47

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracies #1 | World Trade Center ‘Demolition’



On Tuesday, September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda executed a plan in which a group of 19 men, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijacked four passenger airplanes in order …

source

admini22

47 Comments

  1. For those of you still buying the official account, you're either trolls put here to support the official story or you're fucking brain-dead retarded. A 2 year old can see that these were controlled demolitions.

  2. So why was there molten steel seen at ground zero?
    Officially there was nothing hot enough to melt it, but you are showing pictures of molten steel yourself- can't you see the contradiction?
    The two towers and building 7 are falling , respectively 'pancaking' straight down as if there was zero resistance beneath them. "Buildings don't have zero resistance, that's why we feel comfortable walking into a building" says one of the architects in this documentary. Watch it, and good luck debunking it.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

    Politics isn't an innocent business and people go over dead bodies for power and money, that's nothing new. We just somehow want to believe that this time it's different and that the era of power politics and deceit is over. The only difference is, today you're not (yet) prosecuted for asking questions, but only ignored or ridiculed. So let's use this freedom to exchange some civilized arguments!

  3. Lmao XD Guy sounds like someone with a huge mouth ulcer who doesn't know that every statement in this video has been re-debunked (outside the government circles ofcourse). NIST THEMSELVES revised their pancake theory to "Inward Bowing" theory. Your genius guy experiment is horse crap shoddy. An enclosed furnace of constant 2000 degrees being compared to a building openly exposed to air where people were seen to stand waving handkerchiefs.

    That squib ejection being positive air pressure or glass shooting out has too been debunked, squib ejections were seen 30 – 40 floors below the cloud so there was no way pressure from above floors could have reached the spot because the collapse wave was way far away from it.

    Also its not "glass" , glass would have been very hard to discern in the videos, rather it is solid concrete dust and chunks being ejected (you tell that by looking at the dark spray,glass wouldn't have been dark)

    Also if pressure from the above floor would have resulted for such strong air ejection then it would have been equal and in all directions not in some places as the Pascal law states "pressure applied on an enclosed fluid escapes equally and undiminished in all directions."

    DEMOLITION ALWAYS START FROM BOTTOM – FALSE. There are many demolitions where they dont start from the bottom, in fact sometimes its a very BAD IDEA to start from the bottom because it may result in unsuccessful and incomplete building collapse.
    See here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHcCbY2wY38 check the footage at 1:31, 2:07, 2:16, 2:43

    There were explosion PRIOR to any planes hitting any tower in the basement, confirmed and testified by William Rodriguez, then janitor with the WTC who was awarded presidential award for his bravery on that day. Completely ignored by NIST and unanswered/evaded by debunkers when asked.

    Let's also not forget that out of all that a passport survived which was inside of pocket of hijacker in a plane flying @500 mph which was destroyed beyond traces.

    I have just scratched the surface here.For everyone out there no matter which side you are on, watch the documentary 9/11 A New Pearl Harbor which takes into account every alternative theory and debunking theory ever made and is analyzed and scrutinized thoroughly. Every statement is made in the documentary has been cited with footage/articles both from newspapers and the commission report along with testimonies from people inside and outside the government. It's the best compilation on 9/11, citation nazis who don't believe the "he said" "she said" stories should watch it to clear their head of propaganda fog.

  4. Every statement in this video has been re-debunked (outside the government circles ofcourse). NIST THEMSELVES revised their pancake theory to "Inward Bowing" theory. Your genius guy experiment is horse crap shoddy. An enclosed furnace of constant 2000 degrees being compared to a building openly exposed to air where people were seen to stand waving handkerchiefs.

    That squib ejection being positive air pressure or glass shooting out has too been debunked, squib ejections were seen 30 – 40 floors below the cloud so there was no way pressure from above floors could have reached the spot because the collapse wave was way far away from it.

    Also its not "glass" , glass would have been very hard to discern in the videos, rather it is solid concrete dust and chunks being ejected (you tell that by looking at the dark spray,glass wouldn't have been dark)

    Also if pressure from the above floor would have resulted for such strong air ejection then it would have been equal and in all directions not in some places as the Pascal law states "pressure applied on an enclosed fluid escapes equally and undiminished in all directions."

    DEMOLITION ALWAYS START FROM BOTTOM – FALSE. There are many demolitions where they dont start from the bottom, in fact sometimes its a very BAD IDEA to start from the bottom because it may result in unsuccessful and incomplete building collapse.
    See here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHcCbY2wY38 check the footage at 1:31, 2:07, 2:16, 2:43

    There were explosion PRIOR to any planes hitting any tower in the basement, confirmed and testified by William Rodriguez, then janitor with the WTC who was awarded presidential award for his bravery on that day. Completely ignored by NIST and unanswered/evaded by debunkers when asked.

    Let's also not forget that out of all that a passport survived which was inside of pocket of hijacker in a plane flying @500 mph which was destroyed beyond traces.

    I have just scratched the surface here.For everyone out there no matter which side you are on, watch the documentary 9/11 A New Pearl Harbor which takes into account every alternative theory and debunking theory ever made and is analyzed and scrutinized thoroughly. Every statement is made in the documentary has been cited with footage/articles both from newspapers and the commission report along with testimonies from people inside and outside the government. It's the best compilation on 9/11, citation nazis who don't believe the "he said" "she said" stories should watch it to clear their head of propaganda fog.

