Don't miss my other two videos on WTC building collapse WTC 7 - th-cam.com/video/KMvCWFCoVN4/w-d-xo.html WTC 1 & 2 (Evidence based) - th-cam.com/video/KMvCWFCoVN4/w-d-xo.html To see evidence of the phenomena mentioned in this video, watch these videos 1) Inward dent in perimeter columns and immediate buckling - th-cam.com/video/ULdiD6gYZO0/w-d-xo.html & th-cam.com/video/5Um971QC96w/w-d-xo.html 2) Shredding of perimeter columns - th-cam.com/video/kWCDA09XFT0/w-d-xo.html 3) Central core staying strong till the last moment - th-cam.com/video/3HbD_Q6kmh8/w-d-xo.html (2:06) & th-cam.com/video/R889eSvuS-w/w-d-xo.html (2:03) 4) The superstrong foundation (sway of the building) - th-cam.com/video/Qk5NQgU-9G4/w-d-xo.html Your support on Patreon is vital to my team. Please support us at - www.patreon.com/Sabins . I am still studying about the collapse of WTC7. Sorry for the delay in WTC7 video release. I hope I can release this video by mid December. Cheers Sabin Mathew
Looking forward to this as so many people use WTC 7 as "proof" of a conspiracy. I don't get it personally as a collapse of two 110 story buildings would compromise the structure of buildings near by from the vibrations alone and that's ignoring falling debris and fire.
I'd suggest everyone to unsubscribe until he looks at the study made by the University of Alaska. It seems like the guy behind Lesics has become desperate for clicks.
FAIL ... it was NOT an actual university study BY the university ... but instead a PRIVATE COMMISSION by the morons of Richard Gages wee fourteen year old online pretend petition that PAID an ALREADY believe to find what he was PAID to find.@@ziad_jkhan
Please do a video of the physics of the Building 7 collapse on the same day. the building that was NOT hit by any plane, and was newer, with better engineering.
Very informative. Any chance you could do a video that explains how WTC building 7 collapsed in the exact same way (despite not getting hit by a plane)?
Well stated and on point. Ppl still believe it was the planes, and according to majority of the know it alls I seen, was that supposedly a part of one of the towers fell onto building seven (even this CGI shows how the towers fell). It does not add up at all.
Debris from the WTC1 and WTC2 collapses damaged the buildings around them, including WTC7, and started major fires which were left to burn for seven hours. The heat weakened internal core steel columns in one part of the building failed vertically. And then the now unsupported adjacent columns failed laterally. The debris from the steel frame collapsing pierced the now freestanding outer shell near the base and it finally collapsed.
ALL the columns in bldg 7 collapsed at the same time, not just the few which were hot from a fire. The columns which fireman were standing right next to just 5 minutes earlier were not surrounded by flames.
@@Larry26-f1w watch a lecture by Dr Judy Wood and ask yourself if it was controlled demolition was the rubble pile big enough? Or thought exercise: how could you rig a 110 storey 1million ton building for demolition without a massive civil engineering undertaking that thousands would remember? Use your brains guys
So crazy... the videos of the towers falling AT FREE FALL RATE, building 7, prove that were brought down with controlled explosions yet people just blindly believe what their told. Even the builders of the towers even said the buildings were designed to withstand 100 planes flying into them - what a world we live in...
I worked at 2 WTC up until April 2001. I got laid off from a start up. I was amazed at those buildings. I would stare straight up on my lunch break in amazement. I guess it wasn’t my time. RIP to all who perished.
Having survived 9/11 only because of a layoff… wow, I would imagine that was probably life-changing for you! I never worked in the towers but whenever I was on foot in the city, I would stop to look up at the tops of them. Even from a block away, I would have to bend my neck and arch my back to the point that it felt as if I were looking up at something BEHIND me in the sky!
I can't believe a video with Hulk executing the Trade Center is the only video in 22 years to explain this in a way that seems logical. The question was always: if the floors pancaked, where was the steel core? The sagging floor demonstrating pulling the walls inwards makes a LOT of sense.
The planes engines blew through the towers. Heavy components took out or distorted many core columns, the others descended by being dragged down by the external walls _through_ the top hat truss. It was my first thought too - but I am an engineer . . . and thought again.
Certainly “seems” logical. Yet the inconvenient truth remains. Never forget even the experienced news casters that day said the phrase “controlled demoIition”
The steel core remained for a few minutes before also giving out, likely from joints no longer being within tolerance and also falling like a house of cards. You can see it happen in real time with the NBC coverage of the collapse. Once the smoke clears a little bit, you can clearly see the cores failure.
I lost my 22 years old granddaughter. She was in there to interview for an internship. I've never been down there since rebuild. Thank you for sharing this.
I’m so sorry to hear of your loss. I visited NY for the first time this summer and saw the WTC memorial. It was nice how they did it and of course has all the names of those who were lost. her memory will live on. Stay safe
I’m sorry to hear of your loss. I hope there’s a real investigation because of people just like your granddaughter. This video is a lie and a slap in the face to her, you and all of us who really care about what happened that day. People need to hear the real truth before it’s lost in history and forever a lie.
@@NickkaDUB dude you have no humanity in you right? They are sharing their experience about how they lost a relative, which is very tragic, and you're here just spewing your conspiracy theory? Shame on you. Also, saying "no uh, this is a lie!" after the video shows and demonstrates with ALOT of evidence how the tower may have collapsed, just shows how purposely ignorant you are.
To my knowledge the spray foam mentioned was actually asbestos based and came in huge quantities, causing long lasting health risks to people close to the building after the collapse.
Most of the fire retardant spray on material is asbestos material. I’m not sure if it’s still in use today but it’s literally everywhere and not just spray foam insulation but loads of other materials as well.
Yup, they were told they had to update the buildings prior to 9/11. The cost was estimated at morethan the two towers' value. The owner made around 4 billion in insurance when they fell as well.
You are incorrect. Only the North Tower had any asbestos in it at all and only below the 40th floor. The SFRM used in the rest of the North Tower and ALL of the South Tower contained no asbestos material. Plenty of toxins floating around that site. Why people have to just jump to assumptions about asbestos and ignore true and relevant facts boggles my mind.
The construction companies that built the towers was owned by the Italian mafia they pocketed the money that the building developers gave to them and brought CHEAP METAL NOT STEAL !!!!….
If you can acknowledge that trivializing one of the most important events in history is at best naive, that would be good for you. Do some research. Start with terms like building 7, thermite, Larry Silverstein, and NORAD.
@@WildMatsu the live footage shows shattered steel beams being jettisoned away from the towers as they explode into dust as they fall during the demolitions on 9/11 . This video doesn’t explain this phenomenon
@@WildMatsu I’m half deaf so I only noticed that steel beams had been reduced to stick sized pieces as they flew into the air . The pulverizing concrete had created such a wave of dust as the towers fell that it almost hid the steel fragments shooting sideways from the collapse
@@johnbruce4003 So Sorry, it was Col Mustard in the conservatory with building demolition caps. I was stupid to believe all the footage of the roaring fires and several partial collapses. When facts get in the way - go conspiracy!
@@pse2020 Bingo! Spot on... fire can't create a free fall collapse of that building. To those who doubt: then why did the construction crane NOT melt, that was closer to the Towers than Bldg 7? Yet B7 collapses?? We need an explanation that includes the obvious use of demolitions. You are spot on.
how much did the tower weigh and the jet.. concrete. how can an alluminum balloon jet destroy iron steel and concrete the heat energy from the jet fuel can be measured in the external fireball image. that fact then determines the heat energy within the building u explain that the material within the building was fuel to expand the fire damage melting at some point all the heat energy was absorbed from then un burned frame.. same effect at the pentagon why no destruction there? next time your got nothing to do look at an image of the pentagon and a ukraiin missel striking a building.. the lies shankswberg pa no piece of anything look at images of plane crashes there is stuff everywhere no cameras laughable
Good interpretation of the physics of the "why" of the collapse of Towers 1 & 2. However, I am keenly interested in the physics of the "why" of the collapse of Tower 7...
See, this is what totally made me realize that it was planned. You're telling me, a giant skyscraper, which burned for about 7 hours, just collapses? There wasn't even smoke or anything like that billowing out, and the skyscraper that caught fire in Hong Kong, didn't collapse despite it burning for 9 hours, and it was a lot less wider than WTC 7, which other buildings around did catch some fire, but were okay. Can't make this nonsense up, two trillion dissapeared on the same day as well? Yeah, what a conspiracy, the government would never do anything wrong to the people.
a firefighter friend of mine lost his life while trying to rescue victims in one of the towers, May Jose A Guadalupe R.I.P. as well the rest of the people that perished on that day!
@@vaughnmcintire4015 > *"you can blame your own government"* You mean for not identifing the terrorists before they committed the 9/11 terrorist attack?
@@BullToTheShit I talked to civilian pilots - they all said that such a maneuver is very complicated - the probability that they would hit the center of the building with their plane - is very small. Everyone claims that the pilots were incredibly skilled - where did the terrorists train the pilots, and on what planes ?
My brother was working for NYC OEM when this happened. He was a block and a half away when the first jet hit, and began assisting with evacuations. He lost his best friend that day, then in January of this year, he died from the cancer he developed from being there amongst the debris, searching for survivors and bodies. He may have survived the day, but that day eventually took him from us, and 3 surgeries to remove the cancer couldn't keep it at bay. He was almost 51 this year. My brother lived, breathed, and died for his city, his home. I miss my big brother every day, hoping I'll get a random phone call from him, listening to his perverted jokes, and finding out this was his most epic prank ever.....RIP, Paul 😭
@@mooneyes2k478 thank you! It was hell watching him go through 2 rounds of chemo/radiation and 2 surgeries, only to see it destroy his immune system and keep coming back. He's not in pain anymore, but he had to be in constant pain in order to be free of it.
Death is a temporary state: Job:14:12-15: So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep. O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me! If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come. Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee: thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands. Ec:3:20: All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Ec:12:7: Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. Ec:9:10: Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest. This vid is one of the first ones to start linking companies that were in the WTC: th-cam.com/video/MSyFD51vN_4/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUUd2hvIHNob3Qgam9obiBvJ25laWw%3D WKJO: Who Killed John O'Neill?
@@Larry26-f1wi guess they were pulverized like the concrete lol do you even understand what kind of force was created when the collapse happend? Its compareable to a nuclear bomb.
