This "enough to collapse" part; every engineer that's studied it apart from the official account says no way possible for that to happen. What bias or motive do they have for lying?
Thanks for taking the time to create this response! This is what reasonable discussion looks like :)
Starting with your last link, info that's new to me: 2700 degrees F, "locally." It doesn't say how long that highest temperature could be sustained but it's a long way from the previous upper limit I'd seen of 1500 F or so. Molten aluminum interacting with water storage tanks for the sprinkler system is new info to me. I didn't realize they used storage tanks, I thought they were just pipes. The guy who wrote the official explanation doesn't like this at all which is understandable, but he makes the predictable mistake of trying to compare spraying water from a hose onto molten aluminum to the same aluminum hitting a tank of water instead; the two events are not comparable. Hitting a pipe would be the same as the same size firehose, which could turn the water into steam such that the aluminum never contacts water.
This provides the missing ingredient of what got things moving in the first place.
It also addresses the 1600 professionals who studied this far longer than the official version ever did, and concluded no way in hell could their claim happen.
I do appreciate this article talking about explosions one floor below the fire. I always allowed for that. It's the series of explosions 30+ floors away from the fire right before the collapse starts that looks exactly like controlled demolition, which I have seen. They wouldn't be set off by fire. It is possible that all the footage is doctored. It doesn't make sense to me that those explosions would be signs of load bearing stress.
That's a dramatic pic of the top of the tower at it's furthest extent of tilt, which is honestly the main thing that made me question what was happening as I saw it. What leveled that off? Gravity would've only accelerated that horrible angle, not brought it back to level.
Realize that at that time no steel framed building had collapsed due to fire, ever. One simply can't claim "you can see clearly this building isn't going to make it." The reporter certainly has no basis for making that statement, other than fear based on what had just happened.
In terms of emotions, it certainly should make us all ill to realize our government is evil enough to kill us. 50 x the death count of 9/11 they've done exactly that with CCPvirus, and not just some shady unknown DS creatures, but our Governors, Mayors, and public health Officials, who clearly have done the exact opposite of caring for the public well being. This was obvious in March. The Governor of SD proved one Governor can stand up to all the bureaucracy and win, and she kept the State's death rate per infection 12x lower than the National average back when that was high. Following Dr Z's protocol results in the death rate being 38 x lower. We've still done nothing to stop this ongoing problem, and the election won't change it no matter the results. This is more important than masks.
If the footage wasn't doctored then all the little explosions 30 + stories away from the fire that look exactly like controlled demolition have to be explained. You're presenting two major claims that are absolutely false:
saying footage was doctored somehow refutes eyewitness accounts. No it doesn't. You couldn't possibly "doctor" that much, only small details. Like a series of small explosions that look like controlled demolition right before the collapse. Those could be doctored, which would be nice. There is nothing else that would explain these 30+ stories away from the fire, sorry. They're on too many floors and occur too close to the same time.
How did those explosives get there? You mean the work crew working for weeks right before 9/11 supposedly building a balcony but pictured with huge quantities of electronics used for controlled demolition? With the name of their company being the name for explosives? (That aren't detonated by fire, btw) Have you ever looked at their notepad? It takes away all doubt about your series of questions.
You're being incredibly naive. US had enemies, even back then. Terrorism hadn't struck domestic soil, except for this very site. By OBL. I remember where I was when the basement was bombed. 30,000 dead was by no means the extent of their plans, and it still isn't. Very few people in US government had to be in on this. Who let these Saudi hijackers into the US in the first place? Who made sure they could train to fly jets without being hassled? Who contracted these Saudis working on WTC? Somebody had to do those things. There's a common thread, and his name is John Brennan. Who else had to know?
What was the CIA formed to do? Bypass Constitutional checks and balances, and do an end run around oversight. This is deep state / globalist central, along with the CFR. When you're trying to kill 325 million, (more like 5 billion +) danger is no object. Like flying a plane into a tower, you're not worried about usual safety precautions. That's not stupid logic, it's evil. The plan of 9/11 was evil, there's no debate about that. The DS is evil, that is uncontested. Unfortunately they control a great amount of our tax dollars, and aren't voted in.
We know the numbers for CCPvirus are fake. PCR tests can't differentiate between Influenza, A, B, or CCPvirus. So even without deliberate faking of numbers we have no idea how many really died. Most likely 150,000 have died that were completely preventable. Or some number approaching that if 150,000 total haven't died yet, which I would prefer to be true. And you're saying the 30,000 innocent civilians working on the WTC complex on 9/11 is unthinkable? This contrast is incredibly important because We the People have to bring this to a stop, somehow. History has many unanswered questions, what we do in the present is what matters.
This "enough to collapse" part; every engineer that's studied it apart from the official account says no way possible for that to happen. What bias or motive do they have for lying?
What damage do you see that leads to collapse?
Thanks for taking the time to create this response! This is what reasonable discussion looks like :)
Starting with your last link, info that's new to me: 2700 degrees F, "locally." It doesn't say how long that highest temperature could be sustained but it's a long way from the previous upper limit I'd seen of 1500 F or so. Molten aluminum interacting with water storage tanks for the sprinkler system is new info to me. I didn't realize they used storage tanks, I thought they were just pipes. The guy who wrote the official explanation doesn't like this at all which is understandable, but he makes the predictable mistake of trying to compare spraying water from a hose onto molten aluminum to the same aluminum hitting a tank of water instead; the two events are not comparable. Hitting a pipe would be the same as the same size firehose, which could turn the water into steam such that the aluminum never contacts water.
This provides the missing ingredient of what got things moving in the first place. It also addresses the 1600 professionals who studied this far longer than the official version ever did, and concluded no way in hell could their claim happen.
I do appreciate this article talking about explosions one floor below the fire. I always allowed for that. It's the series of explosions 30+ floors away from the fire right before the collapse starts that looks exactly like controlled demolition, which I have seen. They wouldn't be set off by fire. It is possible that all the footage is doctored. It doesn't make sense to me that those explosions would be signs of load bearing stress.
That's a dramatic pic of the top of the tower at it's furthest extent of tilt, which is honestly the main thing that made me question what was happening as I saw it. What leveled that off? Gravity would've only accelerated that horrible angle, not brought it back to level.
Realize that at that time no steel framed building had collapsed due to fire, ever. One simply can't claim "you can see clearly this building isn't going to make it." The reporter certainly has no basis for making that statement, other than fear based on what had just happened.
In terms of emotions, it certainly should make us all ill to realize our government is evil enough to kill us. 50 x the death count of 9/11 they've done exactly that with CCPvirus, and not just some shady unknown DS creatures, but our Governors, Mayors, and public health Officials, who clearly have done the exact opposite of caring for the public well being. This was obvious in March. The Governor of SD proved one Governor can stand up to all the bureaucracy and win, and she kept the State's death rate per infection 12x lower than the National average back when that was high. Following Dr Z's protocol results in the death rate being 38 x lower. We've still done nothing to stop this ongoing problem, and the election won't change it no matter the results. This is more important than masks.
If the footage wasn't doctored then all the little explosions 30 + stories away from the fire that look exactly like controlled demolition have to be explained. You're presenting two major claims that are absolutely false:
saying footage was doctored somehow refutes eyewitness accounts. No it doesn't. You couldn't possibly "doctor" that much, only small details. Like a series of small explosions that look like controlled demolition right before the collapse. Those could be doctored, which would be nice. There is nothing else that would explain these 30+ stories away from the fire, sorry. They're on too many floors and occur too close to the same time.
How did those explosives get there? You mean the work crew working for weeks right before 9/11 supposedly building a balcony but pictured with huge quantities of electronics used for controlled demolition? With the name of their company being the name for explosives? (That aren't detonated by fire, btw) Have you ever looked at their notepad? It takes away all doubt about your series of questions.
You're being incredibly naive. US had enemies, even back then. Terrorism hadn't struck domestic soil, except for this very site. By OBL. I remember where I was when the basement was bombed. 30,000 dead was by no means the extent of their plans, and it still isn't. Very few people in US government had to be in on this. Who let these Saudi hijackers into the US in the first place? Who made sure they could train to fly jets without being hassled? Who contracted these Saudis working on WTC? Somebody had to do those things. There's a common thread, and his name is John Brennan. Who else had to know?
What was the CIA formed to do? Bypass Constitutional checks and balances, and do an end run around oversight. This is deep state / globalist central, along with the CFR. When you're trying to kill 325 million, (more like 5 billion +) danger is no object. Like flying a plane into a tower, you're not worried about usual safety precautions. That's not stupid logic, it's evil. The plan of 9/11 was evil, there's no debate about that. The DS is evil, that is uncontested. Unfortunately they control a great amount of our tax dollars, and aren't voted in.
We know the numbers for CCPvirus are fake. PCR tests can't differentiate between Influenza, A, B, or CCPvirus. So even without deliberate faking of numbers we have no idea how many really died. Most likely 150,000 have died that were completely preventable. Or some number approaching that if 150,000 total haven't died yet, which I would prefer to be true. And you're saying the 30,000 innocent civilians working on the WTC complex on 9/11 is unthinkable? This contrast is incredibly important because We the People have to bring this to a stop, somehow. History has many unanswered questions, what we do in the present is what matters.