  5. it did go down on its foot print. it started to tilt but righted itself. and all this can be proven by a simple science experiment that no one has duplicated. Unless on a computer. but in order for it to be credible. I want to see a small scale model where they can duplicate this at least 2 times. the last video is a joke. if that's what happens . why didn't the towers bend instead of explode. and I thought it was funny when he tapped It on the anvil and it didn't crush like the towers. but bent easily like what should have happened if it was so hot. not explode and fall straight down.

  6. Let's pitch in to rebuild the towers and reenact the attack, trust me, there are not going to be the same results base on the information we have.

  7. lol quoting pancaking and Pancaking is indeed NOT what we see
    hahahahaha and then next saying the buildings were falling toward the path of least resistance, e.g. the plane impact. lmao, yeah that's why you see the upper floors crash towards the plane impact side.

  8. Dude u missed many points u claim the steel dosent need to melt for the building to collapse why was molten steel found on the site then lmao obviosily it did melt and it's impossible for it to melt from office fires or jet fuel sure the building started falling asymmetrically so why didn't the top tilt off the building continued symmaterically all the way to the bottom ! The Terriosts u mentioned many were still found alive after 9/11 u didn't even mention building 7

  9. Yeah. This is all brilliant. Let's just overlook the fact that the only 3 high rise steel frame buildings in history to ever collapse due to fire all occurred on the same day, September 11, 2001. Or that the twin towers were SPECIFICALLY built and designed to withstand MULTIPLE impacts from planes that carried more fuel than those that hit it, traveling at a higher rate of speed than those that hit them. Or that you can plainly see in any video you watch that the smoke from the towers were black and grey smoke, which means the fire was oxygen starved, and therefore not burning as hot as reports claim. Or the fact the BBC started reporting that WTC7 had collapsed about 20 minutes before it actually happened. Or the countless people who reported hearing massive, multiple, widespread explosions that entire day. Or the fact that the government absolutely would not allow ANYONE to exam a single piece of the wreckage from any of the collapses and was immediately shipped overseas and destroyed. Or that satellite imagery showed that for 3 months after the collapse there were still fires burning and pickets of molten steel under the wreckage that could only occur do to a thermite induced heat. Sure. Let's just ignore all of that and believe what the people who were paid to cover it up said. Genius.

  10. Just 300 degrees hotter than the jet fuel? JUST? Really? You do realise that increasing heat has an exponential effect on weakening steel? That extra 300 degrees could have done virtually all of the weakening of that steel. . . Your argument is invalid

  11. That's a reasonable demonstration. I have a few questions. How long was the 1" steel bar in 1800 degrees heating?
    2. Let's say i grant you this argument, and every weakened steel girder gave way in succession from higher floors to lower floors, and that it explains how the burning floors, conservatively, 50th and above, but probably more likely, 70th and above, had steel support girders weakened by fire and gave way. But why did the remaining 50 floors' steel weaken and collapse simultaneously w/ little to no fire?? Shouldn't there have been about 40-50 floors that were not burning, still standing as the floors above it collapsed around them? The weight? Maybe, but not without slowing the collapse at all, and certainly not at almost free fall speed in 10 or so seconds…the collapse would have slowed considerably. If not, why not. Anyone explaining these collapses only addresses why the collapse started, even NIST. How could there not be 50 floors still standing or some of it standing after noticeably slowing the free fall collapse.  And not once, not twice, but 3 times in one day? I am very interersted in your response.

  12. When the building fell not the whole structure was on fire. So the bottom of the building must have stopped midway the heated soft metal top from coming all the way down…

    But the buildings fell like the whole structure (or atleast half of it) was hot on 1800 degrees.

    (Btw there are many claims 1800 degrees was far from reach)

  13. I watch this because a couple of my calssmates believe that 9/11 was an inside job (for real). They also believe in many other theories as the supposed moonlanding hoax, which I wrote an essay about with well presented debunks. Even after that they refused to admit it.

    How do you argue with these kind of people? People who desperately are looking to reject the truth in these kind of things. It seems like they want to make the U.S government up to be this evil, lying, untrustworty, corrupt organisation that wants nothing else than to trick us. And that it's us ''normal'' or even ''dumb'' (I've heard) people that doesn't see what's happening behind the curtains and that we're being lied to.

    It's okay to be critical to mainstream knowledge, but, for the love of all, don't deny things that can ble factually proven!

  14. Some scientific knowledge could help. This video is debunking nothing. Video tries to tell me, that a paper fed fire is able to weak steal? Ok…… next try.

    And I saw videos of controlled demolitions that started from upside and went down. I catched you lying, my friend.

  15. Oh that idiot with a half inch piece of steel heated in ideal condition with no fire proofing, against a 250 lb anvil, really, you've proved absolutely nothing with that display, If the steel was cold you could bend it with that 250 lb anvil. That is the most stupid evidence ever, GET A JOB!!

  16. If you believe this, you're actually an idiot. If you think the government wouldn't kill its own people to go to war, then read the operation 1962 northwoods. Proposed by joint chief of staff and department of defense. Don't be an idiot and believe this bs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *