Stop, hey, what's that sound? Everybody look whats going down...

very interesting but is it me that you cant really see the white clouds of smoke :S - on the first vid

im loading up the 2nd

PEPPER wrote:

I always thought like all skyscrapers the Twin Towers are similar to a stack of pancakes...levels upon levels...and in between each level is air. When each level collapsed due to the weakening from the jet fuel fire the floor fell...the air has to go somewhere so it took the path of least resistance....the window (this is the white smoke you are seeing). As for the explosions we supposedly are hearing, I believe that this is the middle of the floor collapsing as it implodes on itself…seconds before each level fell on itself bringing the whole thing down.

I am always game for a good conspiracy theory but you 9/11 nuts are way out there for me….why not go after the true lie…we never landed on the moon.

Happy Memorial Day Weekend.

oh wow are you completely serious about the moon landing?

how would someone plant explosivces at the bottom, surely that would take months of planning and doing? and people wold notice?

Not to mention all the people that heard explosions coming from the basements, and people coming up from the basements all cut up and bloody with their skin hanging off.

Explosions did happen in the basements. I don't think it's really contested at this point, except for those unaware.

one of many out there...

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/448824/sub_basement_explosions_in_world_trade_center_first_hand_accou/

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

That white smoke you see is rising from the base of the building BEFORE the building starts its collapse sequence.

You people that are denying that white smoke eminates from the base of the building in PRECISE concert with a LOUD seismic event are the nutty ones, not me.

How do you know it's coming from the base of the building? It could be coming from in front of the building as well.

So what EXACTLY do you think those three loud booms are, at least one of which is visibly linked to smoke at the ground level?

It could very well be a coincidence. The smoke could come from debris that fell and was still smoking. Debris that fell on cars, other fires caused by debris.

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Chopitdown, are you serious?
So what EXACTLY do you think those three loud booms are, at least one of which is visibly linked to smoke at the ground level?

Are you saying that the trauma of the plane impact caused a massive column failure in the basement?

If so, what do you think the smoke is from?

???

i think the smoke is from the building. It could be from explosives, it could be from a weakened structure, it could be from the cars underneath the building exploding if there were fires in the basements or in the parking decks below the building. It could be from anywhere. This much we know. planes flew into the towers. They fell. This much is impossible to prove (not impossible to believe)...explosives were planted to bring the building down.

http://www.designnews.com/article/CA6363426.html
He described the issue in a nutshell: “Because of their unique design and the use of the so called “steel bearing wall” tube structural system, which as far as we know has never been used before or after its application in the WTC towers, the buildings essentially showed no resistance to the impact of a medium-sized plane flying into them at about 450miles per hour.”

Elaborating on the novelty of the design, he said that the notion of a ‘structural framing system’ simply didn’t apply in the case of the twin towers. “Rather than traditional columns and beams, the designers employed a steel bearing wall tube system for the perimeter and steel truss joists in the floors that connected the gravity load-carrying inner core columns to the outside perimeter steel bearing walls. The relatively thin steel bearing wall pre-fabricated units of the perimeter bearing tube were bolted together in a Lego-like fashion to expedite construction” he explained.

He also noted that designers chose to fabricate many of the building columns out of very high strength steel [90 ksi steel as opposed to the more typical 36-65 ksi steel]. “This is not allowed by the structural design codes then and is still notallowed in current codes,” he stressed. “But the World Trade Center did not need to obtain a permit from City Hall. Because of special status as Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, they could make such choices outside the prevailing codes.”

This choice, he argued, allowed builders to use less steel in the columns [two to three times thinner than typical columns] presumably to save cost.

But by using high strength steel and thin cross sections, he pointed out, on impact the plane was able to cut through the outside steel bearing wall and enter the building--delivering thousands of gallons of jet fuel to the interior. During the ensuing fire, he said, the thin outside columns of the steel bearing walls were quite vulnerable to the rapid rise of temperature in them and reduction of their strength as a result of rising temperature of the steel.

“When the fires started, they heated up the steel. In my opinion, the truss joists collapsed first, leaving the exterior columns of probably two floors in the impact area with no bracing but still under gravity load from the floors above. As the columns heated up and reached temperatures of nearly 1,000F, their strength was reduced to less than half the design strength and they started to buckle. When the columns buckled, the top portion of the building, losing its supports, was pulled down by gravity and dropping on the floors below, pancaking the floors one after another and leading to progressive collapse in an almost perfect vertical direction of the pull of gravity force.”

In a 2001 article Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation, published in the Journal of Metal, MIT Material Engineering Professor Thomas Eagar and Graduate Student Christopher Musso concluded that the failure of the steel resulted from loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire and the loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from non-uniform temperatures in the fire. They did not comment on the type of steel used in the design.

In that paper, they concluded that the World Trade Center was not defectively designed, and that “no designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors.”

Astaneh-Asl says that the reason for undertaking his studies is not to implicate the designers, but rather to look into the design and answer the basic question that has bothered him since September 11: “Why did these towers collapse so quickly and so completely while other steel structures, including skyscrapers, under intense fire for hours, have not failed?”

He says that he feels he is closing in on the answer. “These structures were so unique that their collapse does not represent the performance expected of any other existing steel high-rise structure subjected to the same scenario,” he says.