I ran across this site, and had to comment
Forget for a moment the “conspiracy theory.” I always like to take it a step at a time. Let’s pretend we’re on CSI. (I think I’ve seen one episode.) Our first is task to determine: “What happened?” It’s not yet our job to determine “Who did it?” or “How many were involved?” or “How much did they spend?” or “Why did they do it?” These questions would be premature at this point.
Also, let’s keep it simple. I like to use the following rule:
If I can’t verify a piece of information, I throw it out. (For example, this witness said, this video is missing, I see missile launchers, etc. Yes, some or allot of this stuff is laughable.)
Let’s start with things that are incontrovertible. (At least as close to incontrovertible as one can get.)
A little physics.
An object falling to earth falls with a specific amount of force:
The mass of the object multiplied by the acceleration due to gravity.
Mass x Acceleration = Force.
Think of this force as money in a bank account. You only have a specific amount that you can spend. No more.
It takes force to accelerate any object. Even a falling object.
When an object falls to earth, all of its potential energy is converted into kinetic energy. Its force (M x A = F) is used-up (spent) to accomplish this acceleration. This is called free-fall. If any solid object is situated below this falling object, some of this “free-fall” force will be absorbed (used) (spent). The fact that steel beams are flying outwards, means that the force of the falling floors is being absorbed. The force is being used to accelerate the steel beams away from the tower. It doesn’t matter how fast they are flying, or at what angle, straight out or not, etc… Just the fact that steel beams landed hundreds of feet from the tower, shows that force (from the falling floors) was used (spent). Force was also used to cut up the vertical steel beams. All of the structural steel was cut into pieces no larger than 30 feet long. Remember, we’re talking about steel below the point of impact, which wasn’t subject to fire, and so was still structurally sound. Also, all of the concrete was turned into powder. This like-wise took force.
What we end up with, is an equation that doesn’t balance.
(The force of the falling floors) = (free falling floors) + (steel beams cut into pieces) + (steel beams thrown away from building) + (pulverized and powdered concrete)
The falling floors do not have enough force to accomplish all of these things. We know this just from watching the video, because, as stated, the top floors fall at almost free-fall speed. (Not quite, but only a few seconds more. This is judged by comparing the falling tower with the falling debris.)
Not only do the falling floors not have enough power to accomplish these four things, they don’t even have enough power to accomplish each of the last two (throwing beams, pulverizing concrete) individually. It doesn’t even matter if the steel at the top of the towers was turned into melted butter. The vertical beams at the middle and bottom of the tower would be intact. (No fire, no plane impact) (I’ve included a picture of the tower being built. Judge for yourself how much vertical steel went into its construction. Notice in particular the vertical beams in the center section. These were omitted/ignored in the NIST report.)
As an experiment, take a high-rise building, and drop it on a bunch of concrete. (Yes I know, we can’t actually perform this experiment.) But I bet you would agree, the concrete would not turn to a fine powder. It would take more force than the mass of the building during free fall can supply.
As I said, the equation is way out of balance. If you add up the cost of:
1.) accelerating the top floors to free-fall speed
2.) cutting beams into pieces
3.) throwing beams out away from the building
4.) pulverizing the concrete (and everything else) to powder.
… You have a total that was more than we had in our bank account.
The next step then, would be to find out where this extra force came from. Explosives are the only plausible explanation that I can come up with. This also would solve the problem that the building collapsed symmetrically in its own foot-print. This has NEVER happened spontaneously, from a fire, or earthquake, or hurricane, or plane crash. But we have seen it occur hundreds of times from controlled demolitions. (Explosives inside the building at predetermined locations, exploded in a predetermined sequence.)
Thanks for your time.
Please excuse the excessive use of alliteration.
![construction_1[1].jpg](/forums/data/attachments/3/3210-bdb7bec212a4046d90ecdcd953248eb8.jpg?hash=otm3OANt6N)
