>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^jwray:
Also, the gravitational energy released by the collapse could put a shitload more heat into things that were already really hot.

I, for one, am very unsure on this idea that the gravitational potential energy of bricks falling a maximum of 800m (the very very top bricks only) are a source of major internal heating in a building collapse.
Random thought experiment - if i dropped 50 kg of wood from 800m, that's a lot of gravitational potential energy. Would it set on fire, then, on impact with the ground?



17.4 degrees C for iron dropped 800m in a vacuum. More or less for other things depending on their specific heat capacity and the exact configuration of the collapse. Things that get a lot of shit falling on top of them may get a 10-100 times larger share of the energy than the average depending on the parameters of all the materials (if you drop a hard thing onto mush, the mush absorbs most of the impact).

Also, imstellar, 99.9% of all legitimate scientists don't support the "WTC was an inside job done with thermite" hypothesis. For one, it violates occam's razor. The planes alone were enough. A lot of people actually DIED on those planes and were never heard from again. Plus there is VIDEO of the planes crashing into the buildings.

>> ^imstellar28:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/guymontage" title="member since July 18th, 2009" class="profilelink">guymontage
Who said you have to be an engineer? What I said is I very much doubt anyone in this thread is qualified to comment on the consequences of a plane hitting a skyscraper. To think you can just waltz in here and quote "Inertia" because you heard it in 8th grade science class is just ridiculous.
What argument is rcyhan making? The guy in the experiment started with the hypothesis "thermite can cut steel" and then conducted an experiment and proved that yes, it can cut steel. What is not scientific about that? As far as I understand it, that is the exact implementation of the scientific method. The fact that the conclusion is "widely known" (rychans words) has no bearing on this video. Clearly, it is not "widely known" if a mainstream television show is conducting experiments and concludes that thermite can not, in fact, cut steel.
Everyone on the internet thinks they are an expert, but who in this thread even has a college degree much less one in civil engineering? Even if someone has a degree in civil engineering who has the experience with skyscrapers or even the particular design of this tower? It's retarded to think anyone here is anything even resembling an expert on the physics of this particular situation.


My physics went up to a minor on my undergraduate degree. Even in high school though the potential energy of millions of tonnes of concrete at a certain height is already taught. That is more energy than any bomb or load of jet fuel anyone can get their hands on, and it's all rigged to unload itself straight down.

The truther that are idiots are the ones insisting that the planes weren't the cause of the collapse. If you distrust and loath the government enough to believe they were behind the attacks, if you are a rational, scientific person you will conclude that the government organized the plane crashes to take out the towers. All the insistence that was merely a cover for explosives already planted inside is insanity. If the government wanted to commit the act, they would just plant the explosives and set them off. It wouldn't have even been the first time terrorists tried to use explosives to collapse the buildings. The ONLY thing adding the planes into the mix would do is make it infinitely more prone to failure and discovery.

Then you have the unscientific beliefs that people trumpet as reasons they believe the towers were rigged beforehand:
-Jet fuel can't melt steel! Meanwhile commercial steel furnaces are widely sold that are designed to do exactly that.
-The buildings collapsed at near free fall speed, no resistance! Go see the explosives free building demolition video here on the sift. Same speed of collapse, with just the upper supports pulled out by some cranes outside.
-Everyone knows the planes couldn't have been enough to collapse the buildings! Meanwhile, 10's of thousands of engineers the world over didn't bat an eye at the finding that the fires could cause the collapse. That's a lot of professionals in on the conspiracy.
-Blocking investigation of the real story! Meanwhile google scholar is filled with endless numbers of publicly available journal articles that speak to every loony idea the conspiracy crowd can throw out there.

If you believe the government worked with someone to crash planes into the towers that's one thing. If you believe the whole idea that the planes couldn't possibly have caused the collapse and the government must have wired it with explosives before hand, you believe something idiotic and need your head shaken.

>> ^jwray:

Also, the gravitational energy released by the collapse could put a shitload more heat into things that were already really hot.


I, for one, am very unsure on this idea that the gravitational potential energy of bricks falling a maximum of 800m (the very very top bricks only) are a source of major internal heating in a building collapse.

Random thought experiment - if i dropped 50 kg of wood from 800m, that's a lot of gravitational potential energy. Would it set on fire, then, on impact with the ground?

