Was the destruction of the twin towers scientifically possible on 9/11

There seemed to be a few questions concerning the 911 commission report. Evidence pointing toward the twin towers and wtc 7 being a controlled demolition:The time it took for the buildings to collapse. The time was near free fall speed, which means there was little to no resistance in the building. The theory in the 911 commission report said that the pancake effect caused each floor to collapse on the next floors, which created a domino effect. However i find this very hard to believe since the buildings did collapse at near free fall speed.The large dust clouds of concrete. It does not seem like the concrete can be pulverized to dust just from collapsing.Chemical evidence showed that thermite was used.The design of the building showed many steel columns that somehow just got destroyed.Discuss.If you want to watch a video, here is one that focuses mainly on the science of it.
September 11th Revisited: Were explosives used?

We have no idea who was involved but what we can figure out is the science of the building collapses. The explanation the government gave is obviously flawed.

I read the analysis and it does not talk about many of the main arguments of the building collapses. It has no sources. And the person who wrote it bases his theories on assumptions, not science. Testing the theory is what counts and all this person does is say "no that did not happen" without explaining why or what experiment they did to provide evidence. You should read some of the opposing side articles. The majority of them are written by professors with phd's.

Thats ok I like long posts. Now lets think about this problem we have rationally. The world revolves around probability. Scientifically speaking there is a certain degree to which both scenarios can be true or false. Obviously you are on the opposing side of many people who lost friends and family who are fighting to find out the truth about 911. If it was the government, we need to come to a realization that our government is killing our own people. But there is no need to get hostile. Just because i'm looking for answers to questions does not mean I don't respect the people who died on 911. In fact there needs to be justice for 911, and our government has not been looking for osama bin laden at all. They've been using 911 for their own personal benifit. Such as putting fear into our society in order to invade iraq.I would prefer you to actually discuss this with me as opposed to just copying and pasting, but whatever.Puffs of dust:
This explains nothing. You seriously believe that air and debris can cause concrete to pulverize? You can do the simple experiment of dropping concrete from as high as you want and it WILL NOT pulverize to dust.Now think critically for a second. If it was the pancaking effect, wouldnt you think it would take a while for the building to collapse? Each floor provides resistance to the falling floors, however we can see there was no resistance because it fell at near free fall speed. Around 9 seconds! now can you imagine over 100 floors being collapsed in a pancake fashion one on top of the next in 9 seconds? We can drop a rock off the top of the building and it will reach the ground in about 9 seconds.Your next copy and paste is just ridiculous. Its like saying back in the 1950's oh we can never go to the moon because no one has ever done it. Its just idiotic reasoning.The next one is just even more ridiculous. Clean cuts? Hmmmm... I wonder how is it possible for there to be clean cuts in steel from fire? can other material slice the steel? Thats just ridiculous. It just proves the point even more because there were clean cuts of steel. Not a few, but a lot.I do agree with the point that it would take tons of the material to demolish a building of this size. But i don't see the point its making. There is video footage of some kind of molten lava pouring out of the building. Now i don't know about you but i find it VERY hard to believe that fire can melt steel to a liquid. We can even do this experiment very easily and i encourage you to try it out and prove me wrong.First, do me a favor, and watch a video and just count how long it takes for it to reach the ground. Lastly, how the hell did debris falling on top of other debris cause steel beams to project out the build providing enough force to cut the steel and be flung outward?

Ok do you want me to go over every single little detail of the article, because i will. I just find it a little annoying when you expect me to put in lots of effort into a post when all you do is post a link. These boards are for discussion.

Yes they did exist, its kinda funny that you search for who I am. Yes everything is true do i care though? No, what I do care about is that the freaking government is out of control, and if we seriously don't do something early on were gonna turn into a fascists country. And btw at first i didnt know what you were talking about when you said giant wee wee, but i did a search, and that was a board that me and my friends posted on 5 years ago. And at the time it was not named that. and how did you know Im going to U of A and getting a ba in ecology... Thats registered to a different e-mail. OH yeah ROxie is quite beautiful isnt she?

You are not giving very valid arguments... I seriously recommend you watch "911 revisited." I know the arguments of both sides, its obvious you do not. I would like to have a civilized discussion about the subject, however its obviously pissing off a lot of people.

you see those are questions we cannot answer. We can only look at this from a scientific viewpoint. However what we do know is that its possible that the hijackers were fake. A passport fell from one of the planes and the government said "look we have the evidence of this hi jacker. And he was found alive and well in another country. They immediately took back what they said about the passport.Edited by lost-apathy, : No reason given.

Ok finally someone who wants to debate seriously...

quote:

---

Yeah, that's generally what thousands of gallons of JP-5 jetfuel will do to steel columns.

---

There were pools of molten lava that did not cool completely for a few weeks. There were videos of lava spewing out of the side of the building before its collapse. Think of how hot it needs to be for a steel beam to break. We have stoves that are made of steel, and we can run it all day long and it won't melt. The government said it was due to fire, but this is obviously not the case.

quote:

---

Then what do you think it was? Smoke and mirrors? I assume you watched the event unfold.

