How do two airplanes destroy two giant skyscrapers, such as the way the WTC towers were supposedly destroyed?

Question

This is really a question you have to ask yourself. The official story behind the 9/11 attacks is that fire caused the collapse of both World Trade Center towers. However, the FDNY used thermal equipment that day to gauge the temperature of the fires in the WTC. The highest temperature recorded was around 1700 degrees farenheit. Steel melts at 3000 degrees farenheit, and both towers were constructed with a giant steel column running through the middle of the buildings, with smaller steel columns arrayed around the middle column. Jetfuel from the planes burns at a maximum of 2000 degrees (F). How then, did fire destroy those buildings? I would love for someone to explain it to me, because it is scientifically impossible. Add to that the reports from many people, including fire fighters, who were there that day, who said they heard bombs going off.

Answer 1

Those buildings were most probably rigged with explosives before the attacks, like WTC7 was rigged as owner Larry Sylverstein admitted to: See video below.

If you are looking for truth then let the evidence guide you. Here is some evidence that I have been able to gather from the internet: Here for your scrutiny. Also included is list of questions that I found necessary to research. They have helped me understand the character of our highest national leader.

The official government story is that 911 was orchestrated by Al Queda, which is lead by Osama bin Laden. The proof our government provided was a video with Osama confessing to the crime. The problem with the video is that the person in the video does not look like Osama bin Laden: see picture.
http://911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6oAeK1dlHs&feature=PlayList&p=5C9C5F5FB50EF496&index=9

There are many other factors that do not fit the official story. They include, secondary explosions that were seen, heard, reported, and recorded by firefighters, in and around the WTC buildings.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=firefighter+bombs+in+the+building
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEuDeU4IZjE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtBGKSZNWB4&feature=PlayList&p=5C9C5F5FB50EF496&index=7

Here is a video clip showing a trail of explosions just before the destruction wave.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_DkzhonpGY&mode=related&search=

Molten, beyond red hot, "steel" was video recorded coming out of the South Tower just before it collapsed. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to turn steel to liquid.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk&search=thermite

A chemical analysis of the solidified molten iron yeilded an explosive, called Thermate. Also, see picture of WTC beam possibly cut using a demolition cutting charge (Thermate) or perhaps cut by an Iron Workers torch during rescue operations. Click on pic. to enlarge.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

These factors point to a controled demolition of the buildings and thus an inside job. We also have a video recording, where owner Larry Silverstein, admits to demolishing WTC7.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329

There is also a problem with the Pentagon attack. Listen to this retired general, He says, "The Plane does not fit the hole."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VoUN-7RVU&eurl=

The New Conservatives (Neo-Cons). With the help of other friends, that were already in place, planned the invasion of Iraq. This plan included the attack of the WTC buildings. It did this to get the support of congress and the nation, to attack Iraq: Like another Pearl Harbor. Read it from their own PENAC document. Pay special attention to the section entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" page 50 and the top of page 51, where it states we need a new Pearl Harbor attack to get the ball rolling.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Now, I could stop here, but allow me to list and point out some interesting web sights that I have found. These will help one understand the character and background of our national leader.

I. What is this secret society called the "Skull and Bones"?
It's a group a satanic worshipers, whose members include G.W. Bush, his father G. H. Bush, his grandfather Prescott Bush and John Kerry. See list of members:
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/3/skullroster.htm

2.What is the "Skull and Bones" agenda ?
It's the "New World Order", "World Domination", "Globalization", and "World Slavery" all wrapped up into one.
http://www.answers.com/topic/skull-and-bones
http://tvnewslies.org/html/terrorism__globalism_and_consp.html

3. Has any "Skull and Bones" member ever tried to force their agenda, on the U.S.A.
Yes, Prescott Bush (G.W. Bush's grandfather) attempted to assasinate FDR and install Hitler's Nazi model to impose Marshal Law, on the United States.
http://iwilltryit.com/bushnazi1.htm
http://digital-falcon.com/pipermail/toxickemail_digital-falcon.com/2005-September/000497.html