Great animation, forgot to mention the guy shown spraying the "insulation foam" was spraying Asbestos insulation, each tower contained approximately 300 ton of Asbestos, which was turned to dust when the towers fell dispersing Asbestos dust all over the city, the affects of this started to show in 2019 with cases of Mesothelioma rising, As of December 2020, 80,146 first responders enrolled in the WTC Health program to receive treatment for 9/11-related illness, sadly there will be hundreds of thousands of citizens who will also require treatment.
Why were the towers dustified on the way down instead of instead of in giant floor sections and walls like a normal pancaking collapse? Why did everyone in the lobby and basement report bombs having gone off prior to the planes hitting?
There were 100,000 tons of steel in each tower. Even without the insulation how hot could the core columns get in two hours? Where is the data on the tons of steel and tons of concrete on each level? Including the 6 basement levels.
@@psikeyhackr6914 Well I’m not sure how…. But somehow hot enough to be molten metal in a pile at the bottom for three months after even though they were spraying water on it constantly….
10:31 Bush said, "No one would have ever imagined someone would fly planes into buildings" ... And then this documentary says that the engineers designed for exactly that. Golden!
It was assumed until that day that when terrorists hijack a plane, they do it to use the passengers as bargaining leverage - they want something and will trade passengers to get it. That is why the standard procedure for passengers was to not try to fight the hijackers: you are worth more to the hijacker alive than dead, unless you start to cause problems for them. So what was not imagined was terrorists hijacking a plane not to get the passengers but to get the plane itself. This is why the 9/11 terrorists chose flights that typically had low passenger volumes. As soon as the passengers on United Flight 93 found out that they were not being taken hostage, but that the terrorists were going to kill everyone, the calculus changed and they heroically fought back. They gave their lives to save those at whatever the fourth target was. We all know now that if we are on a plane that someone tries to hijack, we all get out of our seats and overwhelm the hijackers with superior numbers.
Well presidents don't always know history very well. Remember our current president said cannons were illegal when the 2a was written, which is wrong cannons always and still are legal. They are just elected officials and not always the smartest people.
Never would I think that a video about 9/11, one of the most tragic events in modern human history, would contain: Hulk cutting the WTC in half 0:20 Metal Pipe falling sound 4:42 and Cigar Man from Grab That Auto 5 5:46
13:10 Nice model. But the wing span of the 767 was 156 feet and the 757 had a wingspan of 125 feet and the tower was 208 feet wide. Your model makes the plane look as wide as the building.
@@ETIC-U Pretty sure those claims have been completely & utterly debunked mate so don't worry about it. The government can be ar5eholes & pretty corrupt at times, but they don't fly planes into skyscrapers to murder thousands of their own citizens.
open air designs turned out to be more uncomfortable in an office environment one look in the wrong direction and suddenly your presence in the room becomes very awkward this incentivizes workers to keep their eyes glued to the screen and use privacy filters on their monitors
The only problem I have with the animation in this video is that the animator rendered the video so that it made it appear as though the building was collapsing at ground level, whereas in reality, the collapse occurred right below the damage area in the building. The floors were collapsing in a pancake fashion starting below the fires and continuing on down.
@@vuurkip2491 i did watch the video but but you know what's very strange is that the towers were engineered so that it can withstand a 707 crash. You think fuel from 707 coming from the middle east will have a tank full of fuel? Most of the fire exits through the hole the plane makes and some of the fuel can spill out. So it's dumb and illogical to say that just plane fuel can collapse a building after 1 hour of the towers withstanding it. There is definitely external interference occuring that cause the building to basically freefall
@hiddenintheshadows530 The fuck you mean? There are literally photos of wtc7 on fire, and also why comment here, there's other videos that you can spread your message.
The animation at 10:15 is very unfortunate, as the entire structure moves down at the same time. This movement would only occur if the tower collapses from the bottom (nutjob theory of bombs on bottom floor) rather than from the top (what actually happenend: plane crash). I understand it is done to make the animation a little easier to produce, but it's important to note that , when looking at videos of the collapse, the towers clearly collapse from the top, and not the bottom.
Naysayers refuse to acknowledge that fact the the interior of the structure was moving and collapsing at a different rate than the exterior exoskeleton. Because of this oversight, conspiracy theories abound by feeble and shallow minds and will continue to do so in perpetuity.
Very cool. A lot of work went into this. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and explaining it in a way that even an average person like me can understand.
See they even paid off this random average person! Sheeple! If you count the columns, and multiply, subtract , and add a few, the numbers match up to the exact coordinates of the loch ness monster and the grassy knoll. This easily shows that it was secret mini nuke thermite demo teams in operation, and the planes were just a distraction so hamburglar could run away with the vaults load of secret gov hamburger buns. I mean you tell me which makes sense , planes bringing down buildings, or masterminding a plan to fly planes into buildings, AND having secret mini nuke thermite demo teams , thousands and thousands of paid off people and media who will keep secrets, all for some insurance money or whatever baloney.
I decided to return to my autism-fueled fixation of 9/11 tonight and absolutely was not expecting the Hulk to come in with a machete 20 seconds in, completely threw me for a loop
Its because this is real physics. Not and theory spreading video with emotional drama music and out of context testimonies to pull at peoples heart strings. This is real truth. Nothing to hide. However I am personally still sus about the floor design. The engineers are smart enough to design things to fail very specifically. So I personally think it was set up from the start to fail. But yeah anyway.
Wrong, I remember seeing a complete explanation of how it happened from engineers a year or so after it happened. Not sure if it was on the Science Channel or Discovery Channel. Pretty much every explanation in this video was the same as the the one that I watched back then.
I'm interested in finding out why wtc7 collapsed in the manner seen in videos. Lesics said he would produce a video but he's not done that. I've looked through the comments but can't find any plausible explanations. If there is anybody that genuinely knows can they please explain why the whole of building 7 initially collapsed at free fall for over 2 seconds?
Hi Diana, I did reply to your question to me on the other thread but will address it here too in case you've missed it. The only section of the building that reached freefall acceleration was the outer facade of the building which became detached from the main structure. This was simply the result of buckling. Fire fighters stated that a collapse was inevitable several hours prior to it falling, it really was that obvious. The sprinkler systems had been compromised & no attempts were made to stem the blaze that was confirmed on at least 16 of its floors & the building was left to freeburn..the fire-proofing was rated at 5hrs if I remember correctly. It actually burned for 7hrs before it fell, 2hrs beyond this. The reason it collapsed in the manner it did was down to the implementation of longspan beams used to create a large, open atrium. Longspan beams are more susceptible to fire for obvious reasons. Hope this helps.
Dianna aren’t you lucky to have two replies from the foremost experts on building collapses answer your question so quickly . It’s almost hard to believe that they both would chime in together almost simultaneously! It must be your lucky day!!!!
@@dirkdiggler8260 Thnx for your reply here and on the other thread ❤️ I have replied on the other thread with a couple of queries. There is another other explanation here in this thread from You Tube Sucks but their explanation seems to be different from yours, which is confusing me🤔🤔 You say the facade was detached from the structure and they say that the external moment frame remained and this was the last part of the building to fall. Which is correct? Also, you mention buckling but do not say which columns buckled or where these buckled. They say that column 79 buckled first then other internal columns buckled and that csused the collapse of the whole internal core structure and all floors which progressed into the collapse of most external columns until there was only 4 corner cjlmns supporting the external moment frame. Is the the same buckling that you are meaning? If the collapse of the whole building progressed from the failure of one intern column near the north east corner, can you please explain how a asymmetrical progressive collapse ends up in a symmetrical coolaose of the whole envelope of the building? Also, how could the firemen know that internal column 79 would occur, which would lead to the whole building collapsing?
@@TH-camSucks_1 Thnx very much for your detailed trply❤️❤️. There's loads of other interesting information you've provided in addition to just explaining the free fall collapse episode. I also have an explanation fro Dirk Diggler but what he says seems to be different from your explanation, which is confusing me🤔🤔. I have a few questions but you say you only want one at a time. My first question is this. Is it your or Dirk's explanation that is correct?
@@dianax266 - Your interest is clearly genuine and you do not appear to be engaging in discussion killing shenanigans so _you_ may feel free ask more than one question at a time. Dirk and I are both saying the same thing, just in different ways and I suspect Dirk will agree on that. Perhaps that is where the confusion is coming in - he and I are approaching the same issues from different perspectives, and in a different sequence. For example: Dirk says: _The only section of the building that reached freefall acceleration was the outer facade of the building which became detached from the main structure. This was simply the result of buckling_ That is dealing with the same event I describe in *Phase 4* and other than degree of detail we are both describing the same thing. _Phase 4 : After about 10 seconds only the exterior moment frame - a hollow shell mostly supported by the _*_4 corner columns_*_ and quite unable to stand on its own - remains standing_ (The interior structure was now gone leaving only this shell). _Casual observers falsely believe the building is still there since little has changed externally. They are wrong. The top center of the north face with nothing behind to support it leans into the big empty, forming a V shape in the roofline. Then the _*_few remaining perimeter columns inevitably buckle_*_ under the strain. The moment frame drops onto the top of the 7-story tall debris pile_ Central core columns have all failed and dropped, taking the floors with them, leaving only the outer shell - supported primarily by just the 4 corner columns which inevitably buckled and gave way. It was this hollow shell that was briefly measured at an _average_ of free fall for 2.25 seconds. And that information tells you nothing about why the building collapsed. The collapse only gives the illusion of being "symmetrical" if you only pay attention to the outer shell (which looks like a building but isn't). The _building_ is the stuff on the inside, not the skin on the outside. Remember, the first 10 seconds or so of the collapse - all the internal failures - are all happening inside those four walls and you can't see most of it. This is the part most people find the hardest to wrap their heads around and is quite different from the Twin Towers where most of what is happening can be easily seen. The FDNY did not have any idea where the failures would start, only that they would. Building 7 was clearly unstable and collapse was deemed inevitable. How and where the collapse started are details.
I have no issue with the video other than how it keeps showing the floors collapsing from the bottom up, which is false. They collapsed from the top down. I would think that's a pretty important detail to miss.
thats your only problem? The nose of the plane contains Radar equipment and is literally the weakest part of the plane and she shows it slide right like a jackrabbit on a date. This is not physics, this is narrative.
@@uselessagent7342 This was a simulated illustration, not a recorded documentary. If you focus on the minor imperfections you will lose sight of the larger and more important points. I understand your point about the radar dome. However, that dome had 120 tonnes of airplane right behind it.
