» Home » Science
The Only Way The Top Of A Building Can Fall At Free-fall Acceleration Is If There Is No Structural Resistance Below It.
It is now admitted by the US government that Building 7 of the World Trade Center did in fact fall at free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds. This equates to 8 stories or 32.77 meters. In other words, 8 stories at the bottom of that building suddenly "went away". Every support column failed simultaneously, many times over, and no reinforced concrete remained to be crushed. This has been attributed to an accidental, asymetrical collapse, due to fire.
 Ballsalsa  24 Sep 2010 17:23
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
Most of the 9/11 commission members got axed when they said it was a controlled explosion. Osama bin laden wasn't even on the no fly/terrorist watchlist after 9/11.
Osama bin laden died of kidney failure- fox news has a fat man impersonating laden, even though he doesn't look anything like laden. 9/11 took more Fromm the American people than it gave them. I'm a truther k9. And your probably fed junk news. Maybe you're a liberal who hates religion and stands for government growth policies?
 gottfried  25 Sep 2010 10:15
 Add a Comment
I don't understand the debate, but ok I agree?
 artemis  25 Sep 2010 04:21
 I know, not much to debate here, except the laws of physics. But in my experience, you got to start with the basics when arguing 9/11.
by  Ballsalsa
 25 Sep 2010 20:22
Americans hate the idea we were vulnerable to such a simple plan. The fact of the matter is when you factor in 50,000 gallons of fuel on the plane and sky scrapers that are carefully designed to collapse in a controlled manner all the calculations make perfect sense. For the best breakdown of the twin towers disaster look at popular mechanics. And ask yourself why it is so hard to believe that slamming a giant plane full of fuel into a skyscraper at hundreds of miles an hour would knock the thing down. Is it truly because you have objectively examined the facts and concluded that somehow and for some reason the US government managed to sneak thousands of pounds of explosives into one of the busiest buildings in the world, or is it because the idea that we are so vulnerable to such a simple plan scares the living cr@p out of you?
 finsch  25 Sep 2010 14:30
 It was far from a simple plan. Think about all the things that had to go RIGHT in order to pull this off. They were banking on everything going WRONG in our defense network. That's a lot of time and money to invest in a plan that had, really, no chance of working. They had no training on large aircraft, they'd most likely be shot down, they'd most likely miss or not find their targets, they had to assume they wouldn't get anywhere near the Pentagon. Heck, Atta didn't even wake up in Boston that morning, he flew in from Portland. As many flights are delayed in cities like Boston, NY, and DC, it might have been pertinent to not have to catch a connection that very morning. It makes no sense. The whole thing was way too lucky.

I've seen the PM debunking of the conspiracy theories, and it was a sham. One straw man after another. They didn't address any of the real issues.

The fact is, if you figure in 50,000 gallons of aircraft fuel, which is nothing but kerosene, most of which burned off instantly in a fireball upon impact, it is not enough to heat the structural steel to failure. Finsch, you should know with your background how heat travels through steel. Sure, if you heat one, isolated piece of steel for a while, it will heat up pretty quick. But when you apply heat to one area of a steel lattice, all interconnected, the heat will quickly disperse and travel throughout before one spot will get very hot. The two main buildings are debatable, and are kind of tricky in their design. So I don't spend much time on their analysis.

There are 3 smoking guns regarding 9/11, that debunkers, including PM, won't touch.

1. Molten pools of steel. Each of the three buildings that fell in NY had molten steel at their foundations. The temperature from a standard fuel/ office combustibles fire is less than half of what is required to melt steel. There are both witnesses, as well as pictures, of melted I-beams in the rubble, and molten steel "flowing like lava". The only explanation of this from the government has been denial that it was there (even though there are NASA satellite thermal imaging of the site showing the temperatures that were in fact adequate to melt the steel). Where did all this heat energy come from?

2. Dust analysis. The dust has never been tested by the Americans. NIST said it would be a waste of taxpayer money (even though it would put the whole issue to rest). European scientists have studied it however. They found some interesting things. They found these highly energetic microscopic red chips, with the same chemical makeup as a military grade of thermite. In fact, they lit some of it off and it behaved just like thermite. Also, iron microspherules. When iron is suddenly vaporized in a 3000+ degree explosion, the vapor cools in the air and forms little spheres. This is in the dust in vast abundance. There's no way for these to form in the low temperature fires in the WTC.

3. The freefall acceleration of building 7. This wasn't addressed initially by NIST, who in their first report, stated that "free fall acceleration would defy the laws of physics". A high school physics professor and his class analyzed the video, and proved that there was a period of freefall in building 7. NIST revised their report and said that, in fact, building 7 experienced 2.25 seconds of free fall; and they also deleted the references they had in the first report stating that free fall acceleration would defy the laws of physics. So, has the NIST analysis been studied and verified? No, all of their data and simulations they used to draft the report is classified. Just like everything else 9/11 - State Secret. No peer review allowed.

I wish I were wrong about this. If anyone can explain any one of those three issues, I will bow down before your superior intellect, join the army, and volunteer for Afghanistan. However, I'm 100% sure on this one. I've put the time in it, and I've resigned myself to the disgusting truth.
by  Ballsalsa
 26 Sep 2010 00:17

I see yet another "911 truther" has escaped from the short bus.

 K9  25 Sep 2010 02:00
 Yep, that's me. That crazy guy who wants a crime to be investigated. The audacity.
by  Ballsalsa
 25 Sep 2010 02:18
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
Did Universe And Time Had A Begining Or They Just Existed ?
Science Vs Religion. It Doesn't Matter.
Intelligent Design Is Disrespectful To God
The Majority Of People Who Deny The Validity Of The Evolutionary Theory Are Often Extremely Uneducated...
There Is Far More Documented Evidence In Support Of The Theory Of Evolution Than There Is To Support...
People Should Now Be Required To Wear Airless Masks And Pay A Monthly Fee To Allow Air To Feed Into The...
No Matter How Many Times You Add The Number One To Itself You Will Never Get A Number Greater Than (Insert...
Animal Testing Should Be Stopped In Unnecessary Products
Just Because You "prove" Evolution Wrong Does Not Mean That Creationism Is Right.
Could We Use Stem Cells To Reproduce Materials That We Must Harvest From Animals?
New Debates
Get A Safe Drive With Driver On Hire Services In Pune.
Which Is The Best Company To Hire Private Driver In Pune?
Find A Dentist & Book An Appointment In Kalyan | Dentee
The Best Fissure Surgeon In Mumbai | ClinTech
Find Best Treatment For Guttate Psoriasis
High Voltage Divider By Udeyraj Electricals Private Limited
Top Executive Search Firms In India | Prompt Personnel
Get Rid Of Gynecomastia At Gynecomastia Cure
Atma - An Accelerator For Education NGOs In Mumbai, India
The Importance Of Landlord Insurance