Cyprus-Forum.com

[Londonrake]

I won’t waste my time trying to refute it ………

You won’t because you can’t.

The questions I posed are simple and fundamental to that days events. But they’re ones to which you have no convincing answers/proof, because there simply isn’t any. You’re just peddling more “fake moon landing “ type Conspiracy Theory BS. However it’s cryptically cloaked.

So instead you take comfort by hiding in your chosen minutiae. As you always do in these situations. From where, refusing to budge, you reach out to bludgeon away, waiting for your prey to die of boredom/exhaustion. Or - quit the forum - taking their sponsorship with them.

Then, you laughingly claim that you “shot them down”.

[Robin Hood]

Kikapu

Yes, it is true that for a seconds or two, the damaged part of the building collapsed bottom up until the rest of the topside of the building collapsed onto the base of the damaged building, which then the whole building came down top to bottom one floor at a time.

After the top section dropped It did not come down one floor at a time, it fell at freefall acceleration. You see that on the videos and for that to happen there must have been no opposing resistance to gravity.(Newton) If you believe the floors destroyed these columns then there would have been a reduction in acceleration every time a floor pancaked But that was not what the videos all show.

There has to be another explanation? IMO: The columns started to collapse around the time the top section started its ‘bottom up’ collapsed. (or even before?) The floors were outside the perimeter of the central core but descending columns would have pulled the floor pans on each floor in and down with them, and they in turn would have pulled the outer shell in and down as well. I think It was the descending core columns that took out the floors, not the other way round!

That is what happened for both the building, just at different time, but each building had the same pattern in collapsing because the conditions and cause were almost identical.

But what was the cause and what were those conditions?

Again just IMO, had there been no human interference after the impact, the towers would never have collapsed! The fires would have run out of fuel and then would have died out naturally! If the columns had been weakened then a collapse would have followed the line of least resistance to gravity ..... it would have toppled? It didn’t ..... it defied Newton and went virtually straight down with no resistance. Try explaining how that could happen without some ‘intervention’? It's impossible.

Now, I also agree with you that the core of the building should have stood on it’s own after the rest of the building collapsed around it given the amount of steel and concrete was used to make it, but it did not.

Again just IMO, I believe it would not have collapse at all ..... it needed help! The floors were light concrete and that stuff cracks (I have seen it happen first hand but on a smaller scale) and breaks up when stressed. It then forms an immensely dusty rubble. But that is ALL outside the core! If the floors detached from the core columns the whole tower would have conceivable ‘peeled’ like a banana!

In order for the whole core to be destroyed by other causes (deliberately), then each floor had to be destroyed this way since the buildings came down from top to bottom.

When the columns were removed from the site not one column was found longer than 36ft ..... the height of a spandrel or two floors! If the columns were destroyed almost simultaneously every second floor and fell they would take the floors and the spandrels down with them. You would then get the free fall acceleration we saw in the videos.

Had the building collapsed bottom up just like WTC 7, then conspiracy would have a better acceptance. With such conspiracies, then both the building should have collapsed immediately after being struck by the planes in a chain reaction, regardless whether the buildings came down top to bottom, bottom to up or just sideways.

I agree with you but ..... if it was a controlled demolition, maybe it was a case of delaying that scenario to allow time to get people out? I have never believed that even if they were rigged, that the intention was to kill people, but a ‘hidden’ means to bring the buildings down into a smaller area in an emergency situation by keeping it to a vertical collapse by controlled demolition, rather than just let it collapse randomly or topple!

However, it did not happen that way, but in the exact same way for both the buildings 1 & 2 as seen in the videos. Unless of course, that the videos has been doctored!

I don’t think any videos have been doctored but did you study this one that I posted earlier? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaydhlOVogk...... at 1:16 there is a judder on the camera, another at 1:20 and the collapse starts around 1:29. As I said in the original post, there is another video from another camera, which shows the same camera shake. Surely that was indicative of a large explosion deep within the structure .... maybe in the basement? At the exact time of the first shake the volume of the smoke erupts and engulfs the upper structure. I have never seen that explained! But a geological observatory some miles away recorded it as ‘an explosion’!

[Lordo]

But surely somebody somewhere would have mentioned the fact that there was an explosion. What people originally thought they heard were explosions were in fact the trusses pulling off the columns.
I also saw a clip where a fellow came out of the basement and he said it was full of smoke. No mention of any explosions. If there was an explosion in the basement, there would be some signs. If the camera moved the same time as another, it could be a pure coincidence or it could be an unrelated incident to do with something else. There are all sorts of possibilities.

[Pyrpolizer]

So.... can the geniuses of the forum, tell us what happened to the core of the buildings? How many pieces did they find in the rubble, were they in their original shape and form, were they distorted, bent, melted, evaporated etc etc.

