Why some people think 9/11 was an inside job
Comments
-
-
-
In the provided photo, it is evident that a significant portion of the liquid pool is covered with a thick cloud of dust. However, upon closer inspection, one can observe that there is still a small corner where a pool of liquid is visible. When the South Tower stood, liquid poured out of the same corner.
That pool is massive; there was substantial melting going on before the South Tower collapsed, all ignored by the official reporting.
The government official claim is that all that is happening here is steel trusses lost strength and pulled in the entire wall, and the building collapsed.
The melting of the south tower caused significant instability, resulting in a part of the top breaking off. This observation is apparent to anyone who is awake and paying attention. The structural integrity of the tower was compromised due to the melting, leading to the detachment of sections of the upper portion.
0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
The official story regarding the events of 9/11 does not adequately address the melting of the steel components, leaving many skeptical of the narrative. This raises valid questions as to why we should believe the official account of what happened that day?
The phenomenon observed here cannot be solely attributed to fire. Nanothermite, on the other hand, provides a comprehensive explanation for all the anomalies observed. Even mainstream studies acknowledge that fire, including that caused by jet fuel, is insufficient to melt steel.
The occurrence of a leakage of red/yellow liquid appears to be connected to the subsequent collapse of the south tower. Within minute after that leak, the entire structure experienced a sudden and complete collapse. It is clear that the explanation surrounding the steel's alleged loss of strength, bending, or warping is dubious at best.
With the data in hand, the investigation can move into the analysis phase. This involves scrutinizing the collected information to identify patterns, connections, or anomalies that may shed light on the nature of the leak. There has to be a connection between a major leak of red/yellow liquid and then a structure collapsing 60 seconds later.
The evidence supporting the theory of controlled demolition can be observed through the examination of seven building. When a building collapses, all floors within the structure interact with one another. However, it is peculiar to note the space between the upper and bottom floors at the initiation of the collapse. This raises the question of how eight floors could have fallen before the upper floors and lower floors made contact with each other?
This observation challenges the conventional understanding of building collapses, as it suggests a controlled demolition scenario. In a typical collapse, one would expect the upper floors to progressively impact the lower floors, causing a sequential collapse. However, the absence of space between the upper and bottom floors defies this expectation ( freefall) NIST modeling disregards the possibility of controlled demolition and instead assumes that the building started to collapse and then entered a state of freefall at a later stage. This contradicts the basic principles of physics, as a progressive collapse should encounter resistance and slow down.
However, if their own modeling shows interactions between upper and lower floors, it raises concerns about the validity of their claim about freefall later.
Debunkers often display a lack of understanding when it comes to the concept of structural collapse. It is quite clear that the red part of a structure now collapsed in the NIST model, while the blue part remains intact. In such cases, a freefall scenario is not likely to occur. In order for NIST to be considered accurate, the entire red section and black section must undergo complete destruction after the collapse starts. NIST has also this going on when building seven falling down ( 2 seconds of full collapse) strangely NIST cut off at this point
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
There is no waffle; it's just that you don't understand why building seven is most likely to be a controlled demolition.
NIST's official finite model of the collapse is meant to provide a scientific explanation for the events at Building seven.
Debunkers have the tendency to cherry-pick data or selectively interpret evidence to fit their preconceived notions. By utilizing the NIST model, we can objectively evaluate the controlled demolition theory and determine whether it presents a more plausible explanation for the collapse.
NIST's collapse model is riddled with lies.
1) In the first screenshot of the NIST model of the collapse, no internal collapse has occurred yet. The image captures the initial state of the structure before any significant structural damage or collapse has taken place.
2) In the second screenshot provided, it depicts the occurrence of a collapse in the NIST model on the 12th and 13th floors.
3) third screenshot. As the floors crumble and disintegrate, the space beneath expands on the eastside of the building
4) Multiple floors are now giving way on the upper floor.
5) Steel columns, beams, and concrete, along with floors, office furniture, and building materials, are all now falling in a cascading manner on the east side of building seven.
.................................................
The last two screenshots under discussion clearly depict a crucial aspect of the collapse that raises doubts about the possibility of freefall occurring due to natural building collapse reasons. These two screenshots present visual evidence that demands further examination. In conclusion, NIST's research presents a detailed examination of the cascading effects that would unfold if the Eastside were to collapse.
For freefall collapse to occur across eight floors, the structural integrity of the building must be compromised equally throughout. You can have one side collapsed and the other side still buckling.
Freefall refers to the absence of resistance or opposing force in the motion of an object. This is not up for debate, it's science. On the west side of the building, there are eight floors that possess a significant amount of resistance to prevent freefall.
NIST's simulations do not account for important variables or potential scenarios (controlled demolition) that may have contributed to the building's failure.
0 -
-
-
-
Freefall is a well-established scientific fact that occurs when an object falls freely under the influence of gravity. It is not a matter of conjecture, opinion, or belief, but rather a fundamental concept in physics.
Controlled demolitions are carefully orchestrated to achieve this type of rapid, symmetrical collapse (freefall) through the systematic removal of all support columns within a building.
Eight floors were pancaked by controlled demolition, it would result in a scenario looking like freefall. Freefall is now verified to have occurred at seven.