4. Where did the "Skull and Bones" secret society originate from ?
It's believed to be an offshoot of the "Thule Society"; a secret Satanic group from Germany of which Hitler was a member of.
http://www.threeworldwars.com/world-war-2/adolf-hitler.htm

5. Finally, where did all this secret Satanic stuff come from and what is the originators long long term goal ?
This is where it gets too bizarre, I will give you a link, that seems to explain it best. It's crazy, but remember, science is now in the process of accepting a multidimensional universe. If nothing else, enjoy a good read.
http://www.illuminati-news.com/000-spiritual/html/how-to-fight-the-nwo.html

Answer 2

Are you listening? I will only say this once. The WTC was constructed of steel and concrete floors. when the planes hit the towers the took out the corners and the interior structure. The fuel while it did not melt the steal, it did however soften it. The weight of the building above the fired kept bearing down on the damaged areas and softened steal. Then it was a simple matter of collapse like a pancake. The WTC according to architects was a much lighter building than say the Empire state building which is concrete reinforced. What the fireman said was that it the floors collapsing sounded like bombs going off.

Answer 3

Well, it may take that heat to melt steel, but far less to structurally weaken it. If the steel were weakened and became pliable, it is entirely plausible for the massive weight of the top of the tower to shift causing millions of pounds of building to move and gain momentum to where the weakened structure could not sustain the pressure and snapped, causing a catastrophic structural failure. It is pure physics.

In regards to the "hearing bombs" comment. There are going to be extremely loud sounds from the collapse of a building this size. Very few people on the planet have ever heard what a real bomb sounds like. They hear a loud noise and immediately think bomb. A 60,000 pound steal section of building snapping in half is going to create a very very loud bang sound. An electric transformer exploding is going to "sound like a bomb." A floor pancaking onto the one below is going to "sound like a bomb" to someone who has never heard one (it will also expel debris and air out the windows in a massive rush of air pressure and may appear to be an explosion when it is not).

If you really watch videos of the collapses closely, you will not see a coordinated demolition. You will see the tower begin to crumble and debris fly in every direction. You will see large sections sheer off and other pieces pulverized into dust. It is not pretty and it is surely not a planned demolition.

Answer 4

This question was answered soon after the Towers were struck. But since you would rather feed conspiracy than allow the truth ( which doesn't include Bush blowing them up) Here is your answer ..... according to structural engineers, the towers collapsed not because of the impact but because of the heat generated by the fires, generated by burning aviation fuel, inside the buildings.
"Steel structures do not usually crumble because of an impact such as that of the planes which hit the towers,” said Mike Richardson, a San Francisco structural engineer.

Each tower was built with an inner steel framework and an outer steel framework, which supported the floors. The floors had been coated with a fire-retardant coating that was supposed to resist the heat of a fire for about three hours, Richardson explained.

“The hijacked planes were going coast to coast and were full of fuel. That (fuel) was the primary weapon in disabling the towers and eventually causing their destruction,” said Darell Lawver, structural engineer in Los Altos, California.

The fire-retardant coating could not withstand the heat of the fires because of its intensity. The fires were hot enough to go through the coating which in-turn caused a weakening of the inner framework.

“Steel melts at anywhere from 1000 to 2000 degrees,” said Earl Sanford, a steel manufacturer. According to news reports, the fires caused by the plane’s fuel produced temperatures well in excess of 2000 degrees.

Answer 5

Okay, so jet fuel burns at approx. 2,000 degrees, and the temperatures didn't really reach the levels needed to melt the steel supports of the towers.

But jet fuel also EXPLODES pretty well, too, and as a result you wound up with a fuel/air bomb detonating within the building at the impact sites (FYI: a fuel/air bomb can, if large enough, create much of the destruction normally associated with atomic weapons)....also, when those planes impacted, there was a HUGE transfer of kinetic energy into those buildings - more than enough to warp and weaken the external supports (and most likely to damage the internal support as well). Once weakened, the structural integrity of the building was greatly compromised.