Because two entire towers fell onto it? And the jet fuel didn't melt the beams, but the beams still became more malleable by the heat. Metal doesn't just instantly transform from cold to melted, it slowly weakens. The beams got hot and became easier to bend, which allowed the weight of the building and the plane to put enough pressure on them for them to snap.
This is an excellent video. Thank you for making a comprehensible explanation of all the variables that led to the mechanism of collapse. I've never bought into any of the conspiracies but it's nice to have some physical understanding of what happened to be able to counter argue conspiracy theorists take on the events. I'm looking forward to a more detailed explanation of how Tower 7 collapsed that you mentioned was coming.
That video is probably not going to happen, but if you like reading,... The unknown and unimportant Building 7, one of six to collapse and 9th of 10 destroyed on 9/11 confuses a lot of people. It was not famous, not a terrorist target, no one was killed in it and thus most people know very little about it, making them susceptible to utter bullshit. When the North Tower collapsed at 10:28am it bombarded the steel framed Building 7 with thousands of tons of burning debris, badly damaging the south and west faces and starting building-wide fires burning out of control for the next 7 hours. With half the responding FDNY firefighters having been killed, others injured, units in disarray, much of their equipment destroyed, no water pressure, and the greater urgency of Search & Rescue efforts, firefighting efforts at B7 were abandoned as futile. The building wasn’t going to be saved and was left to its fate. th-cam.com/video/g_SvpwyC17M/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=MFitz Collapse of a burning structure is always a concern for firefighters. Steel buildings subject to fire _rely on active fighting of the fires_ to survive. Left to their own devices they will collapse. Buildings are designed around 1 to 3 hours of fire resistance, allowing time for occupants to escape and _ACTIVE firefighting_ to get started, after which all bets are off. In B7 the occupants escaped, passive and active fire protections were compromised and *active firefighting never got started* which left the building to take its chances. It lost. Odds on Building 7 would eventually collapse,… and it did. No big deal in logic. That is the sort of choice firefighters make every day in brush fire situations - which houses to save and which ones to let go. Only real difference here is moving the decimal on the size and cost. *FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro* ; _The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged 7 World Trade Center, a 47 story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the buildings structural integrity was in serious doubt. I issued orders to PULL BACK the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision; We could not lose any more firefighters. It took a lot of time to PULL EVERYONE OUT, given the emotionalism of the day, communications difficulties and the collapse terrain_ *FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden* - _We had our special operations people set up surveying instruments to monitor, and see if there was any movement in the building. We were concerned of the possibility of collapse in the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse and if so, how soon? And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said 'In its current state you have about 5 hours_ With its deteriorating condition being reported throughout the day, the collapse of Building 7 expected by the FDNY, bystanders and the media. Which meant at least 24 video cameras recorded some or all of the collapse. Everyone at the time knew what was coming and why. th-cam.com/video/OY5S5k3tMHI/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=911InvestigationVids Building 7’s collapse was totally different to the Twin Towers, harder to understand and most of the details difficult to see. This does not mean however, we can’t sort out what happened through careful analysis and observation before, during and after the collapse. What follows is *MY EXPLANATION* of the collapse sequence using the best available information and relying on no authority. B7 was complex structure, a 47-story building built on top of a smaller existing 3-story building, requiring several lower floors dedicated to complex load transfer structures instead of usable office space. Of trapezoidal shape and all-steel tube-in-tube construction, B7 (above the 7th floor) consisted of a central core of steel columns carrying most of the gravity load, perimeter steel columns around the outside of the structure carrying the remainder of the gravity loads and long span beams and girders to tie those elements together and form the floors. On the outside of the building hung a moment frame - the last part of B7 to fall. *Phase 1* : Collapse initiation for B7 is *notably quiet* with observers not realizing the building was collapsing! There was no audible warning in the form of say hundreds of eardrum busting 180-190dB explosive bangs preceding the collapse. The first externally visible signs of collapse initiation occurred at 5:20:28 pm. Here at 12:00 a local CBS affiliate reporter is talking 10 blocks from B7 when collapse begins. People don’t start to notice the collapse until 12:11. Then at 12:45 is the famous CBS fixed camera clip of Building 7’s collapse Again, note how quiet it is. th-cam.com/video/t5tEy6mXSE8/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=fresnosean379 Collapse initiation was due to multiple lower floor failures above the load transfer region (7th floor) in the NE corner of the building. In this video at 0:45 you can see the NW corner from inside the building while under construction, with Column 79 just out of frame on the left. That big angled steel beam across the top of the frame connects to Column 79 at one end. Those girders connect to the beam. That beam and all those girders _depend on just one connection_ th-cam.com/video/nP3TNHPCIVU/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=EdwardCurrent *Phase 2* : Lower floor failures left core Column 79 laterally unsupported over an excessive length and it buckled. If you look at a floor diagram of Building 7 (see above) and look at all the structures that depend on column 79 you quickly realize _this one column was a relatively isolated structural element on which a disproportionately greater fraction of the structure depended_ . Externally we see a vertical progression of window breakage along the 44-46 line and a kink in the roof of the East Mechanical Penthouse at the top of the building, consistent with C79 failure. The transition from full capacity to almost no capacity occurs in virtually an instant. *Once the buckling failure occurs there is almost no resistance* Normally with a buckling column, the load could very well be redistributed to other columns, meaning the buckling could stop after a while. With C79 that is not the case - the failure did not redistribute the load, so the collapse rapidly progressed to the roofline, sinking the rooftop penthouse. *Phase 3* : With C79 gone, B7’s progressive, non-symmetrical collapse continues with C80 and C81 at the east end of the core left laterally unsupported and quickly buckled and failed as well, sending the EMP down through the building. C79-81 all have no diagonal bracing, which I believe is a major reason why they could not redistribute a lot of vertical load among one another. From there *collapse progressed from east to west through the central core until the core was gone* taking all of the interior floors and structures and probably most of the perimeter columns with it. You can see the horizontal progression of window failures low in the building and the dropping of the remaining rooftop structures into the building. One of the big takeaways from the NIST Building 7 study (that gets completely ignored) was their modeling which determined C79 failing under _ANY circumstances_ would have initiated the same collapse sequence. *Phase 4* : After about 10 seconds only the exterior moment frame - a hollow shell mostly supported by the 4 corner columns and quite unable to stand on its own - remains, creating the illusion the building is still standing since little has changed externally. That’s just hollow empty shell. The north leans inward, forming a V in the roofline. The last remaining perimeter columns buckle under the strain so there is almost no resistance and the moment frame free falls, landing _on top_ of the 7-story high debris pile. This blocked surrounding streets, heavily damaged the Verizon Building and destroyed Fiterman Hall at 30 W. Broadway, all of that well outside of Building 7’s “footprint”. It is only here at the very end that a single measurement of alleged _free fall_ is taken. Start to finish the collapse took 18-20 seconds, or *less than 1/3 of true free fall*. Not that we really care since how **_fast something falls cannot tell you what started it falling_** in the first place. The **_free fall_** argument is about the collapse of the outer shell AFTER *all* of the critical structure had already failed. It completely ignores about 80-90% - of the collapse. Folks who bang on about “free fall” don’t understand that on a fundamental level. Building 7’s progressive, non-symmetrical collapse was incidental and unintended collateral damage due to the combined effects of fire + time + gravity started by the collapsing North Tower. That is *true no matter who planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks or why* . The collapse was of so little consequence it barely even registered at the time, a mere footnote. You’re welcome. I sincerely hope this helped. Serious comment or questions are welcome, one point at a time please. No Gish Gallop whataboutisms.
@@MFitz12 Yeah, I've seen and read other explanations and have a basic understanding that the north tower's collapse was the cause. I was just hoping to see a video made by these same folks because I feel they did such a good job with this one.
This is because this whole thing is fake. There were 100s of reasons exposing the whole thing as a lie. What crashed into the towers was not the passenger jets. If you dig in you find reason after reason after reason the official story was a fake. Perhaps the easiest to listen to was the air hostess who deduced from the clues given what actually did happen to the passengers and where they were taken.
@@Legendaryium 12 seconds means free fall speed which is impossible for a structure. Clearly the building did not fall, no debris on the ground. We can see that it actually turned to dust starting at the top.
You have to be fully retarded to believe the narrative of Building 7 and the pentagon strike narrative… every single physics/structural engineering model shows that the only way building 7 collapsed was by the simultaneous failure of all the supports, and multiple witnesses reported hearing a sequence of explosions. If you believe the “non-conspiracy” explanation of building 7 then YOU are the actual conspiracy theorist man.
It wasn’t the hulk i just gotten notice of who was responsible it was the same wolf who blew down the 3 little pigs houses that wolf huffed and puffed and blew the towers down into their own foot print
God this video is so good. Thank you for explaining in this detail. The collapse does look very odd but it's due to the unique engineering of the building as you expertly explain. Again, very grateful as there are so many conspiracy theorists that run rampant and hard to disprove without content like this
How about they explain what happened to the bodies in the shanksville crash that was supposedly blown out of the sky they found seats but no body parts
it was so "hot" that there were survivors from within the impact location. The extreme heat is bullshit. All jet fuel burned up in the fireball on impact.
Didn't watch the video but came straight to the comments and I'm not disappointed. 😂😂😂 In the next video, we need to see the physics behind Tinkerbell's pixie flight dynamics ☠️
Yes the fireproof passports are available at the gift shop in NYC. If you wanted to know where the disappeared bodies went to you’re out of luck . Three thousand of them have never been recovered
I wouldn't know. But since such passports have been around since at least 1937, and pretty much anything else is able to resist such by not actually being in the fires...I don't see how it matters? Meanwhile, do "truthers" still have nothing but nonsense that is 20 years out of date? Asking for me.
_"Do they still make the passports that can withstand fires destructive enough to take down steel skyscrapers?"_ Tell your friend that the passport was found before the first tower collapsed and therefor wasn't exposed to the fires you mentioned.
Ya, I noticed that too. Just a simple mistake in the digital rendering. In reality the towers fell from the top starting at the impact point, downward, a floor at a time instead of starting from the bottom and bringing the tower down.
I've got to hand it to those engineers. The structure they built for the World Trade Center is the reason thousands of people went home to their families that day. The towers held at least 14,000 people at the time of the attacks, and stayed standing long enough for most of them to get out. Can you imagine how much worse it would have been if the WTC immediately fell sideways?