The claim that the collapse was merely buckling is not supported by the evidence. In reality, the catastrophic event involved the pancaking of eight floors at the base of the building, causing them to collapse downward. Subsequently, the upper section of the building collapsed through the space open at the bottom that had given way. The NIST model does not show that the floor pancake collapsed; end of story.
Several pieces of evidence support the hypothesis that nano-thermite was used at the Twin Towers. Building Seven, however, was collapsed by a controlled implosion. One significant finding is the presence of unexploded nano-thermite particles in the dust samples collected from the site. Researchers have identified these particles through advanced scientific analysis, such as X-ray diffraction and electron microscopy.
Furthermore, the characteristics of the collapse itself point to the use of nanothermite. Melting of steel and iron microspheres.
Either way, whatever you want to believe happened at the Twin Towers, one thing is clear - the collapse of Building 7 was a controlled demolition.The collapse of Building 7 exhibited many characteristics of a controlled demolition. It fell at free-fall speed, meaning it collapsed at the same rate as if there were no resistance. This is highly unusual for a building that is supposedly collapsing due to fires and structural damage.
How does the eight-floor free-fall collapse (east to west) work by fire? If you believe the truther community is full of ****, is be very easy for you to show where in the model this free fall took place at the bottom due to fire?
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Physical evidence provides tangible and concrete proof that can be objectively examined and evaluated. It serves as a reliable source of information that is not influenced by our psychological biases ( you have them)
Physical evidence can include things like documents, photographs, videos, or any other form of material evidence that supports or contradicts a particular claim or official narrative.
Unlike debunkers, who may rely solely on subjective opinions or anecdotal evidence, I use physical evidence to support my case.
The steel columns play a critical role in distributing the weight and loads of the building evenly. The columns on the east side and west side are strategically placed to provide maximum support and balance.
Here is the layout of building seven steel structure..
In the second screenshot, it is demonstrated why freefall is an important feature of this collapse. Freefall occurs when the entire steel core, spanning from east to west, collapses fully. There is no resistance from steel columns. This absence of steel columns is crucial for the occurrence of freefall.n order for freefall to occur, it is crucial that all the steel cores marked with a green "x" are removed to create a clear path for the upper section to pass through. This ensures a smooth and unobstructed descent.
It is important to reiterate that this account is not an opinion or view, but a factual representation of what actually happened to Building Seven on September 11, 2001.
In conclusion, the NIST modeling reveals the presence of internal collapse on the east side of the building, while stages of collapse continue to occur on the west side. This finding highlights the omission of freefall in the original analysis. If the x columns in the blue area are not fully collapsed, then it is impossible for the NIST version to be true.
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Dr. Hulsey's modeling, if the collapse were to occur as NIST stated, the building would have toppled over to the left. This finding, although met with skepticism by idiots at Metabunk. It was earlier reproduced by another independent group, lending further credibility to Dr. Hulsey's finite modeling
The removal of support at the upper portions would result in significant window breakage and wall deformation before the start of the final collapse..
What actually happened is
eight floors fully collapsed below what not visible on the video, leading to the upper section coming through the now-open space at the bottom at freefall acceleration. The video here does not provide any evidence or support for a progressive collapse occurring in various directions over a prolonged period of time.
NIST denied the existence of any noise from inside building seven ( another lie)
The presence of a loud bang ( 1 second of video) raises questions about the official narrative. While critics argue that this noise supports the theory of a structural collapse, alternative explanations and further investigation are necessary to reach a conclusive understanding of the events captured in the video
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Isnt Waffle the Real Actuial Video" has been regarded as significant physical evidence of a particular incident. In the past, both Dohnjoe and Kingmob have made claims about the occurrence, suggesting that the entire interior was gutted out before the end collapse occurred. The question arises: where exactly did this event take place on the west side? It is crucial to pinpoint the location in order to further investigate and verify the claims made.
This separation between the columns and the walls is a critical event that often precedes the ultimate collapse of a building. The penthouse has fallen, and there should be no excuses. It is necessary to determine the location of the gutting happening in the upper section. Of course, I know you guys will ignore that issue here.
The lack of clarity, inconsistent explanations, and contradictory findings within their published works raise doubts about their comprehension of the underlying principles.
Like i said.
One of the claims made by NIST suggests that the entire interior of the building collapsed before the actual collapse occurred. Theory debunkers like Dohnjoe and Kingmob support.However, many find it difficult to comprehend how the interior of the building could collapse entirely before the overall collapse took place. Never discussed on here why the west side looks intact if so?
Final claim. Another claim put forward by NIST is that the collapse of the building happened in stages, starting from the bottom. This theory suggests that the lower levels of the building gave way first over longer period of time, leading to a cascading effect that ultimately caused the entire structure to collapse.
Right in the final one, but there deliberately hiding the fact that didnt happen in a slower stage at all. NIST model is not a faithful depiction of the events that occurred. This alignment between the model and the real-life footage lends credibility to the accuracy and reliability
The building in the second screenshot is clearly in the process of collapsing. It is important to note that the concept of freefall does not apply in this situation due to the presence of a significant amount of steel obstructing the path in the NIST model. The black area represents the area where the steel is still intact and preventing a complete freefall. Therefore, it can be concluded that the building in the NIST model is not experiencing freefall as there are structural elements in place that hinder such a scenario.
0