It was only a matter of time, from that point, before the floors above the impact point would collapse downward, which would cause another huge structural load as the kinetic energy of the falling floors - at least 20-30 times that of the planes' impacts - was vented on the floors below.

The buildings just weren't able to take that sort of load, and collapsed as a result.

Answer 6

So now the planes have been nonexistant, each and all the video of them have been pretend, and each and all the attention witnesses employed by ability of the government to checklist a pretend tale? faster or later, one merely has to admit that the expert tale is merely much less demanding to describe. "hearth won't be in a position to melt metallic". it quite is have been given to be the oldest argument. Jet gas burns at 800° to 1500° F. in accordance to an quite expert, senior engineer Farid Alfawakhiri of the yankee Institute of metallic shape, "metallic loses approximately 50 p.c. of its capability at 1100° F. And at 1800° that's probable at decrease than 10 p.c.". The WTC became burning for a pair of million/2 an hour, build up warmth because it became contemplated back interior. Its very accessible to have faith that hearth might have weakened the metallic beams with out resorting to secret brokers planting explosives interior of. What might have prevented those explosives from going off earlier, via fact the development burned? Why have been there explosions interior the basement and elevators blown aside? via fact the rigidity front of the exploding jet liner traveled down the elevator shaft. I heard that from the hearth branch. That became one extensive fireball created by ability of the crashing airplane.

Answer 7

The steel didn't melt, the fires weakened and distorted it causing it to buckle and the floors to pancake down on top of one another.

From JOM, a technical journal devoted to exploring the many aspects of materials science and engineering:

It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.

Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down.

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.



http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

Answer 8

check out the popular mechanics explanation. it is based on good science. those planes brought those buildings down. a better question would be, why were they allowed to hit the buildings in the first place? why were the hijackers allowed into the u.s. without proper documentation? why did the cia and the fbi fail to act on warnings from abroad?
by the way, how were temperatures tested in the twenty minutes before the buildings fell? where did you get this info from? I don't think anyone from the fdny made it to the fire floors then lived to tell the tale, so how were temperatures recorded
the steel did not have to melt for the buildings to come down. structural integrity was compromised by the extreme heat and pressure
as to scientifically impossible, make sure you are referring to scientific processes and analyses before making your judgment

Answer 9

What exactly are you insinuating?
I'd suggest checking your numbers--steel melts around 2,500 degrees F. A basic understanding of physics will account for the discrepency of 500 degrees F (PV=nRT and formulae containing q, P, & V). And, if you've ever seen something with a combustion engine, it will have explosions after it has caught on fire.

Answer 10

I can't answer everything, but I think I can provide a few logical answers to some of your questions. In regards to "they heard bombs going off" a fuel tank full of jet fuel and fumes might explode... like a bomb.

Have you ever heard of a grain silo exploding? It happens. All you need is a spark and dust particles. Combustion reactions are very complicated, with many reaction steps involving reactive free radicals. Silo explosions are normally triggered by a spark or a naked flame (cigarette, petrol or diesel motor, clash of metals, electric spark.) Grain dust, like grain, does not start burning easily. But once a reaction gets started, the fine state of division of the dust, and the fact that it is well mixed with air, provides conditions for an explosive continuation of the reaction. The large surface area of the dust provides a catalyst surface for many of the free radical reactions, enabling them to go more rapidly and efficiently than they do in the gas phase. There is a rapid build-up of the total number of reactive free radicals, so that the overall combustion reaction accelerates out of control. It is possible that this happened to the WTC towers.

Its scientifically possible.

Answer 11

In addition to all the good points made, especially Jersey Girl, remember the towers didn't fall down isntantly. They were under extreme duress for upwards of an hour. That seems like sufficient time for the steel to warp under those conditions.