You realize that: 1. None of those "structural collapses" were actually collapse - they are partially collapsed. 2. They are all SMALL building, not 1000 foot towers! Do you understand how much weight was above the point of failure in the WTC? It wasn't the weight of 4 floors. It was the weight of 30 or more.
Find a video of a pancake collapse please. Show me one that doesn't have explosives going off from windows and going down perfectly. Please. The burden of proof is on you since I've shown some already.
The irony. There aren't a lot of live video of structural failures because they are unexpected - plus skyscrapers are usually not subjected to the kind of conditions the WTC experienced. Anyway, this won't change your mind it will backfire but here goes: [Removed - mistake - that's what I get for searching in Youtube]
Yes, I should have vetted it more but it was late. In fact, you can not find a video of any tower collapsing. Why? Well because there haven't been many: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_structural_failures_and_collapses Look at that list and highrise skyscrapers have never structurally collapse. Why? Because they are demolitioned before they collapse. But if you look at the few situations on the list where there were partial collapse of major building large in size and height - the parts that collapse did so mostly vertically. That includes OKC, Ronin Tower, and other buildings. Fires can cause collapses of buildings - that list shows that is the case.
You can tell it's the off-season. Boring conspiracy theory threads either bumped or begun by bored members who aren't turned on by off-season basketball madness. Happens every summer.
I haven't read through any of the 23 pages in this thread, but I'm a licensed Structural Engineer, so I'll weigh in on why the WTC collapsed: Essentially, the towers were designed as cantilevered vertical columns (400 m above grade, 20 m below), with hundreds of square steel columns creating a perimeter shell around the exterior of the building. The interior core, which was designed to bear the weight of the tower, was formed using steel joists that tied the core to the perimeter. These joists were covered in concrete slabs, and that's how the floors were created. It was revolutionary at the time because of how light weight the entire structure ended up being. Now, at the time of impact, the structure itself would have been minimally impacted based on several factors. For one, because of the crate design of the structure, losing columns along the perimeter would have only shifted the load onto the interior core, which it was designed to withstand. Also, the overall mass of the building was probably hundreds if not thousands of times more than the aircraft, as well as designed to withstand probably 50 times more lateral force than what the aircraft produced on impact. Based on these factors, it was not the force of the aircraft that caused the collapse, but the fire from the jet fuel. Most people think the steel columns forming the interior of the structure MELTED, which caused the building to collapse. This is false. The temperature from the jet fuel would not have been nearly high enough to melt the steel, but it would have certainly distorted it. Now, due to the sheer volume of fuel, and the irregularities in the DISTRIBUTION of temperature, the steel expanded at different rates, which put undue strain on the connecting elements. Once the angles and connectors started failing, the structure buckled. Once the joists from the hardest hit floors started collapsing, and the floors fell on top of one another, eventually it created a domino effect where the building came down floor by floor. One thing to remember is that the WTC were about 95% air, which explains why the rubble was only a few stories high. Also, because of this, it's highly susceptible to implosion, which explains why it did not collapse laterally. I'm not sure if any of this has been mentioned in this thread, but hopefully it sheds some light on what happened.
I brought up several of the points back when this thread first started. This is the biggest problems with these conspiracy theories is that most of them are based on misunderstanding and misstatements of construction. I have no doubt that there probably are architects and engineers who believe that the buildings where brought down in a controlled demolition using thermite because frankly there are many architects and engineers who don't know their fields.
Also from those pics, of structural collapse, are from earthquake and not from fire, especially an upper story fire. Also the structural system of those buildings aren't the same in fact from seeing them I can tell that some of them aren't primarily steel structure.
I appreciate you weighing in. But they didn't domino. Use your eyes and see it for yourself. Also what are your thoughts on building 7 coming down and the explosions that can be seen and are reported as heard by witnesses?
Also most of the world doesn't believe the official story. It's the official story that has holes in it and thus the burden of proof is on anyone promoting it.
No. All these theories are based on the need to cope with the consequences of the event. There were a lot of people unable to accept the fact that a bunch of Quran thumpers were able to commit such destruction to the U.S. Almost all these people have superiority illusions about how powerful the U.S. is. This is their coping mechanism.
You are basing your speculation off of grainy CCTV and camera footage. Many points have legit questions, all which can be explained by a simpleton. You have yet to explain how dozens, if not hundreds of these conspirators have been able to keep silent through these years. You claim a plane didnt hit the pentagon, but you have yet to explain where all of those people and the plane itself vanished. There are many low level workers constantly watching the sky. How do you get them to remain quiet in which they would never seen the radar tracking for this plane. For the few doubting legit questions you can come up with, there are 100 times more I can come up with when it comes to a conspiracy theory.
You can actually see the sun glinting off the airplane in the pentagon video where the speaker is saying the video doesn't show the airplane. You can't see the bulk of the aircraft because it is behind a hill. Just like you can't see the pentagon itself in the video. Either that or the video is proof that the pentagon never existed in the first place. As for the squib thing, it is one of the stupidest theories I have ever heard. Take a sealed bag of potato chips and suddenly squeeze one end. What happens? There is the counter to your explosives in the building theory.
