oh, boy. Yup. 100%!
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (65)
sorted by:
Gold medal for this meme.
I second that.
Anyone know what the cut off part says?
Tom Hanks is a goddamn communist.
It was legit. They found his passport, remember?😂🤡
Don't fucking forget the chunk of the plane they found in the past like 5-8 ish years. Just sitting there. In Manhattan.
I wonder what there vaccinated geniuses think jet engines are made out of?
This is a red herring to make you look foolish and distract from where you should be focusing on which is the Pentagon.
Surely you don't think the answer to your question is "the same material as building columns and trusses", do you? Because jet engines are made with nickel superalloys precisely for their ability to withstand high temperatures.
Also, have you ever watched them making steel shapes or a blacksmith working with red hot steel? They can bend it. What do you think happens if you get a steel beam hot enough under stress? It bends.
Whomever downvoted you is a cucked, soy boy globohomo. I guess the truth hurts.
Absolutely agree. The burn cage might by a titanium alloy, the impeller rings are made from single crystal nickel alloy. But the bottom line is the burning temp of jet fuel is well below the melting point of the metals
Fun fact, iron has a crystalline structure of Body Centered Cubic, but changes to Face Centered Cubic as it heats to 912°C. In other words iron expands normally until it hits an allotropic state at which it shrinks by about 20%. That’s what forces the bend
Why fairy pixie dust of course. Don'tcha know that shit is the cat's meow.
That's where they get you. They don't think.
Aborted baby parts.
Christ this argument really will never die...
https://youtu.be/FzF1KySHmUA
You don't have to melt steel to weaken it...
Weakening the steel at the top of the tower doesn't make the tower collapse in on its footprint at freefall speed. Oh, and tower 7.
No. But once the steel in the main beams on one floor reach 500C or so (60% strength at STP), they collapse, given the design didn't have anywhere close to a 40% safety margin.
At that point, the weight of all of the above floors crashes down onto the next floor. And they fold one after the other.
Outside chance it could have survived, built to design. Given the changes in its construction against the design, and with a full load of jet fuel, it was doomed it was doomed when the wings/fuel were sheared off and stayed in the structure.
try to catch your maximum deadlift at freefall speed. now catch twice that, now three times that. (seriously, though, dont) the plane hit roughly (my best guess from memory) two thirds of the way up the building. once one floor collapsed, the weight of that floor plus all of those above it landed on the floor below, so now, not only did it have to support all that weight, but it had to absorb the energy of gravity pulling those floors down. Assuming those floors directly below the crash were also weakened by the crash and the explosion above, it's not unreasonable that the floors, already under stress simple gave out, causing a cascade failure all the way down the line. once the collapse was in motion, it wasn't slowing down anytime soon.
dude, there had just been two explosions and two buildings weighing nearly a billion tons just collapsed on the edge of the complex. that kinda force hitting the ground would have been like an earthquake. Forgetting the fire in the seventies and the bombing in the nineties, it's a wonder other buildings didn't collapse.
Building 7's collapse was announced 20 minutes early on BBC as it was still standing in the background, after which it too pulverized neatly into its footprint which only happens in controlled demolitions. Buildings don't just disintegrate, it takes a lot of explosives, planning and work to get it right.
Oh, and where was Bush while it happened? On TV in a Sarasota classroom, watching children spell out words like PLANE, MUST, HIT, STEEL. The cabal likes to rub their schemes in our faces.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/metal-temperature-strength-d_1353.html
800-1500C for burning jet fuel, depending on available oxygen.
steel melts (liquid phase change) at ~1400C.
you're at 60% strength at 500C.
collapse was inevitable given the construction. there's a (slim) chance it may have survived if it had been built to design.....but the specified asbestos cladding on the main girders was deleted (it was at 'that' time in the movement to remove asbestos), without any other compensating changes in the design.
hearsay on whether the asbestos would have had a material outcome.
it'd be sickening to see this still being argued 20yrs later.
most people aren't willfully ignorant, though. they're just not engineers.
agreed, and admittedly, the guy in the video is a bit salty, but the video's useful for making the point; you don't have to melt a metal to severely weaken it...
A few people agree with your intimation about the towers -
Reuters Press Release
New Scientific Evidence Undermines Afghanistan War
*Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release.
Thu Sep 9, 2010 6:39pm EDT
New Scientific Evidence Undermines Afghanistan War
PR Newswire
NEW YORK and LOS ANGELES, Sept. 9
NEW YORK and LOS ANGELES, Sept. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- On the eve of the 9th anniversary of 9/11, support for the war in Afghanistan took a serious blow today. Simultaneous press conferences were held in New York and Los Angeles to present startling new information refuting the official 9/11 narrative, used to justify the war. Also announced were three major professional groups which have joined the worldwide, and ever-growing, "9/11 Truth Movement."
