Not trying to start conspiracy shit...

>tiny debris
The collapse partially mushroomed as the tower fell and entire section of building dropped into WTC7. You can watch it happen plain as day in the right video. WTC7 twoofers are the dumbest of the dumb. Same type of retards that expect a perfect plane outline to have been cut into the Pentagon like the physics of a Looney Tunes cartoon. Consider sterilization.

>supporting a government which isn't shy about wanting to replace and kill you

Why did the impact of 2 planes hitting the towers knock down a building across the street 100 feet away (building 7)

I remember on that day, my kike techer Cohen walked in, saw that i was looking at the news on CNN.com, and she was like

>oh my god i have familly in those buildings.

she ran out. came back ten minutes later. her relatives were safe. did not show up to work that day.

Attached: _88634010_moot_getty.jpg (976x549, 51K)

>designed to withstand a 707

Based on what

>Two thousand and nineteen years after our saviour Jesus Christ
>just now figuring out that jet fuel can’t melt steel beams

Go watch 911missinglinks

Attached: D242EC87-DA92-4CCD-BE9D-A959CA0A313E.jpg (420x146, 13K)

engineering modeling done at the time of construction. not the same as testing, but modeling is widely accepted as 'covering ones ass"

the elevator shaft essentially made the building into a blast furnace.
Steel becomes as flexible as cooked spaghetti well before it reaches melting point.
Although I will agree that it's a psyop and there was definitively controlled detonation involved.

>I never played Jenga once but I did play with sandcastles so my entire concept of physics is based on sand so the WTC fell in a neat pile like just sand so WTC7 must have been rigged to explode it's the only explanation.
Don't breed.

seems like something where the engineers did the math on the structural damage done by an object of that size, not the additional variables like the fire proofing being blown off the load-bearing structures or the ensuing fires reducing the exposed frame's structural integrity.

"Conspiracy" is just a cheap way to discredit dissenting opinion.

The lying government explanation is that the foam was improperly applied and aged.

the israel "art students" did it. everyone knows that by now

Attached: 1549899705372.jpg (998x1024, 161K)

The Israeli theory is lame, if they wanted to drag us into war they'd made sure Iran was blamed for the attack, what possible interests does Israel have in us invading Waziristan?

>an office building located on one of the busiest streets in the world is built with the same structural integrity as a stack of wooden blocks

Don't even try to redpill them. They are just too dumb. If they don't know their are people who have an absolute self-interest in lying to them regarding the most significant attack on American soil ever, then they are just dumb and need to starve to death in some commie shitholle.

Here's a crazy conspiracy for you:

What if the buildings weren't really capable of surviving a 707 crash?

Oh no, must have been 2 remote control planes and 100,000 crisis actors and several thousand people planting bombs in the busiest buildings in the world plus a worldwide coverup of all governments involving thousands of more people of which not a single one has ever said anything about the controlled demolition. Yes, that must be it. Occam be damned.

>I don't understand what analogies are and actually think they are 1:1 comparisons

Google "CitiCorp Center" to understand how easily architects fuck up.

because SADM
youtube.com/watch?v=gxC_8Kuagcw

Occam's razor doesn't apply in a one-world globohomo dystopia run by satanic rejects of the priesthood of Thoth

Attached: rothschild.jpg (500x375, 41K)

there are one of you every time this comes up, without fail
"it wasnt designed to take a plane that big, NORAD were on a training OP" blah blah blah...fuck off.
>tfw they respond
I already closed the tab

You can watch...
> doesnt provide proof.

Not even a screen cap of massive chunk flying blocks away. I digress
Buildings fell directly into their own block without doing a lumberjack dive to any one side. What are the odds that a precariously balanced and allegedly earthquake proofed building which had been immolated from within crumbles like that. Astronomical. Especially considering the relatively cold steel beam at the bottom floors below the fire Those beams all must have been precisely the same temperature and crumpled perfectly at every single rivwt junction going up its central elevator shafts. Not that you can simulate any of that in a computer lab model without having serious red flags.

The plane would have had to of done a stunt more severe than skyking to hit the angle perfect.

In the end it was the kickstarter of kikes in yuris revenge. Anyone with command and conquer experience recognizes how this psychological domination of civilians was foreshadowed in a deus ex theatre of war scripted in reverse and executed with all the right moves in all the right places by these old american families of power brokerage who own the land by engaging in templar masons banking while in bed with rothschilds. The kingdome was an inside job just like the superbowl black out. Cia disinfo is rampant in all sectors of the economy

America hasnt been run by true free folk since the turn of the 20th century faux news began its moon man missions in the apollos theatre to set the stage for an aquarian revolution and biblical war of epoch proportions

even if all the steel was just piled up with zero fixing bolts etc "like a jenga tower" theres no way both steel pile's would fall down the exact same way.

newtons third law. Broken not once not even twice but THREE times that day.

>its a miracle

an entire floor would get pancaked, then another, then another. thats why it fell straight down.

in under 9 seconds hahahahha

three buildings falling in under 9 seconds each.

>what are the odds?

talk about moving goal posts.

Did you forget that they used it to attack Iraq as well?

>there are one of you every time this comes up, without fail

Because it's the truth, and there's always one moron like you with no argument doing nothing but casting aspersions.

Who do you think that convinces?

Cool. How do you explain the presence of molten steel with the pancake theory? Or the presence of thermite? Or the fact that there is footage of huge steel supports turning to dust? How do you explain that?

How does the pancake collapse pertain to Building 7, which was constructed in a different manner to the towers and wasn't on fire to the same extent, but still suffered much the same fate.

>The collapse partially mushroomed
There was an ambulance parked under one of the towers, there was no damage to it, only dust scattered everywhere. The official narrative was that the towers literally vaporized/dustified before hitting the ground, nearly 3/4s of the debris is gone, nothing but POWDER.

>Not trying to start conspiracy shit,

Attached: tom1.jpg (419x480, 123K)

>Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams.
But it melts aluminum
Planes are made of aluminum
Aluminum + steel = thermite
Thermite melts steel beams

i mean i disnt want this to turn into a steel beams and jet fuel meme thread

>a perfect plane outline cut
Funny you should say that.

Attached: 9 111wut.jpg (800x300, 60K)

Shouldn't you be shilling novax like the other conspiratards atm?

Attached: 1536632314338s.jpg (220x229, 4K)

Interesting theory. Do you have any evidence for this? Are the Osama Bin Laden consipracy theorists admitting the existence of thermite on the scene now? Well, done, that only took nearly 19 years.

Nobody ever mentions Newton's Cradle when we are talking about Energy Sources. The energy from the impact traveled through the building, all the way to the basement and release the energy there.

Attached: kinetic_light_newtons_cradle.gif (600x600, 425K)

911 report and their models were full of BS. The three towers were brought down by controlled demolition.
youtu.be/sNriYvuNmu8
youtu.be/l_Kmyo8KLTM

Http://www.ae911truth.org/
TRUMP knew Truth on 911

youtube.com/watch?v=gNodh9OlTrQ

youtube.com/watch?v=flnhdhxVR6g

youtube.com/watch?v=aoYXihwcp8c

youtube.com/watch?v=j-7bxI_XOoQ

The destruction of WTC was an occult ritual.
>the Twin Towers represented Boaz and Jachin, the columns at the entrance to the Temple of Solomon
>Boaz and Jachin represent the two key energies: ying and yang, male and female, strength and beauty, north and south, up and down (duality - like the Star of David)
>WTC builder, Rockefeller, says the buildings are the perfect combination of "utility and beauty"; he also owns Jerusalem museum housing remains from Temple of Solomon
>Luciferianism predicts/wants a new age of transhumanism; Kaballah and freemasonry believe one attains perfection by mastering and combining male and female energies
>Twin Towers destroyed in consciousness altering event at start of millenium to usher in this new era of transhumanism
>Replaced by Freedom Tower where both towers are combined, one up and one down, like a Star of David
>2001: Space Odyssey is about man's evolution to transhumanism - he touches the black monolith and transcends human form to a space baby
>9/11 happened in 2001, next to the Millenium hotel designed to look like the black monolith
>madrid bombing was 911 days after 9/11
>sept 11 is the first day of the coptic calendar, first month is named after Thoth
>2001 was the start of the new millenium not 2000 (there was no year zero)
>33 years from groundbreaking to destruction pentagon groundbreaking sept 11 1941

𒀭𓆏𒀭

Attached: 1543291637264-pol.png (445x581, 588K)

Is that why it instantly collapsed symmetrically into its own footprint?

Structural Engineer checking in.
What most people don't realise is the WTC plaza had a huge subterranean section with a shopping mall, car parking and subway system. Basically, the plaza was built over a big hole in the ground and that's what WTC-7 fell into.
The towers themselves were "trussed" buildings (the floors were joined by simple joints to the walls, if the joint fails, the floor collapses onto the one below). We don't make trussed buildings anymore because they always fail 100% in a fire; they aren't just gutted, they fail and collapse.
Most 9/11 conspiracy theories always show zero knowledge of how the WTC Plaza was constructed.

Yes WTC 7 was badly damaged due to debris. It would make sense that it would eventually collapse, but at free-fall speed? Give me a break.

While the Twin Towers were being built, jews banned asbestos, so they had to insulate with concrete instead. People involved in building them were quoted as saying they would collapse if there were ever a fire because the upper floors were heavier than the lower floors were designed to bear. The jews got the idea for 9/11 when these facts were published in "Liberty" magazine.

The fireproofing did its job.
Remember, all fireproofing will fail eventually, it was only rated to last long enough to evacuate the building. It lasted the right amount of time, but the building escape routes were in the core and were damaged and inaccessible.
There was plenty of time to evacuate had the escape route been open.

>were quoted as saying they would collapse if there were ever a fire because the upper floors were heavier than the lower floors were designed to bear
Source?

This is how the floors of the WTC were constructed. These flimsy trusses stretched from the concrete core to the outer steel exoskeleton. The towers were incredibly strong when the floors had integrity, but once integrity was lost in one area, it was only a matter of time before that floor collapsed onto the one below... then that floor would collapse, then the one below that in a cascade.

Attached: WTC_truss1.jpg (786x525, 190K)

Here's a more details look at a truss.

Attached: WTC_truss2.png (773x375, 146K)

LIBERTY MAGAZINE

Take a look at the "Gusset Plate" in this image.
The Gusset plate is the main join of the truss to the steel exoskeleton.
In the collapse videos, people often think they're seeing explosions happening just below the collapsing floor. What they're actually seeing is the truss being ripped from the gusset plate as the exoskeleton is bent outward.
One floor collapses onto the one below, overloading the structure and breaking the truss from the gusset plate.
How the WTC towers collapsed shouldn't be the conspiracy. There's plenty to question, but the towers collapsed because they were hit by planes. The impacts damaged the core and blocked the escape routes. The fire proofing lasted long enough to evacuate had the escape routes been accessible.

Attached: WTC_truss3.png (750x330, 82K)

Eat shit faggot. The exterior shell was built of huge steel beams and those along with the core columns support the floor decks. The building didnt collapse from a fire.

Funny how you say these types of buildings 100% collapse due to fire, but you cannot name a single high rise that has had a complete collapse due to fire (other than WTC7, 2, 1)

AE911TRUTH.ORG

Look up project due diligence and then answer any one of the 12 errors and omissions in NISTs fake report. They are huge glaring holes in the explination of the total collapse.

Now I mean an actual written/linked source.
I did find this.
>It is known that a large amount of asbestos was used to insulate the lower floors of the Twin Towers.
local2507.com/wtc/911report_by_MARF.pdf
It would appear you aren't telling the truth, as far as no asbestos in the towers.

Attached: Screenshot_20190107-002249_YouTube.jpg (1369x1022, 443K)

Attached: Screenshot_20190107-002309_YouTube.jpg (1358x1009, 397K)

That's not the point. The building was designed to use lightweight asbestos insulation, but in the upper floors, they had to switch to heavy concrete because kikes starting suing asbestos users.

There would have been a significantly larger impact recorded on equipment if this theory were true. DR JUDY WOOD WAS RIGHT, THE TOWERS WERE DISINTEGRATED FROM THE TOP DOWN

proves nothing.
you're showing me something from a cospiracist.
I have a lot of questions about 9/11, but how the towers collapsed isn't one of them. People without engineering knowledge arguing that the towers shouldn't have collapsed does a big disservice to the truth seekers. You're fighting the wrong battle and making all truthers look dumb.

