Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions?

Question

 



Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:
1.
Extremely rapid onset of “collapse”
2.
Sounds of explosions at plane impact zone — a full second prior to collapse (heard by 118 first responders as well as by media reporters)
3.
Observations of flashes (seen by numerous professionals)
4.
Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos
5.
Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust
6.
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
7.
Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves
8.
Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance
9.
1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint
10.
Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away

By the way I realy hope it just a freak thing but some thing do not match up?
what do you think?

Member since: 25 June 2006
Total points: 1,653 (Level 3)
Points earned this week:
--% Best answer

big-brother
0 Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

despite the answer that "somebody else" gave, gasoline burns at a much higher temperature than jet fuel, which is comprised mostly of kerosene.

And no jet fuel cannot burn hot enough to melt steel.Well, to begin, construction-grade steel melts at 2795 degrees Fahrenheit. That’s a proven fact, as can be seen from the website: http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements... . Meanwhile, according to a BBC report on September 13, 2001 entitled How the World Trade Center Fell, the WTC steel cores reached a temperature of 1472 degrees Fahrenheit, which, coincidentally, is the maximum temperature of jet fuel, but nowhere near the 2795 degrees needed to melt steel.

Fire has never caused a steel building to collapse.” Ever! In the history of the world, fire has never caused a steel building to collapse, yet on the morning of 9-11, Thr

Answer 1

This has been debunked over and over. The heat of the burning jet fuel, coupled with the raging fires and massive structural damage caused by the planes hitting the towers weakened the load-bearing outer steel frame. The weight of the tower above on this weakened frame caused the frame to buckle and fall.

The speed of the fall was down to rising momentum as each floor impacted upon the next, faster and faster. The 'squibs' seen are dust particles forced out by the approaching floors bearing down - air was forced outwards because it had nowhere else to go.

The force of thousands of tons of concrete and steel coming down at speed caused most of it to be pulverised, as was visible at the time.

Nobody expected the towers to come down the way they did. The South Tower came down first because the impact was lower down the tower, so the weight pressing down on the damaged area was greater, speeding up the process and causing it to collapse first.

It looked incredible, but that doesn't make it down to explosives. There was no opportunity for anyone to rig explosives to bring two buildings like that down. It's a major undertaking. Go watch how a building is rigged with explosives, and you will see that it cannot have happened in a busy working building like the WTC.

*edit* Here we go...

The jet fuel didn't need to melt the steel, only weaken it. Don't forget the massive structural damage that had already been done by a plane smashing into the building at full throttle, and the subsequent massive explosion that followed.

Answer 2

I agree with you. A plane crash will not cause a building to explode and completely collapse. The way it collapsed totally looked like something was set up in the buildings.

Answer 3

So what is your question ? Two planes hit two buildings, planes explode, buildings fall down.

Answer 4

Wow you got it! Amazing

Answer 5

I think that I saw a plane hit it. Dumb ****.

Answer 6

OMG