World Trade Center eyewitness distinctly describes bombs going off prior to collapse

Well duh. Theres no way a plane brought down the WTC. Planes have crashed into smaller less fortified structures leaving them to burn for days and still the buildings didnt collapse.

 

9/11 pentagon strike conspiracy (september 11th - the pentagon strike) - flash

This blows my mind everytime I watch it, and I've seen it hundreds of times. Watch the entire thing, and you'll most likely be asking yourself a lot of questions.

 

I find that hard to believe without a source of some kind.

And you will note that the engineers told him what he saw was not a series of explosions. The video cuts off before he says what they told him was the actual cause.

If I had to take a guess I would say it was the explosive buckling of the walls and supporting columns under the pressure of the upper floors once the fire had weakened the internal structure of the building.

 

To be honest, I don't think the weight buckling down would actually create an explosion. It woud've been more of a snapping motion, ya know?

 

A NATION CHALLENGED - GROUND ZERO - A NATION CHALLENGED - GROUND ZERO - Burning Diesel Is Cited in Fall Of 3rd Tower - NYTimes.com

 

Why do so many people imagine steel support beams do be nearly invincible? Yes, steel does burn at thousands of degrees (can't think of the exact number atm, little rusty on my metalurgy, no pun intended) but in all reality its really not that hot. And I know if there are any welders here, they will agree.

Combine that with the stress from the momentum of the plane, that alone is a recipe for disaster, let alone all the jet fuel and all the other combustable materials in the buildings.

My theory for people claiming to hear bombs go off prior to the collapse, is that it was just sections of floors collapsing

 

Plane That Crashed Into the Empire State Building

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-12/07/content_501143.htm

no collapsed buildings

 

Any loud noise could have easily been mistaken for a bomb, which most civillians never hear except for in movies, when an airplane just hit the building.

 

I worked in downtown NYC before 9/11, on the morning of 9/11, and for over five years after, and never met a single New York person who believes that bombs were used at Ground Zero. Of course there were some explosions, two huge buildings were struck by planes and there were fires everywhere. An M80 firecracker would have been louder than what most of us heard coming from Ground Zero prior to the collapse. A LOT of people were in the area of Ground Zero, and to this day the overwhelming majority are very skeptical of these bomb theories - it isn't even an issue here where it happened - most of these reports come from troofers in Utah, Texas, Norway, California, etc.

 

Props on the sources, I had heard of that plane hitting the Empire State building in the 40s but I thought it was a small one engine plane, not a B52.

But I stand by my other statements; does anyone have a statement from a professional architect or engineer who says a jet fuel fire couldn't have weakened the supports enough to induce collapse? Or saying that a fire-induced buckling would cause the towers to fall any differently from the straight-down collapse seen on 9/11?

 

Ahh the weekly 9/11 conspiracy thread. Can't we keep this shit that's already been discussed 1000x on here in the same thread?

 

The Twin Towers used to sway on a windy day, and you could feel it in the elevators. There's no question in my mind, after experiencing this many times, that they were not as sturdy as they were cracked up to be. Additionally, around the time the Trade Center construction was being finished there was hysteria about asbestos. They stopped using it when they reached the 40th floors. Had there been asbestos above the 40th floors perhaps the buildings wouldn't have sustained enough damage to cause them to collapse.

 

This isn't the only eyewitness to say a bomb went off prior to the plane crash. There is definitely something fishy with 9/11

 

While I'm not saying that 9/11 was a conspiracy or not, I do tend to lean towards the side with the numbers to back it up.

How Hot Did The Jet Fuel Heat The World Trade Center?
Summary:

_________________________
http://education.jlab.org/qa/meltingpoint_01.html

Obviously there are other factors at play, but this one is usually the one posed as the reason for its collapse. If it was because of the force of the impact I don't see how the building would collapse straight down but I'm not an engineer or knowledgeable in any field regarding this type of situation.

 

1. I remember watching footage and hearing explosions, one after another like an automatic weapon but louder, on the day of September 11, 2001. Firefighter and police footage of people practically in the basement of the WTC before it collapsed, and after the planes hit.

2. WTF 7 building came down just by happenstance? 3 buildings toppeled, and only 2 had been hit. Not only that, but the two main towers were supposed to be able to withstand airplane hits.

3. There was no fucking plane at the pentagon, no plane debris, no security footage either? AT THE PENTAGON?

I'm not going to bother really arguing with anyone who believes the offical story, I'm just putting that stuff out there and I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

 

You sound like a terrorist.

They used to sway? I find that very hard to believe and actually counter fit as this lie was created by 'troofers' in Idaho, Michigan, and Montana to divert an conspiracy remarks. For every fake staff member claiming there was 'swaying' from day to day there are a hundred real staff members who can testify that it never did. And even if it had, why would it sway back and fourth and then decide to fall ever so perfectly straight and down towards the ground? Wouldn't it have swayed, fell to the side with greatest tension, snapped under tension, broken off, fallen to the ground, then left forty-odd stories left standing? Yes. It would have. Someone needs to brush up on their basic laws of motion, gravity, inertia, and over-all psychics.

 

It's well known skyscrapers sway. Or do the basic laws of physics not allow that? It's a very tall flat building being subjected to wind. Oh and those "fake staff members" were probably the ones way higher up where obviously it will sway more while the many more "real staff members" down lower wouldn't hardly feel it.

Your post has earned a grade 5 LOL and a 0 for logic and physics.

HowStuffWorks "How Skyscrapers Work"

 

It definitely would not have fallen over if its supports were cut.

 

Sigh.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0]YouTube - 9/11 Debunked: Columns Cut not by Thermite[/ame]