DURING construction, they switched from asbestos to concrete. The lower floors had asbestos. The upper floors were heavier than designed because they switched to concrete.

Neither of the planes were 747s and neither of them were fully loaded.

>but you cannot name a single high rise that has had a complete collapse due to fire (other than WTC7, 2, 1)
This happened last year sometime.
>An abandoned highrise building occupied by squatters in downtown Sao Paulo, Brazil caught fire and collapsed Tuesday, sending chunks of fiery debris crashing into neighbouring buildings and surrounding streets.
The collapse is similar; freefall speed, down into its own footprint. But the comparisions end there. This was a badly maintained building, completely engulfed in red hot flames for an extended period of time.
youtube.com/watch?v=XwoBRHDLxdo

If you have access to some periodicals database, search for it in "Liberty".

Interdasting. I also found this.
>According to press reports, the original asbestos cementitious fireproofing applied to the steel framework of the north tower and the lower 30 stories of the south were removed after the 1993 terrorist truck bombing.
scientificamerican.com/article/when-the-twin-towers-fell/

So called "Green" New Deal

Under Clinton:
1993 bombing Freon R-12 Air Conditioning taken out (R-12 was developed by GM for cars as best refridgerent devised by Western man to not be flammable. Breaks down safely instead in presence of heat). New system is flammable at temps hot enough to melt steel. Elevators and bottom floors acted like air intakes.

Aspestos was removed (arguable the best fire retardant ever devised by man)

R134 is "difficult to ignite under laboratory conditions, does indeed prove to be flammable in a hot engine compartment. "

R12 ... breaks down safely in heat.

Attached: Auto-fire-under-hood-R1234yf[1].png (300x178, 34K)

That's what they did, though.
Average citizen has no clue on the difference between Arabs and Iraqi, and 9/11 absolutely played a gigantic part in justifying the invasion of the Middle-East.

Also
>dancing israelis

>no one has ever cut corners in building shit before

LMAO

fpbp

Separate controversy.
>In recent days, allegations have been made that the lack of asbestos in the twin towers contributed to the rapid collapse of the buildings. The New York Times article referred to in the second paragraph: Did the Ban on Asbestos Lead to Loss of Life examined claims that the non-asbestos containing fireproofing materials used during the construction of the WTC performed less effectively than similar asbestos products thereby shortening the time available for occupants to escape. Most of the experts consulted were unanimous: "no standard treatment of the steel, asbestos or otherwise, could have averted the collapse of the towers in the extraordinarily hot and violent blaze."
ibasecretariat.org/lka_world_trade_center.php

It would appear that there was cementinous asbestos used in the construction of some of the lower floors of the South Tower and that this was taken out in 1993, presumably it was replaced with regular concrete. What is the weight difference between plane cement and cementious asbestos. Is it considerable? Would it have produced a collapse similar to the one we saw on the day? And if so would it also account for the molten pools of steel in the footprints of the buildings?

I feel like you people don't get it. "Green" initiatives are used to stage major disasters. R12 and aspestos are more than safe. They litterally were designed to save and protect life. Both were removed from the WTC under suspicious means. The 1993 bombing happened to take out the HVAC system of the WTC? It happened to be at a time when there was a huge push to phase out non-flammable R12 systems?

Why won't you people listen to me?

Attached: OrdinaryEnormousBaleenwhale-size_restricted[1].gif (480x368, 3.87M)

>1993 bombing Freon R-12
>source?
Can't find any confirmation of this.

anyone got the close up video of multiple explosions going off in rapid succession, blowing out windows, in WTC7 right before it collapses?

>capable of withstanding 707 impact
>cutting corners
pick one

You have no source, or even a secondary source. Opinion discarded.

The people who built it said it'd collapse because of the heavier insulation. Ask them about it.

I found it originally in an HVAC forum. I can dig it up, but I was not looking into 9/11 type stuff at the time.

HVAC guys were talking (gushingly) about the old system and how it was removed after the 1993 attack. However, seperately I was researching Freon before that, and learned about why GM developed it. Not common knowledge to HVAC guys.

So, I connected the dots. HVAC guys are not fireman. They are not necessarily "researchers" or truthers either. Maybe why they never connected the dots.

The battle color for muzzies is green btw. It helps explain their wierd marriage. Again, HVAC guys are not theologeons. They don't care about aspestos either.

