OK, I was looking for a certain video of WTC 7 which has some decent audio, couldn't find the separate clip so instead here it is in a video compilation. If you turn the audio up (use headphones) you CAN definitely hear a rumble, yet absolutely NO explosions of any kind.
It is simply NOT plausible that explosives were employed to create the global collapse, as claimed by truthers. This camera was just down the street, no more than 3 or 4 blocks away.
and how ironic for truthers that the guy in this video says 'I told you that sucker was gonna go!' Hmmm, so it appears it was obvious to a number of casual observers, as well as many FDNY personnel onscene, that building 7 was in danger of collapse.
Years later, 9/11 Truthers attempt to distort history to fit their pernicious agenda. But this man's comments cannot be erased.....happily.
Still another eyewitness 'we heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder' 'it looked like there was a shockwave....about a second later the bottom floor caved out' - but notice he doesn't say anything like 'a giant explosion'. We expect to hear loud sounds in a building collapse as structure breaks, this again is well established in other collapses (see numerous youtube videos on the subject, at least one made by JREF poster EDX)
It's been interesting just looking at these clips again, months after first examining the details - the final clip, around 7min, clearly shows the W mechanical structures descending into the building, moments before the 'global collapse' follows. It strikes me that truthers such as Richard Gage completely ignore the fact that this collapse happens, as if it were somehow irrelevant to the final descent of the exterior structure. I mean, where do truthers think the rooftop structures went???
Perhaps they cannot bear to ask the question - what internal structure below the roof needed to collapse first in order for the rooftop penthouses fell inside, and how could it be that NO explosions were captured by ANY camera at the exact time this happened?
I guess if you can't handle the answer, best not to ask the question.
And building collapses such as this 30-story building in Brazil (Jan 2011) 'Neighbours reported hearing a loud rumbling sound followed by what resembled an explosion.'
No doubt building collapses make loud sounds, but nothing we've ever seen on videos of WTC collapses is like any explosive controlled demolition. They sound just as we'd expect giant buildings to sound when they collapse.
ETA Does anybody think the Brazilian authorities should be testing for explosive residues in this case? They have no reason to. Nor did NIST have any reason to. Nor would NIST or FEMA do an arson investigation for building 7.
"Some people have said that a failure at one column should not have produced a symmetrical fall like this one. What's your answer to those assertions?
WTC 7's collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place, prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of the WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing."
So the only word you actually believe is "symmetrical"? How is that not cherry picking? You have claimed that EVERY SINGLE SUPPORT would have to fail simultaneously in order for the entire top section to move as a single block. Clearly, they are saying the internal columns failed FIRST and the exterior frame AFTER, which is not "simultaneous".
Do the people who worked on the NIST report have nutcase truthers hounding them day and night to "admit the truth"?
Thanks, but Ive posted that for him at least twice now and he's ignored it every time.
I keep trying to explain that even when the people KNOW they aren't refering to real bombs they use words like "explosion", "blast" or even "sounding like bombs", for some reason he doesn't want to tell me why on 911 we should assume that people hear explosives rather than anything else, or how we can tell the difference.
I dont think anyone would say that that WTC7 did not have any "appearance" of symmetry. But just saying that is not necessarily the same as what truthers say and as NIST already said at the time its clear they do not mean what truthers mean when they said it. People like MrKinnies want to ignore all the context around that word and claim NIST means the same thing he does.
*Sigh* You want to play silly games again. "Truthers" are people like Richard Gage and David Ray Griffin or David Chandler or Alex Jones or Steven Jones or Jesse Ventura etc.
Which people promoting demoltions on 911 don't claim WTC7 collapsed was symmetrical which is an indicator of a demolition?
There's nothing wrong with MrK taking shots at the NIST report. S/he doesn't even have to present a competing theory. NIST had the money and the access to available evidence, with the greatest access to pertinent resources. That they didn't and couldn't even support their unprecedented hypotheses with physical evidence is more than enough reason to take potshots at it.
Could you really have missed the point accidently?
MrK claims the NIST report is saying something it doesn't say because he refuses to read the context surrounding of the usage of the word when NIST says it.
18 hours, the fire was fought. Darn you are grasping. The fires at the WTC complex went on for MONTHS! Darn, WTC months, One Meridian Plaza 18 hours. Do you have a point?
You compare One Meridian Plaza, a fire that was fought with the WTC 1, 2, 7, fires which were not fought. All 4 fires, resulted in buildings totaled by fire.
You confirmed fire destroys structural steel's strength, thanks for debunking 911 truth.
Gage also uses part of the over 200k from his organization to travel and pay expenses, did you make 240k in the 80s in one year? Gage make money off of lies, and fooling people like you who are like Tim McVeigh, upset with the country and failing to help out, just complaining and making up lies to satisfy your failure and fears. Who did 911 in your fantasy? Gage has figured out how to use 911 truth delusional nonsense to turn a buck on the back of people like you. The real conspiracy of 911, is 911 truth and people like Gage fooling you and others too paranoid about things to figure out reality.
That's what happens when you have no idea what "directives and purpose" is. Personally, I don't find this surprising considering most people I meet today think it's all about them (I'll stop now).
The two most obvious explosive sounds come about 10 seconds into the video which is a few minutes into the collapse of WTC1. NIST claim WTC7 only set on fire after WTC1 fell so these sounds are significant since they can't be gas canisters or monitors or general office debris. They sound like cutting charges too. Google Linear Shaped Charge and you'll find an example.
I believe cutting charges were set off throughout the day to reduce the structural capacity of WTC7 - not that any of you debunkers care for my thoughts as you've made clear. That doesn't worry me.
It could be that fire then finished the job off. That would account for the lack of distinct explosive noises prior to the building's collapse sequence, although I've yet to see a video with a convincing soundtrack to that collapse so explosives could have been used - most videos start too late into the sequence or have soundtracks which are too faint. Perhaps someone could give exact timings to show where they believe a soundtrack records the start of the entire collapse and is clear enough to hear the actual crashing sounds of the penthouse structure. I know many of you have posted such clips but I don't see what you guys mean.
I believe cutting charges were set off throughout the day to reduce the structural capacity of WTC7 - not that any of you debunkers care for my thoughts as you've made clear. That doesn't worry me.
Not correct and but even if that were true we have full videos of WTC1 and 2 which according to truthers were far more dramatically explosive during the collapse. You still havent explained why no explosions were caught on any of those videos either. If your explosives in WTC1 and 2 can be so quiet then you'll have no problem convincing me it wasn't picked up in WTC7. But please read my full reply to you.
The two most obvious explosive sounds come about 10 seconds into the video which is a few minutes into the collapse of WTC1. NIST claim WTC7 only set on fire after WTC1 fell so these sounds are significant since they can't be gas canisters or monitors or general office debris. They sound like cutting charges too. Google Linear Shaped Charge and you'll find an example.
I believe cutting charges were set off throughout the day to reduce the structural capacity of WTC7 - not that any of you debunkers care for my thoughts as you've made clear. That doesn't worry me.
It could be that fire then finished the job off. That would account for the lack of distinct explosive noises prior to the building's collapse sequence, although I've yet to see a video with a convincing soundtrack to that collapse so explosives could have been used - most videos start too late into the sequence or have soundtracks which are too faint. Perhaps someone could give exact timings to show where they believe a soundtrack records the start of the entire collapse and is clear enough to hear the actual crashing sounds of the penthouse structure. I know many of you have posted such clips but I don't see what you guys mean.
Off topic delusional nonsense based on your opinion, no facts, no evidence. How does this claim of an inside job fit with Flight 77 and Flight 93? Why were Flights 11 and 175 needed? Who planted the explosives? How does this fit in the thread? Do you know the topic, or is this like your knowledge of 911?
Chris is doing a good job of refuting the lies Gage spreads. The conspiracy on 911 is Gage making money off of people like you who prefer fantasy over reality.
Why not? Illogical. RU saying that none of the flaming buildings (5,6 or 7) had those items?
I believe cutting charges were set off throughout the day to reduce the structural capacity of WTC7 - not that any of you debunkers care for my thoughts as you've made clear. That doesn't worry me.
ie, your lack of intellectual honesty prevents you from accepting the best documentary evidence, instead rationalizing that it doesn't exist. Nice work.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