"There were a lot of firsts for the WTC. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been hit with a plane traveling 500 miles an hour and had its fire proofing removed from its trusses. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever had its steel columns which hold lateral load sheared off by a 767. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been a building which had its vertical load bearing columns in its core removed by an airliner. For Building 7, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been left for 6-7 hours with its bottom floors on fire with structural damage from another building collapse."

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

>> ^Duckman33:

I see the third steel structure building ever in history to collapse from a fire. 3 buildings in one day, but has never happened before in history. Wonder what the odds of that happening are?

So you're claiming a monopoly on reasonable explanations? If the explanations would stand to reason, then why does it take FOIA lawsuits to obtain video? Why is any information about the building collapses withheld at all? I'm not a supporter of many alternative theories, but I know that the first version of history never survives.
>> ^MaxWilder:

It's just these wacko conspiracy theorists that seem to be making up their own facts and ignoring perfectly reasonable explanations that piss me off.

Derren Brown said it best: "Extra ordinary statements require extra ordinary proof to back it up."

Showing this guy built steel box cutters (which were impressive) to show how to make cuts, isn't extraordinary enough to prove that the US government took down their own buildings. You still need to find the answers to this things like: Why? How? When did they set it up? And if they're so logistically sound to plant explosives in three buildings and make it look like a terror attack, then why couldn't they plan a strategy for Iraq that matched it?

Jinx said it best: "Plane hit building. Building collapse."

Until someone recreates a Skyscraper in the desert, built the same way the WTC and flies a plane into it, and it doesn't fall. You're not going to convince people that it wasn't an inside job =\

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...


You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.

Who's trolling?
The two primary civilian uses of thermite are welding and pyrotechnics. Right?
The WTC towers were steel framed structures. Right?
How is thermite residue entirely unexpected in the rubble when the towers collapsed?

http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
Enjoy.

Not particularly enjoyable. Their method for collecting dust was to request dust samples from private individuals years after the collapse? Then they, without explanation, decided to analyze the 4 samples that appeared to have unidentified red chips in them. Oh, and did I mention no effort or explanation for methods of verifying or confirming the origins of the samples save the word of the individuals. Right, some real hard science there. It's worth noting that such gross errors don't normally pass peer review teams, luckily for your crew, the journal they published in is known for peer reviewing anything that passes the $800 submission fee 'test'.
Here's a serious analysis, from PubMed, of the WTC dust. They thoroughly analyze the dust, and they collected it themselves, before it was cleaned up. They also released their findings publicly, years before your crew of committed truthers even requested samples from private individuals.


First, what the fuck is your problem with me? Did I do something to you to piss you off? Secondly, they aren't "my crew". I simply Googled for the information and provided a document link. You seem to have some kind of obsession with making people who don't believe the "official story" look like idiots for some reason. Do you have issues with people who don't believe everything they are told? I'm sorry but the "official explanation" is not very believable to me. If you don't like it, tough shit. Think what you want. Just don't try to make me look like a fucking moron because I have a differing opinion. Which, the last time I checked was MY PREROGATIVE.

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...


You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.

Who's trolling?
The two primary civilian uses of thermite are welding and pyrotechnics. Right?
The WTC towers were steel framed structures. Right?
How is thermite residue entirely unexpected in the rubble when the towers collapsed?

http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
Enjoy.


Not particularly enjoyable. Their method for collecting dust was to request dust samples from private individuals years after the collapse? Then they, without explanation, decided to analyze the 4 samples that appeared to have unidentified red chips in them. Oh, and did I mention no effort or explanation for methods of verifying or confirming the origins of the samples save the word of the individuals. Right, some real hard science there. It's worth noting that such gross errors don't normally pass peer review teams, luckily for your crew, the journal they published in is known for peer reviewing anything that passes the $800 submission fee 'test'.

Here's a serious analysis, from PubMed, of the WTC dust. They thoroughly analyze the dust, and they collected it themselves, before it was cleaned up. They also released their findings publicly, years before your crew of committed truthers even requested samples from private individuals.

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...


You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.

Who's trolling?
The two primary civilian uses of thermite are welding and pyrotechnics. Right?
The WTC towers were steel framed structures. Right?
How is thermite residue entirely unexpected in the rubble when the towers collapsed?


http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

Enjoy.

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^bcglorf:
You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...


You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.


Who's trolling?

The two primary civilian uses of thermite are welding and pyrotechnics. Right?
The WTC towers were steel framed structures. Right?

How is thermite residue entirely unexpected in the rubble when the towers collapsed?

>> ^bcglorf:

You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...



You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.

You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33


Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.


Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.

The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

>> ^Jinx:

Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.


No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.