★

9/11 (terrorist attack): What was the main cause of the WTC collapse?

Don Ouchy 2.5k upvotes by Ibrahim Ismail, John H. Hillman, V, Mark Savchuk, (more)

Fire doesn’t implode steel framed buildings. It never has and it never will. Open air fires don’t burn hot enough. The heat required to melt steel needs to reach over 2000 degrees - usually created in a blast furnace. This is one of the main reasons we can confidently build giant skyscrapers without fear of them collapsing from a fire. When the WTC was built Underwriter Laboratories certified the steel to withstand temperates above 2000 degrees for over 3 hours without any structural changes. UL Executive Speaks Out on WTC Study UL Says NO WAY WTC Steel Could Melt At 2000 F UL Executive Speaks Out On WTC Study We know that the WTC fires didn’t burn hotter than a thousand degrees – likely much less. The bulk of the kerosene from the jet fuel was burned up in the fireball. The fire in the towers were fairly small and contained. The building itself was fireproofed with fire retardant furnishing by code, was constructed with mostly metallic construction - including the floors, and the frame was completely coated with asbestos. There are several pictures of people standing in the impact hole of the airplane during the fire.

If there was a thousand degree fire anywhere near this area these people would be melting. We also have testimony of people who were able to transverse from above the floors that were on fire to the bottom, They reported a standard office fire. The firefighters that the reached impact zone on the 78th floor report a standard fire that can be extinguished with 2 hoses. And describes the fire as “two isolated pockets of fire” that can be extinguished with two fire hoses - hardly a blast furnace. There is no precedent for a fire to ever bring down a steel framed building.

Just three months ago fire erupted in a skyscraper in Moscow Russia. It completely engulfed 3 stories of the building and burned for nearly four hours. The building did not collapse.

In 1988 the First Interstate Bank in Los Angeles burned for 3 hours across multiple floors. It did not collapse.

In 2009 the Mandarin Oriental in Peking burned across all floors of the tower section for 7 seven hours. It did not collapse.

In 2005 the Tower Windsor in Madrid burned for a whopping 24 hours. It did not collapse. The examples of this go on and on. Dozens of fires – even the Twin Towers have had larger fires than on 911. It’s not that the Russians, Chinese, Spanish or Los Angeles has better steel. It’s because fires don’t collapse steel buildings. Especially ones that burn for only an hour like the World Trade Center – one of the most fire proof buildings ever constructed.

This idea is the same as realizing a gas stove will not soften or melt the steel stove grate or a steel pan even if it’s turned on high all day. We know it wouldn’t because it cannot get hot enough. This is part of our everyday life. NO SUCH THING AS A “PANCAKE COLLAPSE” IN SKYSCRAPERS As for the collapse we know from simple physics that the implosion could not have been caused by fire because of the speed that the building imploded. Each tower fell in roughly ten seconds (9.86 seconds and 10.4 seconds).

Its physically impossible for a structure to completly self pulverize as explained here:(explanation begins at 1:24) If you stood on the top of the World Trade Center (110 stories) and dropped a bowling ball it would take 9.32 seconds to hit the ground. With the only resistance being air it falls at the speed of gravity which means it gains speed as it falls until it reaching its max.

A pancake collapse is described as a building collapsing down on itself floor by floor. This means that each new impact meets the resistance of the floor it’s collapsing into causing drag. It would be physically impossible for the solid steel cores (mounted and standing vertically) and the solid steel flooring of the towers to offer no resistance during a pancake collapse. Its physically impossible for the towers to have gained nearly the maximum speed gravity would allow – or gain speed period – with this much resistance in the way. It’s a very simple concept. The only way to fall at the speed of gravity is if the resistance is removed.

Even if it was only meeting resistance every 10 floors it would still have taken over 30 seconds to collapse this way. But again there is no such thing as a pancake collapse in a steel building. It’s not physically possible to generate enough force. We are talking about forty-seven 3 foot wide by one foot thick steel beams in the core. There are over 420,000 tons of steel in each building. The collapse speedmeans that every second 4000 tons of solid steel was atomized into mostly dust and small debris. Where was the down force that could have caused this much steel to turn to dust so fast? What caused this massive crushing force in tower 2 - the roof... radio antenna? Is it even possible to crush with this much force? Experts agree there is no such thing as natural pancake collapse. In the wild event that something like this had occurred it would have been only for 5 or 6 floors before running out of momentum and only would have occurred in one section of the building (a corner or side). The only way to completely “pancake” a steel skyscraper is to blow it up! So how DID the towers fall? Like everything from 911 we can only go by what evidence is available. But the best place to start is the most obvious. When you saw the video of the towers collapsing one of the first impressions that likely ran through your mind was the same thing that ran through everyone’s mind - “it looks just like a controlled demolition”. Since billions of people thought the same thing it’s a good place to start. Unfortunately our government didn’t think so. In fact they decided it was not necessary to test or investigate for explosives. Not even to say to the billions of people wondering – “see it wasn’t that”. This is a strange decision – dont you think? However independent researchers from around the global scientific community - many leading their fields, Nobel prize winners in physics, etc did think it was necessary to test for explosives since the official explanation of fire was not possible. Though the WTC wreckage was not treated as a crime scene and cleaned for 24 hours a day as fast as possible the dust residue was captured by numerous people. Within this dust scientist from all over the world have found the same thing. Mass quantities of the residue of a highly explosive compound called thermite. Here is what thermite is: The thermite residue that was found in the dust is a type of super thermite (called thermate) that contains added barium for hotter burns. Only the military is allowed to create or use thermate - so much so that they own a patent on it.