In a striking show of unity, representatives of "Scientists for 9/11 Truth," "U.S. Military Officers for 9/11 Truth" and "Actors & Artists for 9/11 Truth" presented their findings and unveiled their eye-opening websites. Each non-profit group has launched a petition calling for a new, transparent investigation.
In NY, representing "Scientists," Professor Niels Harrit said, "The official account put forth by NIST violates the fundamental laws of physics and chemistry." Harrit is Prof. Emeritus at the University of Copenhagen and was lead author for a 2009 peer-reviewed study that revealed evidence of high tech explosives throughout the WTC dust.
In LA, physics teacher David Chandler discussed the swift destruction of the WTC towers, including Building 7, the little-known third tower. Having demonstrated its free fall, he confronted the US government agency NIST with his analyses and forced NIST to revise its November 2008 Final Report on WTC 7. NIST's Draft Report had claimed free fall was impossible but NIST ultimately acknowledged WTC 7 was in absolute free fall for over two seconds. Concluded Chandler, "Free fall is physically impossible without explosives."
In LA, former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development Lt. Col. Robert Bowman stated, "9/11 has been an excuse to use our brave young troops as cannon fodder in unjust wars of aggression." In NY, Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford, decorated fighter pilot, and USAF Accident Investigator Lt. Col. David Gapp in LA, questioned how four highly trained flight crews would all break protocol, reporting, "Not one pilot broadcast the required hijack transponder codes."
In LA, actor John Heard asked, "How is it possible that the worst crime in U.S. history has never been properly investigated?" In NY, actor Daniel Sunjata stated, "The August 20th AP poll has revealed that only 38% of the American people support the war in Afghanistan, down from 46% in March. The question is: does this 38% know about the evidence that we have presented today?" Signatories to their petition include Ed Asner, Graham Nash, Willie Nelson, Michelle Phillips and Gore Vidal.
The three groups at the websites below are independent, non-profit organizations calling for the reinvestigation of the September 11th attacks. These groups have no affiliation to any political party.
https://archive.is/7EKFv (archive of http://web.archive.org/web/20110902182650/http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/09/idUS204116+09-Sep-2010+PRN20100909 because Reuters wiped it)
Foreign Policy Journal
Interview with Dr. Niels Harrit on Discovery of Nano-Thermite in WTC Dust
by Editor | March 7, 2011
Dr. Niels Harrit is a retired associate professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and one among an international team of scientists who published a paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal on the discovery of nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center collapses on September 11, 2001. He has recently finished a lecture tour of Canadian universities, where he spoke on the subject.
In this interview on the cable program Face to Face with Jack Etkin, Dr. Harrit discusses this finding and its implications. Dr. Harrit notes that World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7), a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper that was not hit by one of the planes on 9/11, collapsed symmetrically into its own footprint, and that the official explanation for this is that it was due to fire. However, the finding of nano-thermite in the dust, along with other available evidence, leads inescapably to another conclusion. “There is no doubt that this building was taken down in a controlled demolition,” says Dr. Harrit. “I consider this to be [a] mainstream scientific conclusion. There’s no way around this conclusion. There are so many observations that are only compatible with a controlled demolition.”
“Science is based on observation and experience,” says Dr. Harrit in the interview. Pointing out that it had never occurred before 9/11, he says, “A steel framed high rise simply does not collapse due to fire.”
Among the other evidence is the observation that WTC 7 fell at the acceleration of gravity, or free-fall acceleration. Fire, says Dr. Harrit, cannot do that to a building. “All of these columns had to be cut at the same time for this phenomenon to happen,” he says.
While conventional thermite is an incendiary, made from a mixture of powdered aluminum and iron oxide, Dr. Harrit explains that nano-thermite is manufactured from the atomic scale up. The ingredients are much more intimately mixed, he says, so they react with each other much faster. Unlike thermite, “Nano-thermite can be used as an explosive,” notes Dr. Harrit. “You can use thermite for cutting the steel beams, and it’s soundless,” he adds.
Discussing the relevance and importance of the conclusion that the three World Trade Center towers were destroyed in a controlled demolition, Dr. Harrit says, “I think what happened on September 11, 2001 is the most important event to our generation, and for our children…. And the consequences of this event should be obvious to everyone. But it’s not. But it’s happening at such a slow pace that people maybe do not connect the dots.”