@@WHATISTRUTHTV Anybody with the word 'truth' in their username ironically seem to have zero concern for truth, only conspiracy. Why is that? The terrorists never thought the towers would fall so what do you mean, fell as planned? Are you one of these crackpots who thinks this was a controlled demolition against the word of literally every demolition expert on the planet? Lol, but you guys know better 😉👍🏽
@@Olliekay The mystery already starts with the flight controller who was responsible for looking at the radar: he said that it is impossible for a passenger plane to fly in such a small curve so near to the ground. And the mystery ends with the rubble photos showing an engine that does not belong to a passenger plane but a small old fighter aircraft
Good video. One missing detail is that as the tower began to collapse, reverberations ran up and down it, like a taut spring. This energy mostly remains within the system, so the forces quickly become much more powerful than the materials' ability to resist these forces. So there was a LOT of distortion and shearing of materials happening very quickly with the first moment a floor dropper which almost instantaneously caused the collapse to become less localized and throughout the entirety of the structure. Basically, within a couple of seconds, every floor of the building was just hanging in midair, and it all came down together, not in a pancaking manner.
7 was heavily damaged from towers collapsing and them several hours of uncontrolled fire (the fire suppression systems went down)- basically the same thing that happened to the towers , structural damage then fire weakening the steal structure leading to a internal cascading collapse.
@@nortavon So the collapse of building 7 had nothing to do with being struck by an airplane or jet fuel and just fell into its own footprint like a controlled demolition? I guess we've been paying these demolition experts too much if it's that easy
EXACTLY the same thing except there wasn't any plane. The collapse of the twin towers initiated a fire in the WTC7 which wasn't controlled because the building was empty and everyone was already busy trying to save lived in the debris. So what happened is exactly the same thing: Fire melted the steals structure which was unfortunately designed as bad as the twin towers. Some firefighters even said they saw that the WTC7 was about to collapse because the same phenomenon as in this video was the steal columns was visible. I apologize for my bad English, it's not my native language.
5:42 I love how the airplane stays together as a solid rigid object in the animation to signify that it had the momentum required to shear through multiple steel beams
Exactly lightweight rigid aluminium firm ridged perfect for fly but on impact to mega thick steel columns it would just crumple how did the huge steels collapse faster than a pool ball falling it just doesn't make sense how a demolition expert can say it was a perfect demolition all on its own
How do the architects and engineers involved in the design and construction of the twin towers feel about this explanation. I just find the speed of the collapse downwards, without any resistance from the concrete reinforced constructs giving any pause for the collapse, astonishing.
Again, one of you "truthers" fails in their premise, therefore making any conclusion laughably false. *World trade center towers did not have any reinforced concrete.* They were made of steel plate boxes (down to quarter inch thin at upper floors) and I-beams, all sprayed with loosely adhering fire retardant foam. Upper floors had original, asbestos based, crumbly foam. Scenario where heavy airplanes at full speed hit the buildings and initiate a sudden multistorey fire fueled by office combustibles was WAY BEYOND THE SAFETY DESIGN LIMITS and the fact they stood for so long goes to show how well they were designed. Contrary to this video's false idea, any other classical steel building with evenly spaced columns would fall very fast or almost immediately from the impact alone.
I'd like to see the video explaining how an airliner basically flew at ground level and hit the department of the Pentagon in charge of the 1.3 trillion dollars missing 🤷
I'd like to see you explain your comment. Why do you think a plane cannot fly close to the ground....you suggesting they don't take off or land? No money was missing but go ahead and try and logically explain that theory. Explain how the largest robbery in world history took place and not a single person gives a $hit and looking for the money? Explain why a plane would be needed to cover it up?
BEST QUESTION: Why did the owner of building 7 give the verbal order to ..."Pull it" Silverstein said ..." We had such a heavy loss of lives so I told them, pull it." Pull it is a demolitions term. It would take several weeks to set up the proper demolitions throughout building 7 and it would've been impossible to send in a team of experts to demolition that building. Go ahead.... Explain that.
@@TheMiddleClassholes I didn't write "detonation". I wrote it is a demolitions term and it means to push the plunger and thereby detonate a building. Yes, Silverstein clearly said it. Everyone has seen that video so that means you're not telling the truth.
@@skyseasun_333 Correct. He did say "pull it" in an interview conducted 1 year after 9/11. It by no means was an "order" to do anything. Shall I post the entire quote and we can go over it? If you're interpreting it as an order, then you're interpreting it as he told the fdny to blow up his building. Is that what you're saying?
Im not a 9/11 expert but I remember hearing the entire fire suppression system was down due to the collapse of the towers disrupting underground watermains. Fires burned for over 7 hours so its shouldnt be unfathomable that a collapse would occur. Ill never understand why people will deny the "possibly" of this let alone the high probability of this being the case.
7 was heavily damaged from towers collapsing followed by 7 hours of uncontrolled fire (the fire suppression systems went down)- basically the same thing that happened to the towers , structural damage then fire weakening the steal structure leading to a internal cascading collapse. th-cam.com/video/PK_iBYSqEsc/w-d-xo.html
@@nortavon The mainstream narrative and the collective Consciousness that's been manipulated states that without the jet fuel the the powers would not have collapsed
Can you make a Video how the Pasport of the Terrorist survived this? And please do one on how the Third Building collapsed the same way without even getting hit by a Plane.
@@wayland7150 So you haven't watched it then.. Cause there are fires across entire floors, which spread, no water sprinklers cause of damage in that area. The floors collapsed before the outer structure. Would you like to explain how you came to a different conclusion....
He’s over here explaining how the towers collapsed and I’m over here like “wow I cannot believe people can build things like this” or “wow its crazy they thought of that” type stuff. How far we have come is crazy
Why would it all fall at once? The fire would be more concentrated in certain areas, would one side fall before the others? How does it all go at once?
World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours, according to a Federal Emergency Management Agency report. It said the collapse of the building was a direct result of fires stimulated by debris from the collapse of World Trade Center Tower 1.
Everyone knows that the NYC fire department intentionally demo'd the Building 7 on 9/11 after Silverstein gave them the command to 'pull it'. Amazing that these men could pull of such a major operation on such a busy fire day!
The plane has mass and velocity - this gives rise to momentum (the simple product of m * v) and kinetic energy, E(kin) = 1/2 m * v^2; velocity is squared here, so the high speed of the planes is very important. To stop the enormous momentum of that mass, and to dissipate the extreme kinetic energy, requires a hell lot of force - more than the building's steel structure was designed for. In fact, the designers KNEW already in the 1960s that a large jet plane would cut clean through the walls. Notice how I haven't even begun to mention the "hardness" of the materials involved? That's because it matters little: The plane could have been liquid (imagine, if you will, instead of fixed wings there are just wing-shaped rubber blades filled with jet fuel): It would still break through the steel walls! (You know that there are machines that cut steel using high-pressure / velocity water jets, right?). So even IF the aluminium alloys of the plane's structure were as weak as you think, they do break through on account of their mass, high velocity and hence momentum and energy. Doesn't matter very much that the plane itself gets ripped to pieces. BUT you are under a misapprehension: The alloys used in airliners are actually very very VERY strong - some are stronger than the strongest structural steels used in the WTC! I bet no "9/11 Truther" ever told you that fact, right? If you imagine a plane is just a hollow skin of alu foil of the sort you find in your kitchen drawer, you are essentially mistaken. Underneath that skin, a plane of course has a very strong structure made of beams and trusses, much like a steel-frame building - only better! Because a plane must resist extreme dynamic forces in many situations. I hope I gave you some good ideas to help you understandbetter :)
@@PapaOystein but the building has to With stand much bigger forces and if you watch the beams on the pictures (after the crash on grund Zero) it was what We call a dubble T beam with like 2-3 inches of steel, against that everything on a plane i Aluminium foil i thaugth and what wondert me too is that the beams had a clean cut at grund Zero not ruptured or bucherd only a diagonal clean cut. And what i also dosent undestand is where the 1000 degree Celsius is comming cause Kerosin is burning at maximum 990 degree Celsius?
@@gorgeousfreeman1318 but even if it goes realy fast it doesent makes any sense why the plain should stay together this long cause that would meant that a plan crash (With other buildings or infrastructure) would only in a few special okasions mean that everybody on bord will die.
Can you do one on the pentagon crash. You know where the plane completely "turned to dust"? No plane parts seats luggage ect. found. No mention that the gov was audited right before all of this & was missing billions.
A lot of the reason for the lack of damage is that the part of the Pentagon that was hit had just finished a massive renovation a week earlier, where the government had basically rebuilt that entire section of the building and fitted it with anti-terrorism measures. Also, big difference in a plane slamming into steel columns vs slamming into a stone wall
The buildings fell at free fall speed and check out how material was ejected laterally from the building AND just how the much of the building was pulverized to dust. Then there's the witness accounts from the firemen who were inside the buildings before, during and after the collapse.
_"The buildings fell at free fall speed"_ Apart from the fact that there is no such thing as free fall speed, none of the towers collapsed at free fall acceleration. _"check out how material was ejected laterally from the building"_ There were no ejections. I admit that it does look like that every now and then. Yet, if you would take a look at the overhead pictures taken immediately after the collapses, you will see full slabs of connected perimeter panels covering the ground. What we see is not ejection, but falling. _"just how the much of the building was pulverized to dust."_ Probably most of the sheetrock was indeed turned into dust. This is also what the several dust analysis studies show us. 70% of the dust was Ca, the main ingredient for both sheetrock and concrete. _"Then there's the witness accounts from the firemen who were inside the buildings before, during and after the collapse."_ What about those accounts?
1) They didn't collapse at freefall. 2) What material was ejected laterally? Are you not talking about the columns/panels that simply peeled away? Specify what you're referring to exactly. 3) Only things like the concrete floor slabs & gypsum plaster boards were pulverised to dust. Isn't that to be expected given the immense forces & energy being released?? Why is that unusual for you? 4) Witnesses to what??
@@dirkdiggler8260 ROFLMBAO! If after almost 23 years, you've not seen 1 doc on this subject, then you don't wanna know. Ie. The area around the Pentagon had 100s of video cameras and theres not a single video of a 757/767 flying into it. You could at least time the collapse which you could do, but you dgaf, so....
@@brucelansberg5485 ROFLMBAO! You're right! Just like you're right about the tooth fairy being real too! After almost 23 years, ya don't know cuz ya don't wanna know or ya know but you want some attention. But consider for moment what I posted was factually correct, what would that then mean to/for you? Perhaps that's why you think the "tooth fairy" is real.🤔
To this day, there's a leaked emergency line call that still haunts my dreams. A man on one of the higher floors had called 911. His last moments were filled with terror as the building collapsed beneath him. I wouldn't be surprised if the people on the other end have PTSD from the event.
