start a snowball effect. Once the exoskeleton failed above, the lower exoskeleton can't possibly support what's above).

 

[GPIDEAL]

Nice discussion. If only the building was a solid object like your analogy implies. In reality it was a bunch of interconnected pieces that each would fall independently as their connections failed.


But don't worry, that's only science. I'm sure that memes like the one you posted are so much more informative.

Exactly. It was not a simple case of a smaller block falling on a larger block.

The WTC egg-crate construction consisted of 95% air.

 

[GPIDEAL]

It would be pretty easy to spreadsheet it out by assuming each floor was an independent mass, examining the momentum of collisions and the acceleration in the 10 ft between floors. It would be a ridiculous oversimplification but far better than when one of the tin foil crowd tried comparing the building to a candle.


Dropping a brick on a structure made of popsicle sticks would be a pretty good analogy though.

I think there's a better analogy.

Maybe a Popsicle structure holding a brick. Then you compromise the top below the brick, and then the loosened section crashes through.

 

[SuperCharge]

The cameras on the corners could simply be looking down with the middle part out of view. As for that middle camera, God knows. Maybe the plane hit the DVR inside the building and destroyed the record, but we do have footage from a ground level surveillance camera. The speeding plane is just a blur.

Don't forget that there were witnesses who saw the plane fly into the Pentagon building.

The most protected building and air space in the entire world has only one image of the plane out of the 360 cameras installed there lmao? That is laughable and quite frankly defies logic. Please tell me you are not that naive

 

[GPIDEAL]

The most protected building and air space in the entire world has only one image of the plane out of the 360 cameras installed there lmao? That is laughable and quite frankly defies logic. Please tell me you are not that naive

Don't exaggerate. The pic above only shows 3 cameras in that part of the building, not 360. There's only one in the center that would've had the best view (the others are at the far ends of the building). Maybe the DVR was damaged by the crash. But we have one camera that took the video from ground level which shows a blur. Then are also eye-witnesses who saw a plane crash into the Pentagon and not a missile.

Here's your video.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Eye-witness accounts of plane hitting the Pentagon

 

[SuperCharge]

I thought eye witness accounts weren't admissible, or maybe that's just firefighter eye witnesses :doh:

You have to admit there must be more than 1 photo out there besides the only photo we have from one angle.

 

[Promo]

Btw, most anyone with half a brain knows the difference in how molten steel and molten aluminum looks like.

Then you have less than half a brain. The colour is dependent on the temperature.

http://paulcolors.photoshelter.com/image/I0000hti5VsuQ9uw

 

[Jubee]

The most protected building and air space in the entire world has only one image of the plane out of the 360 cameras installed there lmao? That is laughable and quite frankly defies logic. Please tell me you are not that naive

LOL EXACTLY . It's the home of what is apparently the most powerful militarized country in the world and no cameras caught anything of substance. lol
https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/us-military-spending-vs-world/

 

[Jubee]

Don't exaggerate. The pic above only shows 3 cameras in that part of the building, not 360. There's only one in the center that would've had the best view (the others are at the far ends of the building). Maybe the DVR was damaged by the crash. But we have one camera that took the video from ground level which shows a blur. Then are also eye-witnesses who saw a plane crash into the Pentagon and not a missile.

Here's your video.

Pause at 0:22 and 0:23 even 0:24 (before the missile, errr plane enters the frame) does that honestly look like a big commercial jet liner flying THAT fast and THAT low to you?

It's so tiny (yeah that's what she said) compared to that of a plane, which it's supposed to be. lol

Here we go. That thing couldn't even pass for a Lear Jet. lol

 

[Jubee]

Then you have less than half a brain. The colour is dependent on the temperature.

http://paulcolors.photoshelter.com/image/I0000hti5VsuQ9uw

Then it would look more silver in colour and not red like (lava) many of the first responders have reported seeing.
But when it's pouring for that long at those temperatures? There were pockets hot for months on the site.
Would you like to hear those video clips from back in the day at ground zero?

3:53

Then you have this infamous clip "molten steel...........like lava...............like lava from a volcano" - we all know what that looks like don't we? We don't have to be firefighters to know it's red in colour.
0:23 -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM

 

[SuperCharge]

Pause at 0:22 and 0:23 even 0:24 (before the missile, errr plane enters the frame) does that honestly look like a big commercial jet liner flying THAT fast and THAT low to you?

It's so tiny (yeah that's what she said) compared to that of a plane, which it's supposed to be. lol

Here we go. That thing couldn't even pass for a Lear Jet. lol

Flying a 757 passed its designed limit speed by over 100 knots so close to the ground would have structurally damaged the plane. Listen to what this veteran pilot of 757's and 767's has to say about how unbelievably impossible it would have been to do, even with the best pilots in the world.

 

[Jubee]

What do they know? pffff.

It's possible for a terrorist train on a small plane, jump into a COMMERCIAL plane, maneuver, "pilot it" across the country, fly it at speeds over what it's designed to fly at (lol) perfectly parallel just above the ground into the most secure (although ill equipped for video surveillance) military building in the world.


Nonsense. :applouse:

 

[Promo]

Then it would look more silver in colour and not red like (lava) many of the first responders have reported seeing.

Absolutely wrong. The fire was burning at a high enough temperature for the Aluminum to look red. You were the person who kept insisting on the temperature of the fire.

But when it's pouring for that long at those temperatures?

Wrong again. You were the person who provided the video of the molten Aluminum pouring out. Time was measured in seconds.

There were pockets hot for months on the site.

You lie. There have been no reports of molten metal in the rubble for "months on the site".

Would you like to hear those video clips from back in the day at ground zero? ........ we all know what that looks like don't we

Uninformed, uneducated opinions that are easily explainable. Apparently you don't know what molten aluminum looks like, even after you've seen several examples from Google.