911 What do you think?

Question

Did you know, for instance, that never before in the history of the world has a steel building collapsed due to fire? Yet on 9-11, three of them did just that in seven hours – with WTC 7 not even being hit by an airliner.

Furthermore, it takes a temperature of 2,795 degrees to melt construction grade steel, yet the highest temperature jet fuel can reach is 1,517 degrees. Plus, all the jet fuel burned off within two minutes of the towers being struck, while two independent studies proved that the fires within each tower never rose above 500-600 degrees. In fact, FEMA revealed in their final report that, “The heat produced by burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapse.”

Also, the WTC towers were designed to withstand the impact from a Boeing 707 (similar to a Boeing 767), and each floor was designed to hold 2,600,000 pounds beyond its own weight. Likewise, the steel used in these structures was rated to hold five-times its normal load. MIT professor Thomas Eager admitted as much when declaring, “The impact of the airplanes would have been insignificant” in toppling the towers.

Also, how do we explain the pools of molten steel which were found bubbling 70 feet beneath the towers five weeks after 9-11? Incidentally, a temperature of 5,182 degrees is needed to transform steel into a liquefied state. Do you think fires that FEMA admitted “would have burned at, or below, temperatures typical in office fires” could have produced such extremes? Even NYFD audiotapes of firefighters who reached the South tower’s impact point reveal that they “judged the blazes to be manageable” and were easily extinguishable in less than an hour.

Even more interesting is the South Tower. Even though it experienced a less forceful hit than the North Tower and had smaller fires, it fell in only half the time of its counterpart (56 minutes). It takes five-times that long to cook a turkey! Plus, the South Tower’s cap, which initially tipped 23 degrees past vertical, suddenly reversed direction, then dropped vertically, defying Newton’s First Law of Motion.

Most incriminating, though, is the resistance-free speed (a mere 10 seconds) at which the towers collapsed. To put this matter into perspective, if you were standing atop the WTC towers, and at the precise moment when they began to fall you dropped a football over the side, you and the football would have hit the ground at nearly the exact same moment. In other words, 200,000 tons of steel, 425,000 cubic yards of concrete, and all the walls, desks and floors provided no resistance whatsoever. Not only does such a collapse defy Galileo’s Law of Falling Bodies, it is physically impossible unless all resistance was removed via a controlled demolition.
Of course there’s more (seismographic data, the ridiculous pancake & truss-bolt theories, and the complete vaporization of nearly all the concrete into a fine microscopic dust),

Answer 1

I think we are missing too may peices to the puzzle.

Answer 2

okay, little engineering lesson for you. structural steel is sized based upon a 1/3 or 1/5 ultimate strength (depending upon the building code used). ultimate strength is the point of failure. steel weakens when heated, otherwise blacksmiths could not work it. when heated to 1,000 degrees the metal has lost approximately 90% of it's strength but hasn't melted. so even a few hundred degrees could cause failure.
now, the planes struck around the 90th floor which means there's still a fairly large building sitting above the fire. when the steel reached failure, the columns collapsed and dropped a 20 story building (more or less) on to the floor. the floor wasn't designed for that type of impact loading and ,in turn, failed. In this type of construction the walls are not designed to handle load because the steel super structure is supposed to do that. Therefore, one floor collapses on to the one below, impact loading the floor and columns to well beyond their structural limits and then that floor fails and so on until near free fall speed due to the mass above.
Now, if you want to consider something the government may have had a direct hand in, checkout the pentagon. I have yet to see any pictures that show where the plane is actually penetrating the building. Even the hole shown in pictures less than one hour after the "attack" isn't big enough to have been made by a large jet.
I believe the towers falling is just what it appeared to be, however, I think GWB and his minions upped the ante by staging an assault on the newly renovated section of the pentagon.

Answer 3

You are a complete idiot to believe the crap you hear. All of the stuff you have mentioned has been debunked numerous times, yet complete morons like you continousely state these "facts" which hold absolutely no water.

Answer 4

Read the engineer reports and you might understand unless you are so convinced that facts do not have any impact on your reasoning. Sort of like "I know what I know and don't confuse me with facts."

Answer 5

I can bet you a wad, that you're gonna find lots of bush loving nuts, calling these facts "conspiracy theories."

Answer 6

Anyone who looks at the evidence and facts, will without a doubt come to the same conclusion as you. I believe Bush, Cheny, Pnac, were all implicit in 911, to further their own agenda, as well as all of Bush's cabinet, Impeach, charge with war crimes, and execute the whole lot of them.....

Answer 7

It was we British, to get you back for tipping our tea in to Boston Harbour. Don't do it again.

Answer 8

I agree.......the liberals attacked the towers to undermine GWB

Answer 9

How many times do we have to go through this? There was no freakin conspiracy.

Answer 10

that was some question - id put my bets on terrorist, Why would ther eb a conspiracy who would gain?