Look at "Green" califonia and how much fire it has had. That's a lot of C02 right? We all know "Green" initiatives are fake. But why do they end up in flames? What's the end game?

youtube.com/watch?v=5zdqfmB6mXk

You what I should ask the Bin Laden Construction Company? Lol!
Also see You have no primary source or even secondary source. You would think that such pivotal information would be public knowledge by now and yet there's no record of it anywhere.

The 1993 bombing accomplished its role. Those that hired the goons did exactly what they set out to do, take out the freon HVAC.

>I was not looking into 9/11 type stuff at the time.
>battle color for muzzies is green btw.
Where's your proof of the second aircon system being able to melt steel? You must have that source to hand, if not the first.
Also if you believe muzzies were behind the attack, you have not looked into 9/11 type stuff hardly at all.

Here is the link.
hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?839982-World-Trade-Center-Refrigeration-Plant

Timeline photo attached.

Attached: hvac wtc.jpg (1410x366, 158K)

The towers were designed to withstand a low-speed, accidental impact like what happened to the Empire State Building in '45. The designers were picturing the scenario of a small passenger plane losings its bearings during take-off or approach during inclement weather and grazing the towers. JFK is only about 10 miles East of the plaza, after all.

To the designers' credit, the towers did survive the initial impact, what it didn't survive was the aftermath - the fires exacerbating damage from a high-speed, intentional impact until the building hit a failure point. If the designers hadn't taken the precautions they did, the buildings probably would have collapsed shortly after impact and we probably would have lost a LOT more people. Official estimates put the number of people in the buildings at the time of the impacts at about 18,000, but we only lost a sixth of that.

I believe the official 9/11 story to be bullshit too, but obvious shop is obvious...

fpbHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

IT WAS OBAMA BIN LADEN! SHUT UP GOYIM

Attached: 1549669793341.png (127x204, 42K)

The material safety sheet of MSDS.

I would have to dig up the numbers but R12 is never flammable because heat breaks it down into intert elements.

R134 is flammable. It has to be reallllllly hot though, like air plane fuel burning hot. Then as you can imagine it only gets hotter, like melting steel hot. The numbers are more technical, but it will start to burn at like 1300 and move up to 5k type temps or something in that order.

I remember reading old somethingawful posts back when it was happening. CNN was like the only news outlet with an actively updating website back then

>Mixtures with air of the gas 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane are not flammable at atmospheric pressure and temperatures up to 100 °C (212 °F). However, mixtures with high concentrations of air at elevated pressure and/or temperature can be ignited.[23] Contact of 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane with flames or hot surfaces in excess of 250 °C (482 °F) may cause vapor decomposition and the emission of toxic gases including hydrogen fluoride and carbonyl fluoride.[24
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane
Your research is bunked.

>5 FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES Extinguishing
>As R134a is non-flammable, it will not media contribute to the fire, but could help with the extinguishing by reducing the oxygen content of the air by dilution to below the level to support combustion. Specific hazards. R134a does not support life. It can act as a simple asphyxiant by diluting the concentration of
afrox.co.za/en/images/R134a_tcm266-27719.pdf
Less than five minutes research. What agency do you work with?

There was a jew at the top of the towers, laying in wait. Right before the towers hit he took a deep inhale, through his bulbous nostrils - stripping the beams of all their fireproofing. Right before the planes hit, he let out a powerful exhale, further destabilizing the buildings, and propelling him to safety.

Attached: juden hyper nose.png (821x661, 470K)

>However, mixtures with high concentrations of air at elevated pressure and/or temperature can be ignited

It was hotter on those floors than 212 after those planes hit.

Anyways, regardless of added explosives, those towers were an inferno with no aspestos to stop it and plenty of R134 to keep it dueled up.

Green intiiatives have problems. Lota problems.

Attached: FondSelfreliantIrishterrier-size_restricted[1].gif (800x363, 3.16M)

Lazy nigger. It's in here: libertyunbound.com/sites/files/printarchive/Liberty_Magazine_February_2002.pdf

Sorry, I didn't see this post. The ignition of the tetrafluoroethane from the jet fuel might account for the low oxygenated fires burning in the building. I'll have to look into it a bit more.