It’s not just about getting history right and understanding what truly happened on 9/11, according to Dr. Harrit. “I think the whole civilization is in the balance these days,” he says. “Planet Earth will still be there no matter what we do…. But what we call civilization — if you care about music, this is what we’re talking about. If you care about the health of your grandparents, this is what we’re talking about. If you care about theater, literature, kids playing in the playground. Whatever you care for, whatever you love, this is what’s at stake here. Civilization. And it’s very fragile. And it can easily be lost.”
He discusses issues ranging from the environment to the loss of liberty due to the threat of terrorism stemming from the attacks of 9/11. The U.S. has waged multiple wars using 9/11 as a pretext, even though, in the case of Afghanistan, the publicly stated purpose for the war was to bring to justice the presumed mastermind of the attacks, Osama bin Laden. Yet, Dr. Harrit points out, to this day, “we haven’t seen the evidence for this person actually being guilty in the crime, and he is not wanted by the FBI for this attack on 9/11.” An FBI spokesperson, Rex Tomb, Dr. Harrit observes, in fact explained to reporter Ed Haas that 9/11 is not listed on bin Laden’s “Wanted” poster because the FBI does not have enough hard evidence to connect him to 9/11 to indict him in a court of law.
Dr. Harrit credits Dr. Steven Jones, a retired professor of physics at Brigham Young University, with having the insight to examine the dust to look for evidence of how the buildings collapsed. Dr. Harrit rebuts two of the more common attempts to dismiss the discovery of nano-thermite in the dust. One dismissal that is often heard is that this material was a natural occurrence resulting from the collapses. Dr. Harrit points out that this violates basic chemical principles, and that nano-thermite is a high-tech manufactured substance that cannot result from natural occurrences. Another charge is that the material was planted in the dust samples Dr. Harrit and his team examined, a claim Dr. Harrit regards as preposterous, noting that the chain of custody of each of the four samples examined for the peer-reviewed paper is well-documented.
Nano-thermite, Dr. Harrit explains further, is “produced only in military facilities and big military institutions in the world…. The explosions of the future are based on this technology…. Research is going on, but it’s military research. This is high technology material.”
“We know explosives were used,” says Dr. Harrit, to bring down the towers. However, “We do not know where the nano-thermite fits into this picture. We do not know the exact role played by the reactive remains we found.” Further investigation is required to answer the questions that arise from this discovery. But the bottom line, notes Dr. Harrit, is that “Nano-thermite shouldn’t have been there.”
https://archive.fo/sm8sT
Twenty-five Military Officers Call Official 9/11 story "Impossible", "Ludicrous", "A well-organized cover-up" at:
http://patriotsquestion911.com/Article%20Military%20Officers%20Challenge%20911.pdf
Sep-11-2009 23:46 The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government LiesGordon Duff Salem-News.com
How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?
John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″
(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: "The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11", the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue.
The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission, . . .
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.php
You can melt steel with jet fuel. You can melt steel with used motor oil.
Hot steel is weakened.
None of this has anything to do with what happened on 9/11. It sounds awfully similar to flat earth nonsense designed to distract us.
The temperature of a fire is not dependent on the fuel. If you want a hotter fire, add insulation and force air into it. More oxygen means more combustion.
Wild guess, because the plan was to destroy the 2 (tallest buildings in NYC) buildings they flew planes into.
Whoever said the plan was to destroy 3 buildings?
Just gonna leave this here for all you window-lickers that apparently slept through Chem 1.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kloTsio60
And the oxidizer was?
Oxygen. You know, like what happens to be fed to a fire at the top of a hundred-story chimney?
This smoothbrain shit is why we'll never get a straight answer as to why a pack of Saudis can pull this shit and end up with no invasion of SA, and Osama, another Saudi, sits back in Pakistan through the whole thing and all that happens to Pakistan is several billion in military aid.
If you're gonna be a fucking tool, quit being such a useful tool.
Are you sure you understand chemistry? Do you know how an oxy torch works?
Yes, but if you can't look at a video of jet fuel literally melting a steel beam and shut the fuck up about it, I don't I have the time or the crayons to explain reality to any more than that.
Just realize you're making the whole cause of wanting more explanation of what happened on 9/11 look like a pack of morons with your chimp-simple bullshit.
You cannot just bath steel in fuel and oxygen. You have to focus it under pressure. Notice in your video that the steel doesnt even get red beyond the torches path? Dont act like you know something you dont. You just come off looking like a reddit retard.
All I hear is seagulls.
Haha kek, so good...snort hahaha. Molten steel, hahaha my sides...