---

I believe it was due to demolition. In order to bring down a steel framed building of that size you have destroy the base. The whole building collapsed, which says a force greater than a airplane hitting it had to have acted upon it. There were also many descriptions of explosions from firemen policemen and civilians who were at the site.

quote:

---

You're right. Obviously the government amassed tons of dust particles and housed them in the lobby of the Trade Centers, and upon radio-controlled detonation, it deployed plumes of dust in the air to create the illusion of a terrorist attack.

---

In controlled demolition when explosives act upon the buildings it creates a force great enough to pulverize concrete into dust.You can watch the movie 911 revisited. It is worth the hour and half. It could change your whole perspective on things.

quote:

---

I'm sure that somehow had nothing to do with the fact that a jumbojet came careening into a building at hundreds of miles per hour. Physics says that mass x velocity x thousands of gallons of jet fuel causes catastrophic outcomes.

---

First watch a video of a plane crashing into the building. It dosen't flinch a inch. These are also huge steel beams we are talking about it's impossible for a a plane to cut every single beam to the point where the whole building collapses. The bottom floors should still be intact.Another thing i forgot to mention is WTC 7. How is it that the building collapsed in on itself just from debris from the other towers. And the government hasn't even mentioned this in the commission report.Penn and teller is just a comedian, you should watch some professors give lectures on this subject.
Edited by lost-apathy, : No reason given.

If you read the 911 commission report, they mention a list of 19 Hi-jackers. Yet a few of them have been found alive and well. BBC NEWS | Middle East | Hijack 'suspects' alive and wellAnd for your cell phone theory.
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO408B.htmlHowever I really do not like talking about the Hi jackers and the cell phones because the evidence on both sides is very elusive.

Possible by some miracle. Yes, however not very probable from the evidence.

Ok maybe I should have used molten metal. video footage and pictures.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOja0Bw9RE

quote:

---

Because a million tons of building debris landed square on top of it. Why wouldn't it have collapsed?

---

Oh a million tons? Have you seen any videos of WTC 7 collapse? It comes down in 6 seconds. In a perfect fashion. Why didn't they mention it in the commission report? Not only that but there were other closer buildings to the twin towers which got debris, and they didn't collapse.

Yes this may be the nature of it, however you must realize that there are unanswered questions about 911 that everyone here refuses to give even a slight look at. I'm not saying it was the government, im not saying that we are sure about anything. However what I am sure of is that people are not perfect. We all have a different perspectives on things. This causes misunderstandings in science and history. Throughout history the majority have been wrong countless times about what is factual and what is false. People believed the world was flat even when greek philosophers figured it out a long time ago, people believed Noah actually built an arc with every type of animal we have today, people believed there were actual witches. The ignorance of society is when people don't consider all possibilities, which is what science is about. My reasoning is that after researching both sides, "btw I did read the 911 commission report" read it here http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
I came to the conclusion that it is very hard to distinguish which side has more evidence supporting it. The difference between me and everyone else is that I actually have researched both sides thoroughly. And the mainstream explanation does not add up. Even within our government they don't even pay attention to what their side is.The commission report says that the reason they attacked us is because were over there killing their people, supporting Israel who is also killing their people. Yet our government remains there, still supports Israel, and forces us into fear of these terrorist. We buy into this shit. The majority of our society believes that the reason we were attacked is because they are jealous of our freedom and wealth. Its just pathetic when I see people buying into this terrorism shit. They hate us because we are over there killing their people. Our foreign policy needs to be changed.You mentioned the JFK assasination. This theory although convincing does not have nearly enough evidence to be able to come to any conclusion. If you ever watch non biased media, such as media in other countries, you will see that they don't buy into a lot of our American bullshit. 911 conspiracies have actually gotten a lot of mainstream media attention in other countries.All I'm saying is that we need to address some of these questions in a civil matter and push for a new independent investigation of 911.Edited by lost-apathy, : No reason given.

Hm this is the first non hostile post that brings up some good questions.

quote:

---

The firefighters who were in the buildings cannot see the obvious evidence of this, or they are complicit in the cover-up of the deaths of 3,000 some people, including some of their fellow firefighters.

---

They could have known, we don't know.

quote:

---

The media is ignoring the biggest story in the history of the world.

---

Correction, The united states mainstream media is ignoring the biggest story in the history of the world.

quote:

---

Whoever is responsible for the demolition crashed two jet planes full of people who are no longer to be found into the buildings to cover the explosions.

---

Yup, however they could have been empty without people, they could have been osama bin ladens men just like they say. Osama bin laden could have planted the explosions. We do not know.

quote:

---

The pilots managed to hit each of the two buildings in the exact spot where the explosives were rigged to begin the collapse, even though those spots were different in the two buildings.