He’s probably talking about kevin Cosgrove. Him and few of his coworkers were in his office on the phone with a 911 dispatcher, and a few minutes later the south tower collapses.
Agreed! That was in my opinion the most haunting 9/11 related call. Kevin says they're not ready to die and have not given up till the end. He had an online memorial page where people could leave messages of support and love, I think that was back in the early 2000s. I hope his family is doing well nowadays.
nice animation, crazy so many architects and engineers don't know what they're talking about . Please do another video on building 7, this time use Godzilla, not the hulk.
If you look at the footage, the second plane clearly crashes on the side of the building not down the center. In other words, one side would have warped metal much faster and it wouldn't have neatly fell like that. The top would have toppled on its side.
It doesn't work like that. Many hundred ton steel structures are designed to carry a vertical load and resist lateral wind loads while firmly supported at their foundations. Lean the structure even a few degrees from vertical and especially without full and even support from its base or foundation and it will crumble like so many toothpicks.
Man, the laws of physics don't change. If one side goes first, it should come down a little on it's side. It doesn't have to lean and fall sideways but at least it should come down a little on it's side. Not perfectly down like some one squashed it from the top. Ever seen those failed demolition videos where not all the TNTs blow up, and the building ends up falling on its side?@@holdernewtshesrearin5471
@@sspanjersbergNewtons law of motion explain this behaviour. Once the top part of the building is no longer connect to the bottom part, the bottom part of the build can no longer apply a force to the top. That means the only force acting on top part of the building is gravity and gravity acts straight down, and the body then moves in the direction of that force.
I think another factor besides the size of a plane hitting the buildings was it's speed. The planes that hit were travelling at about 500 mph which is is way above the speed a plane would be travelling at basically sea level. A plane at low level has either just taken off or is coming in to land so would be travelling at maybe less than 200 mph. That makes a huge difference to the force of the impact and therefore on the damage caused.
The B 767-200 is not twice as big as a 707. The length is very similar, the wingspan differs within just a few meters. Only the cabin width is considerably different. Concerning the MTOW, a B707 can be even way more heavy than the 767-200.
Aluminum does not stand up well against steel. I have seen what a duck can do when a plane hits one. I find it rather difficult to believe that much of anything of the planes would have been left to do the amount of damage required to bring down any steel and concrete structure loaded with fuel or not. On a side note the black smoke indicates a low burning temperature
It's less about the dimensions and more about the mass. Further, the collision scenarios set out by the architects envisioned a mid-sixties 707 nearly out of fuel flying low and slow, as opposed to a heavier airplane near-fully fueled for a trans-continental flight.
@@ericackerly4877 "On a side note the black smoke indicates a low burning temperature" well for one this is completely wrong, black smoke happens with hotter fires for natural material or fires involving man made stuff like rubber or fuel in general. you know, like a plane that blows up. Now as for the rest of that comment, wood is also known for being much weaker than concrete, however there are some images of tornado damage that appear to show otherwise. Its like questioning how paper being weaker than skin can still penetrate and make you bleed.
@@ericackerly4877 think of a lead bullet hitting a steal plate. lead much softer than steel will still go right through a regular steel plate. its more about mass and velocity than a materials hardness.
Or the SEC insider trading investigation that was triggered in the days leading up to 9/11 due to airline options jumping up more than 1000% in volume. The SEC investigation was eventually forgotten but if you track who made those trades one of the biggest groups was led by an ex-cia official.
Erm, Larry Silverstein's conglomerate took out the policies & put the claims in after the attacks. They fought for a long time to fight for a double pay-out, arguing it was two planes & therefore two separate attacks (which anybody in their right mind would do), but they lost & got paid only half of their claim which didn't even cover the cost of the rebuild. They lost a fortune in the event between costs they had finishing the rebuild as well as the huge amount of money lost in revenue the entire time they had no functional office space. Hardly suspicious.
@@salokin2410 There was a website years back that documented all the trading that went on leading up to the event in meticulous detail. Has been scrubbed from the internet now, unfortunately.
13:00 there were a few other factors too like the Empire State Building's facade being a limestone curtain wall with the structural support being the interior. Another was the bomber was trying to land after getting lost in the fog (this is what led to flashing lights at the top of buildings). Lastly, there wasn't anywhere near as much fuel on it to start anywhere near as large a fire. Empire State is also smaller as it goes up, so less weight on top than the equal sized floors of the World Trade Center.
@@hiddenintheshadows530 WTF? Please at least TRY to use the English language when you post. I’d like to hear what you have to say, but I can’t read the gibberish.
@@rollnstone5539 It didn't fall into it its own footprint. The collapse of WTC 7 severely damaged the Fiterman Hall and the Verizon Building (restored at a cost of US$1.4 billion).
Sabin Matthew has a series of major errors in his thinking. The ablative foam thermal protective coating on the steel would have protected it much longer, as it did with tower 7, but the coating was hard and brittle, and most of it was shattered off of the steel in the impact zones by the force of the explosions. Tower 7 burned many times longer before collapsing. Sabin's worst error is the statement about the size of the airliners involved. At 10:50 in the video, it's said that the Boeing 707 is "half the size of the one that actually hit." This is blatantly false; the most common variants of each, 707-320B and 767-200ER, are very little different. To summarize the aircraft: The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds. The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds. The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet. The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet. The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet. The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet. The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel. The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel. The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s, The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s. The REAL difference between the engineers' test and the incident was the engineers' assumption that the collision would be accidental; it wasn't. The test was for what they considered to be the most likely scenario; a 707 near the end of its flight, with most of its fuel used up and slowed down to landing approach speed (161 mph) in poor visibility. What happened was a 767 very near the start of a long flight, with nearly a maximum fuel load, flying in clear air and broad daylight, at full throttle top speed (558 mph); a worst case scenario that the engineers had no logical reason to consider.
And building 7 was the cities command bunker. Reinforced to withstand direct attack. But some burning debris made it fall at free fall speeds. Oh and the air was safe to breath, nobody in Government would ever lie. All the first responders that died horrible deaths was just a coincidence, right? The FBI agent that warned about the pilots and them being escorted past their visa checks was in one of the buildings and died. Israel, on state tv interviewed people that claimed they were there and filmed it because then knew it would happen. Ignore the explosions that were going off and the witness testimony to that effect. The truth is out there but you straw man with your numbers.
Also no one ever considers the speed limit of airplanes at that height. Airplanes flying at that height are not to exceed 250 mph. No one in their wildest dreams could have imagined a scenario like that could have happened. Simply put the physics of this crash were never taken into account, mainly because the planes hit at a speed limit that was over double what was legally allowed
Maybe when they said half, they compared either the volume or cross-sectional area. However, you still make a great point. Nonetheless, I do appreciate the video, as I thought it explained the main engineering concepts fairly well.
@realtechzero, according to your research, the 767 weighted 60,000 lbs more than the 707. That additional 60k lbs is roughly the weight of two F18s. I guess my question is, how much more force does that extra 60,000 lbs bring to bare on the impact of the building?
Thank you for this video, I argue common sense general physics to people who still believe that the building were brought down by demolition charges. One thing that would be great to add is the effect of wind essentially turning the impact craters into pig furnaces. A similar technology we use in heating and forging different alloy steels. This would attribute to higher temperatures that may have further gotten the steel to critical or melting point faster.
Most people don’t use physics to understand how 3000 missing bodies made the building collapse fairytale absurd . Mathematics was the only science necessary to understand the impossibility of 90% of the victims never being recovered from the debris. If no building collapse in history had these statistics who would reason it happened for the first time twice in one day to two identical skyscrapers at the same location ? ( are you a tiller ? … or perhaps a planter ? 💩🪴🫡?)
Don't miss my other two videos on WTC building collapse
WTC 7 - th-cam.com/video/KMvCWFCoVN4/w-d-xo.html
WTC 1 & 2 (Evidence based) - th-cam.com/video/KMvCWFCoVN4/w-d-xo.html
To see evidence of the phenomena mentioned in this video, watch these videos
1) Inward dent in perimeter columns and immediate buckling - th-cam.com/video/ULdiD6gYZO0/w-d-xo.html & th-cam.com/video/5Um971QC96w/w-d-xo.html
2) Shredding of perimeter columns - th-cam.com/video/kWCDA09XFT0/w-d-xo.html
3) Central core staying strong till the last moment - th-cam.com/video/3HbD_Q6kmh8/w-d-xo.html (2:06) & th-cam.com/video/R889eSvuS-w/w-d-xo.html (2:03)
4) The superstrong foundation (sway of the building) - th-cam.com/video/Qk5NQgU-9G4/w-d-xo.html
Your support on Patreon is vital to my team. Please support us at - www.patreon.com/Sabins . I am still studying about the collapse of WTC7. Sorry for the delay in WTC7 video release. I hope I can release this video by mid December.
Cheers Sabin Mathew
Did you look into the study made by the university of Alaska to begin with?
This is 100% bs, shame on you in a nice but bad try misleading the population. Said by a guy with a top Mensa IQ and Sir Isaac Newton agrees.
Looking forward to this as so many people use WTC 7 as "proof" of a conspiracy. I don't get it personally as a collapse of two 110 story buildings would compromise the structure of buildings near by from the vibrations alone and that's ignoring falling debris and fire.
I'd suggest everyone to unsubscribe until he looks at the study made by the University of Alaska. It seems like the guy behind Lesics has become desperate for clicks.
FAIL ... it was NOT an actual university study BY the university ... but instead a PRIVATE COMMISSION by the morons of Richard Gages wee fourteen year old online pretend petition that PAID an ALREADY believe to find what he was PAID to find.@@ziad_jkhan
Please do a video of the physics of the Building 7 collapse on the same day. the building that was NOT hit by any plane, and was newer, with better engineering.
will they dare?
You sound open minded
All those buildings were controlled Demolitions ! Done by you know who !
he should do a video on tower 5 how the center of the building was hallowed out but remained standing...
th-cam.com/video/zRpCwKRnL1M/w-d-xo.htmlsi=VbgSC6B7oi-0ZPSS
Very informative. Any chance you could do a video that explains how WTC building 7 collapsed in the exact same way (despite not getting hit by a plane)?
Well stated and on point. Ppl still believe it was the planes, and according to majority of the know it alls I seen, was that supposedly a part of one of the towers fell onto building seven (even this CGI shows how the towers fell). It does not add up at all.
