9/11 question?

Question

Why is it so hard for people to understand that no building, let alone a steel framed building, can collapse at free fall speed (i.e. maximum gravitational pull) without the help of explosives? PERIOD!

Free fall speed is the maximum speed an object falls from a given point to the earth given that there is no additional energy added to the object and there is nothing between the object and the earth.

In the case of the towers and building 7, between the top of the building and the ground there is AN ENTIRE BUILDING in the way. So what does this mean? This means that the time that it takes for the top of the building to reach the ground must NECESSARALLY be MUCH slower than free fall speed UNLESS the structure below was moved out of the way as the top came down. And the only way the structure below could have been moved out of the way as the building came down was with ADDED ENERGY, i.e. EXPLOSIVES.

This rule applies to the ENTIRE UNIVERSE and one need not know a damned thing about structural engendering or fire or the melting point of steel to be able to apply this rule.

If you can’t understand that, I suggest you bush up on your high school physics.

9/11 was an inside job.

.................................

Yes, big_John, sneaking into and planting bombs inside WTC 7, which held offices of the SEC IRS FBI and CIA and was therefore one of the most heavily guarded buildings in the US, was so easy that even a Saudi caveman could do it.

Answer 1

Becareful you might get branded as a traitor by the necons for such a question. Pity the fools!

P.s. Don't expect very intelligent replies such as the guy above me.

Answer 2

Frame by frame calculations have shown it is not actual free fall although it is pretty close to it. Almost speed free fall is not same as free fall speed and lot of claims come from eye ball estimate. Just as 55mph is not same as 60mph. Plus there are footages showing things falling faster than building collapse right along side. People who did this calculation didn't just eye ball it like so many who claim it is 'pretty much free fall.'


Not to mention absence of sweeping exlosions you see prior to collapse. Nobody saw sweeping flashes all over building like you see in all other demolitions. Other than few isolated ones that can be anything from electricals, equipments...etc.


Plus it doesn't even make sense why one would demolish WTC7 so many hours after attack when it would provide much better cover while Twin Towers were going down spewing thick dust every where. But they say 'oh wait, lets wait till every thing clear up so everybody can see our secret plan to bring it down.' And 'let's tell everybody about it on TV.'
That's inside job?

Decision to demolish building can't be made on one afternoon. Smaller buildings require months of preparations. Do quick research on it see how long it takes to prepare one for demolition.

And you're right buildings don't go down at speed of free fall and WTC didn't.

So you're skeptic of 'official story', but other guys are right 100%? What makes these others guys so special you worship their claims?

Ever wonder why people make so much money off get rich quick, lose fat quick schemes?

Answer 3

Wrong. always wrong.


What really makes this argument absurd is the amount of explosives needed to turn that much concrete into dust. (We are only talking about 10% of the total concrete in the building anyway. There was a massive amount of gypsum as well, which conspiracy theorists would like you to forget.) The argument is the pyroclastic flow (which there is no evidence of) was created by explosives. (Some have suggested an absurd amount of thermite) If the incredible amount of POTENTIAL ENERGY (Energy the building had just standing there due to the stored energy of lifting the steel into place.) which converted to Kinetic energy (as it collapsed) is not enough to create the dust cloud, then the assumption is explosives must have created it. How much? And why would they overload the building with powerful explosives? Why put more than would be needed to cut the steel? Why put enough to cut the steel AND create a pyro show? As you can see above, the collapse released enough energy to equal 272 TONS of TNT. Why wouldn't this amount of energy be enough to cut the steel connections AND create some dust as the floors impacted each other 110 times per building?

More on the pulverization of concrete

Another absurd straw man is that they say Greening is saying the collapse weakened the steel. Nowhere in Greening's paper does it say the collapse "weakened" the steel. The massive potential energy converted to kinetic energy in the collapse and was MORE than enough to destroy the connections. No "weakening" of steel needed. The only weakening was on the fire floors which had its fireproofing blown off. This has NOTHING to do with Greening's paper.

Do the conspiracy theorist leaders have one shred of REAL evidence of explosives or anything else which could take down the buildings? Air samples with trace explosive chemicals in it? A memo like the downing street memo? A whistleblower who was in on the planning maybe? None of that involves the so called "whisked away steel". They have nothing. They're left to scour the internet for the slightest mistake made by anyone on that horrific, chaotic day. They're left destroying peoples lives by suggesting innocent people are involved in mass murders.

