Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief’s Assessment

by da02 • 9 years ago

17 31 9 years ago

pseingatl• 9 years ago

The real question is why the third building, WTC 7, went down. It wasn't hit by an airplane and the fires were trivial compared to other buildings. I'm not suggesting conspiracy or aliens, just that WTC 7 should not have fallen given the damage it suffered.

rapsey9• 9 years ago

That and about a 100 other unexplained questions. Like how it's impossible for commercial aircraft to fly at that altitude with that speed. Like how it's impossible for any passenger to make a phone call during flight, yet there were quite a few making phone calls home when they were suppose to be flying. How the pentagon damage pictures make zero sense. How there not being any security footage for one of the most secure buildings in the world.

KozmoNau72• 9 years ago

I'm sure you have some very credible sources for those claims?

6nf5• 9 years ago

Why would it be impossible for passengers to make calls during the flight? I've made calls from a 747, it's definitely possible?

da02• 9 years ago

There is also the flight certificate of one of the hijackers found in a Saudi embassy envelope (among other Saudi government connections withheld from the public): https://harpers.org/blog/2017/09/crime-and-punishment/

And Mueller's odd behaviour: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2017/09/10/robert-mueller...

aiyodev• 9 years ago

Trivial? The whole building was engulfed in flames.

AstralStorm• 9 years ago

The real questing is how true flames skipped from WTC 1 & 2 to WTC 7. Probably easy to answer. (Must be highly flammable material and what essentially became thermite driving nearby building temperature high enough to start the fire.)

rapsey9• 9 years ago

How many non-wood buidings collapse after a fire? None except tower 7 that I have heard of.

rapsey9• 9 years ago

Was it? http://imgur.com/gallery/JQq18Lr

germainemalcolm• 9 years ago

To add to the confusion the BBC reported WTC 7 had collapsed before it had actually collapsed. A fact an old work colleague's husband used as evidence (to support not paying his TV license) in court. He suggested that the BBC colluded with terrorists.

This is the only coverage I could find that isn't the Daily Mail. [https://www.sott.net/article/266268-UK-man-wins-court-case-a...]

And this is the BBCs explanation. [http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_co...]

grecy• 9 years ago

A fact an old work colleague's husband used as evidence (to support not paying his TV license) in court.

How did that work out?

0x4f3759df• 9 years ago

pull it clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPzAakHPpk

codewritinfool• 9 years ago

This photo always illustrated a lot for me about WTC 1 & 2 composition: http://www.rumormillnews.com/pix4/wtcTowers-night2.jpg

bmh_ca• 9 years ago

I summarized the information I have read on this topic in an answer on Skeptics.SO:

https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/31144/1792

To quote a much more authoritative Europhysics article that subsequently came out (and which I since put at the head of my answer):

... The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion [that a steel frame building collapsed from a fire], fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. ...

Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief’s Assessment

Related Stories