Debris from the WTC1 and WTC2 collapses damaged the buildings around them, including WTC7, and started major fires which were left to burn for seven hours. The heat weakened internal core steel columns in one part of the building failed vertically. And then the now unsupported adjacent columns failed laterally. The debris from the steel frame collapsing pierced the now freestanding outer shell near the base and it finally collapsed.
😂👏
ALL the columns in bldg 7 collapsed at the same time, not just the few which were hot from a fire. The columns which fireman were standing right next to just 5 minutes earlier were not surrounded by flames.
@@martoto77 LMAO🤣🤣🤣
I did not expect a video on 9/11 to have a 3d Hulk within its first 30 seconds
Haven't watched the video yet i wonder what's the context of why a hulk is represented in a 9/11 video
Trying to appeal to a younger audience and make a joke out of it so they don't realise they're being brainwashed.
@@truesurrealist i think you re digging a little too deep with this
@@ButterDog42069 there’s only dust to dig through, created by controlled demolitions . End of story
@@Larry26-f1w watch a lecture by Dr Judy Wood and ask yourself if it was controlled demolition was the rubble pile big enough?
Or thought exercise: how could you rig a 110 storey 1million ton building for demolition without a massive civil engineering undertaking that thousands would remember?
Use your brains guys
1:45 "These cute but gigantic cranes-"
*Crane blushes* 😚
🦘💋
Awww thanks
The first and only time in history someone called a crane, "Cute."
As a scientist, architect, demolition specialist, engineer, car dealer, actuary, and a Uber driver I can confirm this is not true
So crazy... the videos of the towers falling AT FREE FALL RATE, building 7, prove that were brought down with controlled explosions yet people just blindly believe what their told. Even the builders of the towers even said the buildings were designed to withstand 100 planes flying into them - what a world we live in...
No wonder why you started your life as a scientist and currently are a Uber driver 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Where did you get "current" from that sentence?@@Cailo4
@@Cailo4 🤣😆
And let me guess, you have 41 years of experience
I worked at 2 WTC up until April 2001. I got laid off from a start up. I was amazed at those buildings. I would stare straight up on my lunch break in amazement. I guess it wasn’t my time. RIP to all who perished.
My dad worked across the street delivering to WTC1 and WTC2 frequently, he quit 6 months before the towers collapsed. I was 5
Having survived 9/11 only because of a layoff… wow, I would imagine that was probably life-changing for you! I never worked in the towers but whenever I was on foot in the city, I would stop to look up at the tops of them. Even from a block away, I would have to bend my neck and arch my back to the point that it felt as if I were looking up at something BEHIND me in the sky!
How do you know somebody worked in the WTC buildings?
Don’t worry they’ll tell you.
Unless, you know.
@TheNJDirector I don't know you but I'm glad to be able to read your comment. Thank God you made it. Go have a amazing year(s).
I can't believe a video with Hulk executing the Trade Center is the only video in 22 years to explain this in a way that seems logical. The question was always: if the floors pancaked, where was the steel core? The sagging floor demonstrating pulling the walls inwards makes a LOT of sense.
The planes engines blew through the towers. Heavy components took out or distorted many core columns, the others descended by being dragged down by the external walls _through_ the top hat truss. It was my first thought too - but I am an engineer . . . and thought again.
I did not expect that Gmod💩! 😏
Certainly “seems” logical. Yet the inconvenient truth remains. Never forget even the experienced news casters that day said the phrase “controlled demoIition”
The steel core remained for a few minutes before also giving out, likely from joints no longer being within tolerance and also falling like a house of cards. You can see it happen in real time with the NBC coverage of the collapse. Once the smoke clears a little bit, you can clearly see the cores failure.
@@CoercedJab what a difference the words *_like a_* make when omitted . . . 😎
Thanks!
I lost my 22 years old granddaughter. She was in there to interview for an internship. I've never been down there since rebuild.
Thank you for sharing this.
I’m so sorry to hear of your loss. I visited NY for the first time this summer and saw the WTC memorial. It was nice how they did it and of course has all the names of those who were lost. her memory will live on. Stay safe
I’m sorry to hear of your loss.
I hope there’s a real investigation because of people just like your granddaughter.
This video is a lie and a slap in the face to her, you and all of us who really care about what happened that day.
People need to hear the real truth before it’s lost in history and forever a lie.
@@NickkaDUB dude you have no humanity in you right? They are sharing their experience about how they lost a relative, which is very tragic, and you're here just spewing your conspiracy theory? Shame on you. Also, saying "no uh, this is a lie!" after the video shows and demonstrates with ALOT of evidence how the tower may have collapsed, just shows how purposely ignorant you are.
I'm so deeply sorry for your loss of your granddaughter. Kind regards from Copenhagen, Denmark.
I hope the collapse of te towers didnt collapse your heart. R.I.P.
To my knowledge the spray foam mentioned was actually asbestos based and came in huge quantities, causing long lasting health risks to people close to the building after the collapse.
Absolutely true, so there will be more death people in the near future linked with this disaster than actually on paper
Most of the fire retardant spray on material is asbestos material. I’m not sure if it’s still in use today but it’s literally everywhere and not just spray foam insulation but loads of other materials as well.
Yup, they were told they had to update the buildings prior to 9/11.
The cost was estimated at morethan the two towers' value.
The owner made around 4 billion in insurance when they fell as well.
You are incorrect. Only the North Tower had any asbestos in it at all and only below the 40th floor. The SFRM used in the rest of the North Tower and ALL of the South Tower contained no asbestos material. Plenty of toxins floating around that site. Why people have to just jump to assumptions about asbestos and ignore true and relevant facts boggles my mind.
The construction companies that built the towers was owned by the Italian mafia they pocketed the money that the building developers gave to them and brought CHEAP METAL NOT STEAL !!!!….
The hulk 3d model cutting the twin towers is fucking wild
And is just as much of a fictional cartoon as the entire video is! What a complete pile of BS- LIES LIES LIES!!!
These graphics suck lol
Swear it’s a total war animation as well
George Bush shouldn't have made the Hulk mad.
If you can acknowledge that trivializing one of the most important events in history is at best naive, that would be good for you. Do some research. Start with terms like building 7, thermite, Larry Silverstein, and NORAD.
2:06
bro it is 3:44 in the morning and i thought my neighbors were pissing me off 🤣🤣🤣
Without even clicking that time link I know exactly what you’re talking about lol. Same thing happened to me.
no way it’s 3:42 for me
the metal pipe dropping sound effect at 4:42 is crazy
I am amazed how few people seem to have noticed it
@@WildMatsu the live footage shows shattered steel beams being jettisoned away from the towers as they explode into dust as they fall during the demolitions on 9/11 . This video doesn’t explain this phenomenon
@@Larry26-f1w Did the steel beams sound like Destruction_Metal_Pole_L_Wave_2_0_0.wav when they hit the ground?
@@WildMatsu I’m half deaf so I only noticed that steel beams had been reduced to stick sized pieces as they flew into the air . The pulverizing concrete had created such a wave of dust as the towers fell that it almost hid the steel fragments shooting sideways from the collapse
Getting seventy likes for such a useless comment is crazy fake. Nice avatar. I have one just like it on FB.(A jet couldn't demolish a wrecking ball.)
Extremely surreal seeing Ang Lee’s Hulk slicing the north tower in half. Was not expecting that
Lmao hulk 2003
Gee, so happy I had a cartoon character demonstrate that for me.
Seems more credible than the explanation in this video.
@@sulandelemere
Pffft!!!
Facts don't matter, eh?
More believable than the official narrative tbh
hulk slicing open the tower and staring at the insides all befuddled absolutely sent me
Did you notice that he is wielding a scimitar. It was the curved sword used by arabs during warfare.
@@AlbanSombreval8686💀
@@AlbanSombreval8686
*Evil Tobey McGuire music*
I didnt even notice that the first time I saw it and now I cant stop laughing
as someone who barely knows any physics, i understood almost everything in this video. brilliantly explained. thank you for sharing
Did you understand that thousands of bodies have no possible way to disappear in a building collapse ? If you did then👏👏👏👏👏
@@Larry26-f1w idk man i don't know physics
@@Larry26-f1w no bodies disappeared you’re just smoking rocks.
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
@@Larry26-f1wwhat? Missing? You mean BURNED? INCINERATED? PULVERIZED? SPRAYED WITH TENS OF MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF WATER?
And building 7 was so scared seeing these two towers fall that it just gave up and collapsed inward on itself. Quite remarkable
Fire will do that…
@@catfishcave379No it won’t.
@@johnbruce4003 So Sorry, it was Col Mustard in the conservatory with building demolition caps. I was stupid to believe all the footage of the roaring fires and several partial collapses. When facts get in the way - go conspiracy!
@@catfishcave379fire makes controlled free fall demolition? No need for explosions then?
@@pse2020 Bingo! Spot on... fire can't create a free fall collapse of that building. To those who doubt: then why did the construction crane NOT melt, that was closer to the Towers than Bldg 7? Yet B7 collapses?? We need an explanation that includes the obvious use of demolitions. You are spot on.
in my 91 years of being a structural architect engineer in college, i can confidently state that the use of the metal pipe sound effect was hilarious
same bro
What? 91 years of being a structural engineer in college? You’re like 110 and never graduated?
See people, _that_ is how you troll.
how much did the tower weigh and the jet.. concrete. how can an alluminum balloon jet destroy iron steel and concrete the heat energy from the jet fuel can be measured in the external fireball image. that fact then determines the heat energy within the building u explain that the material within the building was fuel to expand the fire damage melting at some point all the heat energy was absorbed from then un burned frame.. same effect at the pentagon why no destruction there? next time your got nothing to do look at an image of the pentagon and a ukraiin missel striking a building.. the lies shankswberg pa no piece of anything look at images of plane crashes there is stuff everywhere no cameras laughable
@@cmike956 - Never heard of punctuation or sentence structure, eh?
this is the only explanation ive actuallu understood, thank you for taking time to create this.
Good interpretation of the physics of the "why" of the collapse of Towers 1 & 2.
However, I am keenly interested in the physics of the "why" of the collapse of Tower 7...
and why the boss had an appointment at that day and why was there a new ensurance for a asbestos soaked building?
See, this is what totally made me realize that it was planned. You're telling me, a giant skyscraper, which burned for about 7 hours, just collapses? There wasn't even smoke or anything like that billowing out, and the skyscraper that caught fire in Hong Kong, didn't collapse despite it burning for 9 hours, and it was a lot less wider than WTC 7, which other buildings around did catch some fire, but were okay. Can't make this nonsense up, two trillion dissapeared on the same day as well? Yeah, what a conspiracy, the government would never do anything wrong to the people.