Answer 4

Republicans did not spend a penny investigating Clinton. Ken Starr was once named a unique prosecutor, after Janet Reno requested the 3 pass judgement on panel to nominate him in 1994 At the time, there was once a democratic majority within the House and Senate. two. Once appointed, the one character who might get rid of Ken Starr as unique prosecutor, was once the Attorney General, janet reno. three. The FBI was once the lead company for the nine/eleven research, with aid from all different executive organizations. The fee of that research was once nearly one thousand million bucks. Your complicated the nine/eleven committee, which wasn';t there to determine nine/eleven, however to make ideas on how one can hinder a further nine/eleven

Answer 5

this is true, yet in no way shape or form proves that it was an inside job. they were good enough to get guys in aviation school, highjack several planes at once, hide their guys in the united states by smuggling them in through the canadian border yet we do not think that they could have possibly planted explosives in the WTC. there is an old phrase that is taught in most high school physics classes, "the simplest answer is usually the correct one." yet you seem to be able to make wild leaps of reason on this issue. if there were explosives it had to be an inside job. what!!!!that makes no sense. would it have been possible for them get people inside the WTC just in case the planes didnt bring the place down? would it have been possible for those people to have set off explosives while inside if the ploanes didnt bring the place down? of course not. o wait YES IT IS!!! when you talk about physics you are talking about the truest use of logic and reason. if you follow the logic train the terrorist planned ahead for all possibilities. check bin ladens track record, he ties up all loose ends.

Answer 6

It was an inside job, Aliens came down and disguised there ships as airplanes, then they recruited Elvis and Big foot to fly them into the W.T.C. It was an inside job because Hitler is actually still alive, living in an underground bunker in Utah and is the head of the New World Order that is planning the destruction of the United States.

In reality the jet fuel was on fire and ran down the ventilation and elevator shafts, this weekend the floors on the bottom and caused the tower to fall with less resistance. The W.T.C. towers were unique in design. They used a light steel exoskeleton for support instead of the traditional block heavy steel girder construction most buildings have. This allowed the inside of the building to be more open, it also allowed the fire to consume entire floors and that helped to weaken the building.

Popular mechanics dedicated an entire issue to it, consulting physicist, architects, builders, and engineers. Maybe you should read it before you make a complete fool of yourself.

Answer 7

You have to understand how the building was built. The only thing that supported the steel beams were the floor joices. It was a new thing in construction when the towers were built. It was the impact of the plane that took the buildings down but the heat of the fire created by their fuel. (the tanks were a little over half when they hit i think. Dry wall is fire resistant but grows weak under intense heat. The drywall buckled and the floor joices just started crashing down one on top of the other. The weight of the first knocking down the other. All the building needed was one floor to fall, then the whole buildins goes. After all the floor joices fell there was nothing to hold up the frame so it caved in.

Answer 8

Any questions, that I had about this? Was answered when I saw the Documentary, "Inside 9/11". It clearly showed how the Buildings were able to come down. I'm not an Expert of physics, Energy and all of that stuff? But, I really don't like anyone accusing Americans, of doing this. Without checking out all of the facts. I hope this doesn't offend you. But that it causes you to check out everything about that dreadful day.

Answer 9

Go back to high school were you there or watching it on TV fool?? It was not an inside job to suggest that is actually criminal. How stupid can you be?? Watch the footage again idiot and then come back and talk stupid. Ive seen the footage I watched our people holding hands and jumping. I watched two of our planes slam into the towers. I watched our President cry along with the rest of our Nation. Stop being an *** and bashing the man and our Military the very people that give you the rights to speak freely and as stupidly as you do. Keep your opinions to yourself we dont want to hear them. We are at War if you havent noticed things are hard enough we dont need to hear your stupid Left Winged Crap anymore. Come back when you have some hard evidence other wise keep your crap to yourself.

Answer 10

You need to back away from the microwave. The only reason you clowns are trying to create a conspiracy theory is because President Bush was in office at the time. Nice try.

Answer 11

Your not understanding Physics.....try this...take a 10 ton slab of concrete..raise it up 10 feet...drop it and time it....next..raise it up again...this time stand under it and drop it..see i f you can slow it down....when/if you get out of the hospital then maybe you will understand the upper floors had so much weight that it pulverized the supports below...I have the greatest source....I WAS THERE...I am a retired NYC Paramedic...I lost a Brother-In-Law and a best friend that day.
You conspiracy cases INSULT their memories with this trash...