Richard Gage on CA Fox station- 9/11 Evidence that is was a Controlled Demolition
 

wow.. watch this architect talk about how scientifically the explanations the gov't has provided for 9/11 are impossible.. maybe 9/11 was a inside job.. :upsidedow

https://youtube.com/watch?v=aht_ZmqA-pk

Maybe the video was an inside job?

how silly

And the idiotic conspiracy theories and their followers continue. Hilarious how many idiots exist.

well if you watched it then you saw an example of controlled demolition and the actual news footage from the building 7 collapse which was NOT hit by a plane.. they look pretty similar..

interesting:2 cents:

I never said im a firm believer of the conspiracy theories as I had friends who died in the buildings, but it sure makes u scratch your head when u watch stuff like this.

No, it makes me scratch my head at how many retarded theories people with too much time on their hands can come up with.

These are qualified scientists and architects saying it doesn't make sense... and that further investigations are needed.

If they had said "Building 7 became unstable so we pulled it"... I'd have zero questions about it.
But their official explanation is that it just fell on it's own.... looking exactly like a controlled demolition.

That leaves me with questions.

From 22 - 28 I worked for DMD Services in Chicago. That's a building demolition company in case you don't know.

While I was not there at 9-11, I can say with 100% certainty, that the building in question was taken down via a controlled demolition. I did this job for 6 years and helped bring down around 50 buildings, each of them looking exactly like this one.

I'm not saying it was an inside job, there is no way to know. What I am saying is, that looks 100% like a controlled demolition. I've spoken to others who still work for DMD regarding this topic and EVERY ONE OF THEM agree.

Because if it collapsed because of the major damage it wouldve done what exactly? Fall up? Implode? Tell me exactly how else the building wouldve come down.

Ahh yes the Nano thermite. Theory... Good God.... :uhoh

If a building falls from damage, it will not collapse at free fall speed. It does not do so because the entire building is not damaged and the structures under it would support part of the building causing a staggered or even a crooked or partial collapse. It would not pancake as the buildings did on 9/11.

What you have here is a perfect demolition where the building drops at free fall speed and collapses straight down (pancakes) with zero interference. The only way you could have zero structural interference is if you simultaneously severed the supporting structural beams below.

Buildings do not collapse in this manner otherwise. Not in the history of man kind has a building collapsed into its own footprint, at free fall speed, without a controlled demolition.

Ya all that thermite was just coincidental :P

I dont think it was an inside job. But hearing first hand testimonies of people inside the building seeing and hearing bombs go off in the basement and on different floors as they run up and down stairs saving people makes you wonder if there is more to the story.

Actually, the building did NOT fall at free fall speed. Don't let a little thing like facts interrupt your expert oppinion though.

I stopped reading at the free fall speed part :1orglaugh

I thought you were the expert :1orglaugh

Experts on gfy make me laugh.

Fucking imbecile.

:error:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

But he's really an expert...

He got the free fall thing from some conspiracy site...

It's kinda worrying that he calls himself an expert since even a blind person could see that the debris falls faster than the building itself.

It's proven over and over again that these conspiracy nuts are the biggest retards alive.

Bombs? Did they see the bombs? People running in chaos who never heard a bomb go off in their life can actually indentify bombs going off in the basement?


Wow...

And that you actually believe that is even more wow.

I love these threads. It really shows who the imbeciles on this board are.

I should have said explosion not bomb. And do I believe what people say? Sure why not, why would they lie?

In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?
In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTA...ic_comment.pdf), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.

To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.

The approach taken by NIST is summarized in Section 3.6 of the final summary report, NCSTAR 1A (released Nov. 20, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf) and detailed in Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCST...%20Vol%202.pdf).

The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:

Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity
This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

indeed it does...but they are not who you are talking about

only fools believe the official story

Oh yeah and some of "those people" that heard bombs/explosions were firefighters and first responders.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/852742...ter_explosion/

Explosions in the basement

some people made some nice bank from this conspiracy.

ROFLROFL yea it's the FOOLS who believe the official story, and it's the GENIUSES who believe the conspiracy theory. Absolutely hilarious logic.

Anyway it's a beautiful Saturday and I absolutely refuse to get in to the same stupid argument with the same losers in a 9/11 conspiracy thread. You super internet sleuths have a great day.

Now explosions sounds a bit different than bombs doesnt it? And yes if someone say they heard explosions it sounds more believable.

Stop saying bombs. Those people can't indentify bombs. I'm pretty sure that 99.9% of the people who heard explosions never heard a bomb going off in their life. Not even the firefighters or police.

Uhm so they bombed the basement so the building can collapse from the top?


Is that what you're aiming at? If not then tell me what you are trying to say exactly.

I would be willing to bet that any major high rise fire is going to have explosive sounds. Doesn't have to be bombs.

That's how conspiracy morons work. Any explosion = bomb.

i like how everyone with their head in the sand just refutes scientific evidence...because popular mechanics....a controlled media outlet says otherwise..lol


funnay..keep your head in the sand..i know its safe and warm and there are no monsters except those living in a cave on the otherside of the world

everyone in control here is super nice and they would never do anything wrong

oh wait they lied to go to war..and tortured people into confessing to bullshit


as jesse said..give him one hour to waterbord dick cheney and he will have cheney admitting to killing anyone you like

I know - let's spend $50million on an official inquiry - and come to the already foregone conclusion. :thumbsup

I've always thought it was controlled, its so easy to tell.

just a question: doesn't it usually take a few weeks to prepare a controlled demolition? drilling holes for the explosives, cables everywhere etc? that would be hard to hide

Ah another expert here..

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

No seriously :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Unbelievable comments like this...