@@SquidCena where are the turbines? Where is any debris at the Pentagon?
Finally someone else asked this question besides me.
Lesics is doing a video on WTC 7 next. (Spoiler alert: It collapsed due to fire.)
a firefighter friend of mine lost his life while trying to rescue victims in one of the towers, May Jose A Guadalupe R.I.P. as well the rest of the people that perished on that day!
you can blame your own government - RIP
thank you Silverstein jew phuck and thank you Bush... deep state keeps effing us over. buckle up for more
@@vaughnmcintire4015 > *"you can blame your own government"*
You mean for not identifing the terrorists before they committed the 9/11 terrorist attack?
@@BullToTheShit no, he means blaming cia for sponsoring terrorists.
@@BullToTheShit I talked to civilian pilots - they all said that such a maneuver is very complicated - the probability that they would hit the center of the building with their plane - is very small. Everyone claims that the pilots were incredibly skilled - where did the terrorists train the pilots, and on what planes ?
My brother was working for NYC OEM when this happened. He was a block and a half away when the first jet hit, and began assisting with evacuations. He lost his best friend that day, then in January of this year, he died from the cancer he developed from being there amongst the debris, searching for survivors and bodies. He may have survived the day, but that day eventually took him from us, and 3 surgeries to remove the cancer couldn't keep it at bay. He was almost 51 this year. My brother lived, breathed, and died for his city, his home. I miss my big brother every day, hoping I'll get a random phone call from him, listening to his perverted jokes, and finding out this was his most epic prank ever.....RIP, Paul 😭
My condolences on your loss.
@@mooneyes2k478 thank you! It was hell watching him go through 2 rounds of chemo/radiation and 2 surgeries, only to see it destroy his immune system and keep coming back. He's not in pain anymore, but he had to be in constant pain in order to be free of it.
@@bronwentillman8385 Cancer is the modern plague, and it crushes not only the victim but those around them.
Death is a temporary state:
Job:14:12-15:
So man lieth down,
and riseth not:
till the heavens be no more,
they shall not awake,
nor be raised out of their sleep.
O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave,
that thou wouldest keep me secret,
until thy wrath be past,
that thou wouldest appoint me a set time,
and remember me!
If a man die,
shall he live again?
all the days of my appointed time will I wait,
till my change come.
Thou shalt call,
and I will answer thee:
thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands.
Ec:3:20:
All go unto one place;
all are of the dust,
and all turn to dust again.
Ec:12:7:
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was:
and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Ec:9:10:
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do,
do it with thy might;
for there is no work,
nor device,
nor knowledge,
nor wisdom,
in the grave,
whither thou goest.
This vid is one of the first ones to start linking companies that were in the WTC:
th-cam.com/video/MSyFD51vN_4/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUUd2hvIHNob3Qgam9obiBvJ25laWw%3D
WKJO: Who Killed John O'Neill?
😓
Note for all interested: The long-promised and much delayed Building 7 video finally dropped about a half hour ago.
Does it reveal where 90% of the bodies went to on 9/11? They weren’t found at Ground Zero , were they in #7 ? 🤔
@@Larry26-f1wi guess they were pulverized like the concrete lol do you even understand what kind of force was created when the collapse happend? Its compareable to a nuclear bomb.
Your guess is wrong but fake plants rarely guess the truth🪴💩
Fitz has nothing to explain why 90% of the bodies were never recovered. His swagger is staggered by the numbers .. each .. and …EVERY.. time !
@@Larry26-f1wthe bodies were destroyed and burned, it’s not hard to figure out.
I knew that it wasn't the planes. The giant Hulk with a scimitar was the one responsible all along!
Thought it was 5 dancing Israelis
@@jason-s8cdog whistle
Jesus had Moses raise his staff and poof. Jonah tried warning everyone before hand, but nobody listened.
well eyewitnesses of Jehovah say it was Godzilla
@@kendexter Godzilla is REAL unlike god
Great animation, forgot to mention the guy shown spraying the "insulation foam" was spraying Asbestos insulation, each tower contained approximately 300 ton of Asbestos, which was turned to dust when the towers fell dispersing Asbestos dust all over the city, the affects of this started to show in 2019 with cases of Mesothelioma rising, As of December 2020, 80,146 first responders enrolled in the WTC Health program to receive treatment for 9/11-related illness, sadly there will be hundreds of thousands of citizens who will also require treatment.
Know that the whole tower turned to dust. Not only the asbestos.
Why were the towers dustified on the way down instead of instead of in giant floor sections and walls like a normal pancaking collapse? Why did everyone in the lobby and basement report bombs having gone off prior to the planes hitting?
@@Turdfergusen382 Yeah, especially the core, just one tube standing there? ...
There were 100,000 tons of steel in each tower. Even without the insulation how hot could the core columns get in two hours?
Where is the data on the tons of steel and tons of concrete on each level? Including the 6 basement levels.
@@psikeyhackr6914 Well I’m not sure how…. But somehow hot enough to be molten metal in a pile at the bottom for three months after even though they were spraying water on it constantly….
10:31 Bush said, "No one would have ever imagined someone would fly planes into buildings" ... And then this documentary says that the engineers designed for exactly that. Golden!
I believe he meant fly them into buildings on purpose like gigantic cruise missiles. The engineers were thinking more along the lines of an accident.
@@lurch789I’d rather have to Bush’s than the tard we have now
It was assumed until that day that when terrorists hijack a plane, they do it to use the passengers as bargaining leverage - they want something and will trade passengers to get it. That is why the standard procedure for passengers was to not try to fight the hijackers: you are worth more to the hijacker alive than dead, unless you start to cause problems for them. So what was not imagined was terrorists hijacking a plane not to get the passengers but to get the plane itself. This is why the 9/11 terrorists chose flights that typically had low passenger volumes.
As soon as the passengers on United Flight 93 found out that they were not being taken hostage, but that the terrorists were going to kill everyone, the calculus changed and they heroically fought back. They gave their lives to save those at whatever the fourth target was. We all know now that if we are on a plane that someone tries to hijack, we all get out of our seats and overwhelm the hijackers with superior numbers.
@@Murph_gaming They defiantly had terrorism concerns at the time of construction. That still doesn't mean they thought it would happen.
Well presidents don't always know history very well. Remember our current president said cannons were illegal when the 2a was written, which is wrong cannons always and still are legal.
They are just elected officials and not always the smartest people.
Very informative I love this channel already❤🎉
Never would I think that a video about 9/11, one of the most tragic events in modern human history, would contain:
Hulk cutting the WTC in half 0:20
Metal Pipe falling sound 4:42
and Cigar Man from Grab That Auto 5 5:46
That's some deep meme knowledge and pattern recognition.
@@Materialisimo DUDE THERE IS NO WAY TH ACTUAL MATERIALISIMO REPLIED, DUDE YOURE MY IDOL
@@Materialisimo I remember watching your MLG edits on my grandpa's Sony VAIO 2009 PC with windows XP as a kid, simpler times :'D
@@Materialisimooh my god there is no way (you posted some of the best videos ever)
one of the most tragic events in american history, not human history ;)
13:10 Nice model.
But the wing span of the 767 was 156 feet and the 757 had a wingspan of 125 feet and the tower was 208 feet wide. Your model makes the plane look as wide as the building.
pretty sure this is bunk and it was an inside job bud. i, like you, wish it werent so
@@ETIC-U Pretty sure those claims have been completely & utterly debunked mate so don't worry about it. The government can be ar5eholes & pretty corrupt at times, but they don't fly planes into skyscrapers to murder thousands of their own citizens.
But the height of hulk is 8 feet in his ultimate form.
This video makes it look like he’s as tall as wtc.
Fucking fake news man
@@AmazingRofa Spam
B767 is a relatively big plane but B757 is a single aisle narrow body aircraft which was as big as B707..
1:00 -1:15
architects: here you have this nice and open space without columns!!!
tenants: ok cool. let`s install cubicles and drywalls!
🪴🪴🪴🪴🪴
@@Larry26-f1w You already said that, oh, your "supervisors" are REALLY mad at you, huh?
@@mooneyes2k478🪴🪴🪴🍕
open air designs turned out to be more uncomfortable in an office environment
one look in the wrong direction and suddenly your presence in the room becomes very awkward
this incentivizes workers to keep their eyes glued to the screen and use privacy filters on their monitors
@@Katzelle3 good point ! Find yourself a nice hat for it
Thank you for creating this in such a high quality and detailed way, we did a project on this in physics class and i wish i had watched this
You failed math class and went on to physics? Doubtful
There was one fake plant in Physics class but it was on the teachers desk , not taking the class 🪴💩🪴💩🪴💩😆
The only problem I have with the animation in this video is that the animator rendered the video so that it made it appear as though the building was collapsing at ground level, whereas in reality, the collapse occurred right below the damage area in the building. The floors were collapsing in a pancake fashion starting below the fires and continuing on down.
I noticed that too. Very strange.
Nano Thermite
@@feralzi8930 did you watch the video
It looks like they didnt actually animate a collapse they just made the model move down and have ruble move upwards from the ground
@@vuurkip2491 i did watch the video but but you know what's very strange is that the towers were engineered so that it can withstand a 707 crash. You think fuel from 707 coming from the middle east will have a tank full of fuel? Most of the fire exits through the hole the plane makes and some of the fuel can spill out. So it's dumb and illogical to say that just plane fuel can collapse a building after 1 hour of the towers withstanding it. There is definitely external interference occuring that cause the building to basically freefall
That crane lifting mechanism is genius
Explain the 52 story build that free fell with no plane hitting it or jet fuel?
What the hell does that even mean-@@hiddenintheshadows530
@@hiddenintheshadows530Your comment had no correlation to his comment. Typical.
Even more genius: alu plane crashing steel columns.
@hiddenintheshadows530 The fuck you mean? There are literally photos of wtc7 on fire, and also why comment here, there's other videos that you can spread your message.
The animation at 10:15 is very unfortunate, as the entire structure moves down at the same time. This movement would only occur if the tower collapses from the bottom (nutjob theory of bombs on bottom floor) rather than from the top (what actually happenend: plane crash). I understand it is done to make the animation a little easier to produce, but it's important to note that , when looking at videos of the collapse, the towers clearly collapse from the top, and not the bottom.