175,000 lbs of aircraft traveling at over 400 knots. The weight of the roof, weakened support structure, 3 sides strong, one side weak. Inside job, or maybe just not letting a good crisis go to waste.
Not vaccinated. shrug
Traces of thermite, you know. Just normal stuff.
Multi-ton engines and black boxes never found, terrorist passport survives unscathed. I can't believe there are people here who believe this shit.
Me neither digga. 20 years on, tards gonna tard.
Don't ask them to research which people of a particular faith all mysteriously decided to be sick on that day... including that Golem Silverstein, who picked up the big fat insurance check on the other side.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=silverstein%20wtc%20insurance&ko=-1&ia=web
Facts <> FeeFees
The engines weighed about 4 tons each.
The collapsing towers weighed 500,000 tons (each).
What's the mystery? They were atomized. Fist sized pieces were recovered. Finger sized pieces of the 3000 or so people killed were recovered.
Let me guess......nobody died because they didn't pull out an intact body......
This shouldn't require an engineering background. I get why people are skeptical.
But there's a line of credulity, where the consequences of this would have been once understood. Seemingly, that's no longer true. Basic math comprehension is gone.....
Doesn't everybody have magnesium laying around?
Look up what happens when molten aluminum and water mix.
Burning at temperatures way below what's required to even anneal steel, let alone melt it... yeah totally.
An aluminum fuselage turning molten, and water, do not mix well.
Show me where you got jet fuel to burn below 400F. Would make an AWESOME chemistry paper.
how long does it take for jet fuel to burn off in open air?
How long is a piece of string?
i get it, it depends on the length like the time depends on the amount of fuel. ok. how long deos it take for a 747 with a full tank of gas when burning to open air take to burn? answer: 15 seconds.
Steel annealing is around 1100 degrees genius, jet fuel burns at around 800. The steel also has to be heat soaked for long enough ,usually a couple of hours or more at that temperature. Learn shit. face palm
if 3 sides were weakened then laws of physics dictate that things topple, they don't fall into their own footprint. only a handful of companies around the world could do this as it require very precise timing of explosive that are carefully placed, in yet 2 planes toppled 3 building in that very difficult outcome that day. Explain again how a building never hit was toppled that same way.
Dude that shit was everywhere
For a building designed in the traditional sense. The world trade centers were designed to have more of the weight distributed through the outer walls so as to require less interior support columns, making more room for office space. If the relatively few inner support columns are also damaged and weakend, you would see an implosion rather than toppling. Bear in mind the weight of the roof, which was 6ft thick, concrete and steel.
Not many buildings, if any, were built the way the towers were, so the best we have is computer models. And we know how trustworthy those can be.
You can find pictures of the debris field along Barclay street to see building 7. Even buildings along the north side were hit by falling debris.
The world trace center was retrofitted to withstand multple plane hits. there was a pool of molten steel for weeks after the event. thermite does this, not a plane fuel explosion which could somehow melt the very engine its injected into.
It was never retrofitted. I'm not sure where you got that info. In 1964 they did impact tests and calculated that the towers could withstand an impact from a 707.
And few people claim seeing a pool of molten steel. How do we know it was steel, and not say molten aluminum? Look up what happens when molten aluminim and water mixes. Why did no one take pictures of it? And what is thermite? Iron oxide and aluminum. Both of which would be found in the towers. Are you suggesting that iron microspheres is enough to claim thermite charges?
I'm not saying there was no conspiracy. Only that the end result was probably going to be achieved whether the towers fell or not. Thus why I said "not letting a good crisis go to waste". I believe the planes did the job, but I also believe the attacks were allowed to happen.
You have completely ignored building #7
How does a pro demolition work. They start a the bottom with the supports, yes? You're ignoring the video evidence of a fire under the penthouse of building 7.
Building 7
Look closely at the top left of 7. That's the penthouse. Notice how it collapses? And if you play the video slowly, you can spot the left side giving way before the right side. As you say, its not designed like the others, therefore it does depend on its inner support structure, which the penthouse has just fallen through.
Secondly, explain the damage here. 7 is the building in the upper left just in front of the white building at the top. that doesn't look symmetrical if that white building has been damaged. Barclay St. that same white building is now on the left. Kind of sloppy for a pro demo job.
Its not nearly as simple as starting fires at the bottom... wow... its a very very precisely times set of explosions, they also CUT each of the beams at an angle and the locations and timing of all of it is critical. A fire has never in history collapsed a steel building before that day. No steel building have ever defied the law that things topple without a controlled demolition, that day we are suppose to believe 3 did. 2 identical building and 1 completely different. 2 by airplane and 1 by fire.
Did anyone ask Q who did 9/11?