---

In order to demolish a building there has to be explosives in multiple areas of the building. There is such thing as remote controls, where you send a signal when to activate something.

quote:

---

None of the dozens, 100s or even 1,000s of people who must have been involved in the planning and execution of the demolition has spilled the beans.

---

People have been spilling the beans... Go here, it has quotes of government officials, scientists, and 9/11 surviors.
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

quote:

---

Now, I have looked at dozens of websites put together by different conspiracy groups. I have watched the "Loose Change" video. I have read papers written by people with scientific degrees. None of them provided any answers that were nearly compelling enough for me to accept them and be willing to live with the questions raised above. Believe me, it has nothing to do with blindly accepting what the government tells me. If good ole dumbya told me in person that he was alive, I wouldn't believe him without checking for a pulse. The man's a liar. But the fact of the matter is that anyone who suggests that the towers came down through demolition raises more questions, and more difficult questions, than any that they answer.

---

We can only answer the simple questions first before we can answer the hard ones.I didn't like loose change so much. It focused on assumptions and not so much the science.Here's a video I liked, it starts with live clips of 911, then shifts to professors giving presentations.
September 11th Revisited: Were explosives used?If you can manage through that whole movie paying close attention, I am almost positive it will change your mind at least a littleI just want to ask one last question. How did WTC 7 collapse. No one has given me a reasonable explanation. One person accused me of not reading the 911 commission report, one person said it was from all the debris falling onto it. The report doesn't even mention this building.Here are some videos of it collapsing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0Now watch that video. Watch how it collapses, and tell me again that it is because of falling debris.Edited by lost-apathy, : No reason given.

quote:

---

And WTC 7 didn't collapse just due to fire. It sustained heavy damage in several floors at or near the bottom from debris from the collapse of one of the towers. What's more, this answers your basic question, why did it collapse. It was not in pristine condition before it collapsed. Moreover, its problems ran deeper than just a few fires throughout the building. It sustained heavy structural damage when the towers collapsed.

---

Heavy structural damage? Lets see your evidence for this. You like to talk about evidence, lets compare the two sides.From your point of view. The evidence:1. A couple small fires are seen within the building.
2. The government said so.
3. Please add to this list, because it sucks.From my point of view. The evidence:
1. Eyewitness accounts show that people hear explosions, and in one we do hear a huge explosion.
2. Firemen and police officers Know prior knowledge of the collapse.
3. The building collapses strait down in 6 seconds. watch the video and count yourself.
4. Huge dust clouds encircle the site after the collapse. This says that the concrete was pulverized into dust by some huge force.
5. BBC announced the collapse 20 minutes before it happened.
6. The building collapsed in a fashion similar to that of a building being demolished.
7. It obviously wasn't the pancake theory because it collapses from the bottom.
8. No steel building that big has ever collapsed in that fashion ever in the history mankind.Something had to have triggered the collapse. It didn't collapse until long after the twin towers collapsed. Now please explain the physics of this. Did somehow some magical fire cause a huge chain reaction which cause every single steel beam to break? It just suddenly fell down randomly.

quote:

---

So what? What are they trying to suggest in this video, that the Commission thought everyone would forget about it if they didn't mention it? This kind of pointless, snarky comment does nothing but undermine the credibility of the video.

---

This just shows they did not do a thorough investigation. They left it out most likely because they don't have a good explanation for its collapse.

quote:

---

Please explain to me how someone observing that kind of damage to the building an hour and a half before the building collapses is consistent with demolition.

---

What damage? Lets see evidence. Pictures, interviews, whatever. From looking at the collapse it seemed perfectly fine before.

quote:

---

So, several firefighters on the scene, in all the confusion, thought the building was exploding. Of course, none of them are saying it now, after many, many investigations.

---

What investigations? Give me sources. There was one main investigation, and it ignored this subject.You keep bringing up non relavent evidence. Such as "it couldn't have happened because that many people wouldn't help cover it up." However this is just making blatant assumptions. I do admit the video isnt perfect but I linked it not for what they argue but the video of its collapse, eyewitness accounts, and how the media covered it.

quote:

---

Why in the world would the United States mainstream media ignore the biggest story in the history of the world?

---

There are three main media's in america. Fox, cnn, and nbc. All of them are huge coporrations that are influenced by money and the government.

quote:

---

As far as I can tell, your link didn't give one single account of anyone who was actually involved, which is what I was talking about.

---

There are thousands of quotes over 500 people. Now I find it hard to believe that you read it all within the time you read my post.

quote:

---

you had a lot of "we don't know"s. That's not a very compelling argument in the face of what I saw happen on television that day and common sense conclusions.

---

I don't understand how this is common sense. Some debris hit the building causing some damage, then randomly the building collapses 7 hours after it got hit by debris in a perfectly neat fashion. Please tell me what triggered this collapse I really would like to know.Its funny how the the explanation for wtc 7 is different with so many people. Here's Larry Silverstein's explanation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100Edited by lost-apathy, : No reason given.