9/11 belief, mythology, and the unknowable (OT)

It just simply isn't possible without help

I do know for a fact, unless someone can prove me otherwise, that no building can fall that fast, solely due to the loads from the top 30 floors, and straight down for that matter. The building would take the path of least resistance, which means it would fall over once it hit the resistance of the floors below, not straight down at near free fall speed.

6. How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?

NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NCSTAR 1-5A).

As documented in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, these collapse times show that:

“… the structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass at and above the impact zone. The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that energy through energy of deformation.

Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos. As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.”

In other words, the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. The downward momentum felt by each successive lower floor was even larger due to the increasing mass.

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

2nd - the Can scenario is not as valid as the tree.

Yes - it is a so-called tube in tube design. The Main structure was in the core and the Skin. Yet, you fail to awknowledge that the interior trusses act as lateral supports. Not present in a soda can. The compressive loads were handled on the interior core and exterior skin. The trusses provided the connection between the two to #1 provide for lateral support, and #2 carry the floors. A scenario that might be more accurate would be several cans stacked on top of one another. Run that scenario and see what happens.

#3 - in that photo it is clear that the center of gravity is off center. You do not need to be an engineer to see this. The moment of Inertia is off center. This means that as the forces are applied to the remaining structural members they will be pulled in the direction of that moment.

The photo shows it falling to the side clearly. As I stated before, if no other factors were involved it would have continued in that direction, pulling as gravity acted on that body. Somehow, that did not happen. Somehow the Inertia of that mass collapsed all subsequent floors.

#4 - You make reference to the connections on the exterior skin. If in fact the pancake theory is correct as you believe there was enough force to collapse each subsequent floor, with massive amounts of debris protruding outward. If that was the case, then the force was so large that it would have sheared each and everyone of those connections. Yet, what we see is massive amounts of debris exploding outward. The exterior sking should have remained largely intact (Comparatively), as it itself fell outward due to the explosive force of the pancake theory. However that is not the case. The buildings were turned to dust.

#5 - Due to research of my own, I am convinced that it was an inside job. I am also convinved that it was a controlled demolition. I posted earlier on this, and provided photo's of columns that were indintical to other columns in controlled demolition. People posted, links debunking the use of thermite, but failed to see tha huge difference between torch cut columns and ones cut by thermite. I also never got a response to the massive molten steel way down below in all the debris that burned for months.

#6 - Who bought the WTC months prior?

#7 - What security company was hired?

#8 - Then of course explain WTC 7.

It's all there, all you have to do is realize we are all being fooled.

I'd love to hear the engineer's/physicist's view point on indestructible paper after the towers fell:-D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seDzWf76HYA

The answers are out there, but you won't find them on prisonplanet.

Uh, where's the plane?? Or how about just a piece of luggage? A bone fragment, a tooth, a wing, a tail, a jet engine???? You must have a good explanation of why MY eyes can't see any of that stuff. Please enlighten me. You sound like quite an authority...

Carefully stand on an aluminum can... Then slightly press the sides and you will crush the can in an instant. You won't slowly crush the can, it wil be in an instant... And 'straight down'.

Now, the load of just you is nowhere near the load of 30 floors of building falling an initial 10'(?), as the can is only about 6", but the result is the same... Quick and straight down.

Now, let's imagine you stacked to cans on top of each other, and pressed only the top can... So you think only it will collapse, and the 2nd can will stop you? Or that after the first can, the 2nd can will fall over?

Umm... Here's just one montage of pices of plane that were at the Pentagon:

There are three basic ways to talk to complete idiots.

The first is to assail them with facts, truths, scientific data, the commonsensical obviousness of it all. You do this in the very reasonable expectation that it will nudge them away from the ledge of their more ridiculous and paranoid misconceptions because, well, they're facts, after all, and who can dispute those?

Why, idiots can, that's who. It is exactly this sort of logical, levelheaded appeal to reason and mental acuity that's doomed to fail, simply because in the idiotosphere, facts are lies and truth is always dubious, whereas hysteria and alarmism resulting in mysterious undercarriage rashes are the only things to be relied upon.