[repulsewarrior]

...a simple explanation, and quite reasonable; although questions remain about the core, its debris and the evidence which was moved away so quickly.

[Kikapu]

...a simple explanation, and quite reasonable; although questions remain about the core, its debris and the evidence which was moved away so quickly.

Unfortunately this video misrepresented the collapse of the towers by showing the towers collapsing bottom to up, instead of, top to bottom!

[Robin Hood]

But surely somebody somewhere would have mentioned the fact that there was an explosion. What people originally thought they heard were explosions were in fact the trusses pulling off the columns.

Both the video’s show the tremble at the same moment in time. Both were fixed cameras and both showed that at that very moment the smoke literally erupted out of the tower. When the collapse started the mast tilts toward the side of the aircraft impact as it predictably started to take the line of least resistance and then disappeared into the dust/smoke cloud. Then you see the tower below the impact point start to descend ...... and it accelerated. There seems to be few that question that the collapse was close to, if not actually at free fall acceleration.

If the ‘explosions’ were the floor trusses detaching from the columns, and there were 88 of them on every floor, to create this ‘explosion’ they would need to all fail within milliseconds. So, even if this was possible ........ which it isn't .... why did the outer shell not peel like a banana because it was the trusses that held the outer shell to the columns via huge girders, on all four sides of the core and on each floor.

So in that scenario what was then carrying out the systematic destruction of the columns? I have yet to see an explanation of how this was achieved ...... without human intervention i.e. controlled demolition! BTW: not all ‘explosives’ go bang! Cutting charges such as Thermite/Thermate, FIZZ and belch white smoke and any blasting charge required would be very small.

Sorry. LORDO but it doesn’t add up!

I also saw a clip where a fellow came out of the basement and he said it was full of smoke. No mention of any explosions. If there was an explosion in the basement, there would be some signs

The basement was huge and went down several stories below ground level and also housed the subway station as well as the multi-level parking areas. A group of Fire fighters in the lobby of the Nth tower said they hears a series of ‘booms’, as he said “Like ... boom...boom ... boom ... boom in rapid succession” , just before the Sth tower collapsed. Again it is in a video .... if I could find it.

If the cameras shook at the same time as each other, it could be a pure coincidence or it could be an unrelated incident to do with something else. There are all sorts of possibilities

.
Coincidence? Some coincidence! You Name an ‘unrelated incident’ that would shake two fixed cameras many, many meters apart, which also triggered the eruption of masses of dense black smoke almost a 1,000ft above the ground level at the exact same moment and just a few seconds before the collapse sequence started?

Another coincidence? Again it doesn’t add up!

[Robin Hood]

...a simple explanation, and quite reasonable; although questions remain about the core, its debris and the evidence which was moved away so quickly.

Unfortunately this video misrepresented the collapse of the towers by showing the towers collapsing bottom to up, instead of, top to bottom!

It also didn't explain ..... HOW!

All these videos show fires, trusses bending or detaching and floors collapsing .... but all this was external to the center core! To add to the mystery, every floor was surrounded by a supporting 'collar' to hang that end of the trusses on ..... and the bolts were max. 5/8". I believe these collars accounted for 40% of the core's weight.

WHAT was taking down the core columns whist all these floors were collapsing?

[Robin Hood]

So.... can the geniuses of the forum, tell us what happened to the core of the buildings? How many pieces did they find in the rubble, were they in their original shape and form, were they distorted, bent, melted, evaporated etc etc.

Nobody can tell you how they came down ...... without considering controlled demolition! But if you think that way you become a 'conspiracy theorist' to those that 'know' better ......... but they can't actually explain it!

[cyprusgrump]

The problem with the ‘Controlled Demolition Theory’ is that you’d have to believe that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of other buildings wired up with explosives in case of a terrorist attack. After all, they didn’t just increase Airport Security and lock Cockpit Doors at the airports the terrorists flew from.

Yet nobody has ever seen anything or found anything suspicious to this day. Nobody has raised warnings about the dangers faced by hundreds of thousands of people occupying these buildings every single day.

And you’d have to wonder, if the point of wiring the building(s) with explosives was to stop them toppling in the event of a terrorist attack, why weren’t the explosions triggered immediately when the aircraft hit?

After all, the ‘expert’ on this forum tells us that the underground bomb attack was that close (holds finger and thumb a few mm apart) from bringing the building town, toppling over on great swathes of Lower Manhattan. So if that attack was repeated, the demolition would have had to have been immediate.

And if the explosion wasn’t going to be immediate, why wasn’t the building evacuated before it was demolished, why were the firefighters allowed into the building before it was demolished?

Occam's razor is why…