Thermate residue found in dust from WTC

When the thermite residue was found scientists suggested that if this was a thermite explosion the debris would be littered by tons of tiny steel balls as they are a byproduct of a thermite reaction. When researchers looked for them they were indeed everywhere. The little balls in the picture are tiny steel balls that are created by thermite reactions. They found massive amounts of thermate residue in the WTC dust. Baruim is not a naturally occuring elememt. Thermate is not a naturally occurring compound. It is now widely believed amongst the global scientific community that this is what caused the twin towers to implode in a controlled manner. Thermite charges placed along the central core of the towers causing violent explosions and extreme heat melting the core. It is believe the thermite was first used to sever the base of the building and then the explosion sequence could be triggered at will. He published his finding in the "Open Chemical Physics Journal": http://benthamopen.com/tocpj/art... His findings have gone un challenged since he published them in 2009. Physicist Steven Jones discussing the findings Beyond the obvious evidence of the physcial presence of explosives other supporting evidence of this theory is abundant. First there was the molten metal shown to be leaking from the towers right before collapse: Does that look like a building fire or a steel factory? We have already established the WTC fires were not that hot – in fact we have established building fires don’t do this. But a thermite reaction does. This is what we would expect to see from a thermite demolition.

Next we have numerous witnesses including the Mayor and the Governor himself admitting the core of the wreckage stayed above 700 degrees for weeks after 911. No matter how much water they added it never cooled off. The fire didn’t go out until December 13th, 2001. Over three months after the implosion. This is what we would expect to see after a thermate explosion of this size. This molten steel is denied by the government and the official report. Why?

This is not molten steel? Here is John Gross the lead engineer for the government investigation blatantly lying about the presence of molten steel. This is the main scientific mind who provided the explanation of why the building collapsed: We trusted this guy to tell us why the buildings fell. And paid him 8 million dollars for his trouble.

This is a satellite image taken of the WTC on September 13th, 2001. Heat signatures in the orange red spots indicate temps up to 1800 degrees at both the Tower sites and Building 7. The molten steel clearly existed. THE BASE OF THE BUILDINGS

For a building to implode into its own footprint the bottom supports need to be cut at perfect angels in perfect timing to cause the building to fall precisely.

The picture in the top corner of this photo shows a thermite charge being placed before a demolition. Here is an example of how demolition charges are placed at the base of a building.

This needs to be done with military precision. The chances of a building falling into its own footprint naturally are astronomical. It has to be designed to implode a specific way.

The outer cores of the towers are cut with precision to fall inward and the inner beams cut straight and clean – except the melted steel around all the cuts. These are signs of very professional demolition happening at the base of the towers. This is what we would expect to see from a demolition. Explosions at the base of the building were reported by hundreds of rescue workers, witnesses and media that morning. They have been categorically denied by the investigation. During the implosion itself all the evidence points to explosives. Let’s have a look:

What we are seeing here are explosions – not implosions. We see material being blown out of the building from the core and the remnants being vaporized by extreme heat. When we see the top it’s a banana shaped explosive plume being blown out with force – not imploding.

In controlled demolition the term “squib” refers to explosions taking place below the blast zone. They are called squibs because they are blasts clearly visible during the demolition. The towers had these explosion squibs all around the building and all along its length. Sometimes dozens of floors below the collapse zone.

We can clearly see them in the video. Squibs don’t happen without explosions. This is what we would expect to see from a demolition.

This is the “dust cloud” created by the implosions of the building. Except it’s not a standard dust cloud. This is what’s known as a pyroclastic density current – or pyroclastic flow. Unlike a normal dust cloud they are created by an extreme release of hot gasses creating extreme heat similar to a volcano. The tephra is bound together by gasses and is hot and heavy. It hugs the ground as it spreads - even clinging to water. A dust cloud spreads into the air because it’s cooler and not bound together by hot gas. The only things known to create a pyroclastic density cloud are either natural or synthetic explosions (ie – volcanoes, bombs or rockets). This is what we would expect to see from thermite demolition. Let’s listen to what some demolition professionals think. This is Tom Sullivan who worked for the largest controlled demolition company in the world as a set up person:

This is Danny Jowenko who is considered one of top experts in the world of controlled demolition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z... Regarding the WTC complex itself. After the 1993 bombing, bomb sniffing dogs became standard protocol at the WTC. This remained the case up until two weeks before 9/11 when they were pulled from the site. Ten days later, for the first time in history, the WTC was completely powered down on September 8th, and 9th 2001. This answer is getting really long and it’s only scratched the surface of the evidence that is documented. So I will let the real scientists and experts handle it from here: Here is Jeff King noted MIT Engineer Here are over 2000 architects and engineers standing behind the theory I just presented: Richard Gage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s... Nobel Prize winner Daro Fo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8... Major General Albert Stubblebind who was in charge of army intelligence: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d... Experts Speak Out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X... There is really not enough room for me to link you to all the scientists who acknowledge the towers were a controlled demolition. There are hundreds. The government has offered an explanation that is not only un-scientific – it’s anti science. In other words, they started with a conclusion and then designed a theory to match their conclusion. No studies, no simulations or testing, no models or actual investigation. And they have been caught telling lies about it. Their explanation buried in a 10,000 page report was: “we think it was fire but aren’t sure. We didn’t think investigating for explosives was necessary so we didn’t”. This summarizes the only real info from a ten thousand page report in two sentences. Don’t you deserve better than that? Physical evidence of explosives has been found. Our media glosses it over along with everything else they don’t want you to think about.

For those who seek more information about 9/11 investigations on Quora - click here: 9/11 information blog

Updated 2 Dec.

Upvote2.5k

Downvote Comments62+ Share60