Yeah.. It's hard to animate the steel core failing for no reason. :)
Lets just sink it all into the ground.. nailed it
This is completely inaccurate. This video is actively engaging in the Terr orism.
Exactly, none of the animations match reality.
Naysayers refuse to acknowledge that fact the the interior of the structure was moving and collapsing at a different rate than the exterior exoskeleton. Because of this oversight, conspiracy theories abound by feeble and shallow minds and will continue to do so in perpetuity.
Yes the rest portion should have buckled at first,
Very cool. A lot of work went into this. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and explaining it in a way that even an average person like me can understand.
Average = simpleton
See they even paid off this random average person! Sheeple! If you count the columns, and multiply, subtract , and add a few, the numbers match up to the exact coordinates of the loch ness monster and the grassy knoll. This easily shows that it was secret mini nuke thermite demo teams in operation, and the planes were just a distraction so hamburglar could run away with the vaults load of secret gov hamburger buns. I mean you tell me which makes sense , planes bringing down buildings, or masterminding a plan to fly planes into buildings, AND having secret mini nuke thermite demo teams , thousands and thousands of paid off people and media who will keep secrets, all for some insurance money or whatever baloney.
I decided to return to my autism-fueled fixation of 9/11 tonight and absolutely was not expecting the Hulk to come in with a machete 20 seconds in, completely threw me for a loop
There are fan made pics of a giant Hulk Hogan destroying the WTC on 9/11 floating around online. Google it, it's the strangest thing!
Its because this is real physics. Not and theory spreading video with emotional drama music and out of context testimonies to pull at peoples heart strings. This is real truth. Nothing to hide. However I am personally still sus about the floor design. The engineers are smart enough to design things to fail very specifically. So I personally think it was set up from the start to fail. But yeah anyway.
The 3000 bodies that weren’t recovered threw me for a loop
It took 20+ years for us to get a damn 3D hulk and pipe drop SFX to explain how the towers fell the way they did
Suicide not allowed
Wrong, I remember seeing a complete explanation of how it happened from engineers a year or so after it happened. Not sure if it was on the Science Channel or Discovery Channel. Pretty much every explanation in this video was the same as the the one that I watched back then.
@@MrMADMILO69 It was in 2006. A NOVA presentation on PBS.
🤣@@Ed_Stuckey
@@baird5776mullet I made no comment on the veracity, only the source.
I'm interested in finding out why wtc7 collapsed in the manner seen in videos. Lesics said he would produce a video but he's not done that. I've looked through the comments but can't find any plausible explanations. If there is anybody that genuinely knows can they please explain why the whole of building 7 initially collapsed at free fall for over 2 seconds?
Hi Diana, I did reply to your question to me on the other thread but will address it here too in case you've missed it. The only section of the building that reached freefall acceleration was the outer facade of the building which became detached from the main structure. This was simply the result of buckling. Fire fighters stated that a collapse was inevitable several hours prior to it falling, it really was that obvious. The sprinkler systems had been compromised & no attempts were made to stem the blaze that was confirmed on at least 16 of its floors & the building was left to freeburn..the fire-proofing was rated at 5hrs if I remember correctly. It actually burned for 7hrs before it fell, 2hrs beyond this. The reason it collapsed in the manner it did was down to the implementation of longspan beams used to create a large, open atrium. Longspan beams are more susceptible to fire for obvious reasons. Hope this helps.
Dianna aren’t you lucky to have two replies from the foremost experts on building collapses answer your question so quickly . It’s almost hard to believe that they both would chime in together almost simultaneously! It must be your lucky day!!!!
@@dirkdiggler8260 Thnx for your reply here and on the other thread ❤️
I have replied on the other thread with a couple of queries. There is another other explanation here in this thread from You Tube Sucks but their explanation seems to be different from yours, which is confusing me🤔🤔
You say the facade was detached from the structure and they say that the external moment frame remained and this was the last part of the building to fall. Which is correct?
Also, you mention buckling but do not say which columns buckled or where these buckled. They say that column 79 buckled first then other internal columns buckled and that csused the collapse of the whole internal core structure and all floors which progressed into the collapse of most external columns until there was only 4 corner cjlmns supporting the external moment frame.
Is the the same buckling that you are meaning?
If the collapse of the whole building progressed from the failure of one intern column near the north east corner, can you please explain how a asymmetrical progressive collapse ends up in a symmetrical coolaose of the whole envelope of the building?
Also, how could the firemen know that internal column 79 would occur, which would lead to the whole building collapsing?
@@TH-camSucks_1 Thnx very much for your detailed trply❤️❤️. There's loads of other interesting information you've provided in addition to just explaining the free fall collapse episode. I also have an explanation fro Dirk Diggler but what he says seems to be different from your explanation, which is confusing me🤔🤔.
I have a few questions but you say you only want one at a time. My first question is this. Is it your or Dirk's explanation that is correct?
@@dianax266 - Your interest is clearly genuine and you do not appear to be engaging in discussion killing shenanigans so _you_ may feel free ask more than one question at a time.
Dirk and I are both saying the same thing, just in different ways and I suspect Dirk will agree on that. Perhaps that is where the confusion is coming in - he and I are approaching the same issues from different perspectives, and in a different sequence.
For example: Dirk says: _The only section of the building that reached freefall acceleration was the outer facade of the building which became detached from the main structure. This was simply the result of buckling_
That is dealing with the same event I describe in *Phase 4* and other than degree of detail we are both describing the same thing.
_Phase 4 : After about 10 seconds only the exterior moment frame - a hollow shell mostly supported by the _*_4 corner columns_*_ and quite unable to stand on its own - remains standing_ (The interior structure was now gone leaving only this shell). _Casual observers falsely believe the building is still there since little has changed externally. They are wrong. The top center of the north face with nothing behind to support it leans into the big empty, forming a V shape in the roofline. Then the _*_few remaining perimeter columns inevitably buckle_*_ under the strain. The moment frame drops onto the top of the 7-story tall debris pile_
Central core columns have all failed and dropped, taking the floors with them, leaving only the outer shell - supported primarily by just the 4 corner columns which inevitably buckled and gave way. It was this hollow shell that was briefly measured at an _average_ of free fall for 2.25 seconds. And that information tells you nothing about why the building collapsed.
The collapse only gives the illusion of being "symmetrical" if you only pay attention to the outer shell (which looks like a building but isn't). The _building_ is the stuff on the inside, not the skin on the outside. Remember, the first 10 seconds or so of the collapse - all the internal failures - are all happening inside those four walls and you can't see most of it. This is the part most people find the hardest to wrap their heads around and is quite different from the Twin Towers where most of what is happening can be easily seen.
The FDNY did not have any idea where the failures would start, only that they would. Building 7 was clearly unstable and collapse was deemed inevitable. How and where the collapse started are details.
thank you sabin for this amazing video
I have no issue with the video other than how it keeps showing the floors collapsing from the bottom up, which is false. They collapsed from the top down.
I would think that's a pretty important detail to miss.
Agreed. It's so obvious that it may be a limitation of the simulation software.
thats your only problem? The nose of the plane contains Radar equipment and is literally the weakest part of the plane and she shows it slide right like a jackrabbit on a date. This is not physics, this is narrative.
@@uselessagent7342
They should have made the planes with passport materials. Very strong!
@@uselessagent7342
This was a simulated illustration, not a recorded documentary.
If you focus on the minor imperfections you will lose sight of the larger and more important points.
I understand your point about the radar dome. However, that dome had 120 tonnes of airplane right behind it.
Great video
4:41 not the metal pipe falling sfx 😭😭😭
I was looking for this
😂😂
Sounded like it was in French
Ik
@@kimmys2982me too
Man I didn’t know jet fuel burned that hot. How did building 7 collapse the same way as the twin towers without a plane hitting it?
Shhhhhh.... you'll wake the sheep.
Because two entire towers fell onto it? And the jet fuel didn't melt the beams, but the beams still became more malleable by the heat. Metal doesn't just instantly transform from cold to melted, it slowly weakens. The beams got hot and became easier to bend, which allowed the weight of the building and the plane to put enough pressure on them for them to snap.
Bingo! I bet you he doesn't have an answer.
Anybody who passed grade school physics classes has the answer.@@rickyt11
It was loaded with backup diesel generators. Once WTC 7 was hit by the collapse, a fire started and spread to the fuel storages.
This is an excellent video. Thank you for making a comprehensible explanation of all the variables that led to the mechanism of collapse. I've never bought into any of the conspiracies but it's nice to have some physical understanding of what happened to be able to counter argue conspiracy theorists take on the events. I'm looking forward to a more detailed explanation of how Tower 7 collapsed that you mentioned was coming.
That video is probably not going to happen, but if you like reading,... The unknown and unimportant Building 7, one of six to collapse and 9th of 10 destroyed on 9/11 confuses a lot of people. It was not famous, not a terrorist target, no one was killed in it and thus most people know very little about it, making them susceptible to utter bullshit.
When the North Tower collapsed at 10:28am it bombarded the steel framed Building 7 with thousands of tons of burning debris, badly damaging the south and west faces and starting building-wide fires burning out of control for the next 7 hours. With half the responding FDNY firefighters having been killed, others injured, units in disarray, much of their equipment destroyed, no water pressure, and the greater urgency of Search & Rescue efforts, firefighting efforts at B7 were abandoned as futile. The building wasn’t going to be saved and was left to its fate.
th-cam.com/video/g_SvpwyC17M/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=MFitz
Collapse of a burning structure is always a concern for firefighters. Steel buildings subject to fire _rely on active fighting of the fires_ to survive. Left to their own devices they will collapse. Buildings are designed around 1 to 3 hours of fire resistance, allowing time for occupants to escape and _ACTIVE firefighting_ to get started, after which all bets are off. In B7 the occupants escaped, passive and active fire protections were compromised and *active firefighting never got started* which left the building to take its chances. It lost. Odds on Building 7 would eventually collapse,… and it did. No big deal in logic. That is the sort of choice firefighters make every day in brush fire situations - which houses to save and which ones to let go. Only real difference here is moving the decimal on the size and cost.
*FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro* ; _The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged 7 World Trade Center, a 47 story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the buildings structural integrity was in serious doubt. I issued orders to PULL BACK the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision; We could not lose any more firefighters. It took a lot of time to PULL EVERYONE OUT, given the emotionalism of the day, communications difficulties and the collapse terrain_
*FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden* - _We had our special operations people set up surveying instruments to monitor, and see if there was any movement in the building. We were concerned of the possibility of collapse in the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse and if so, how soon? And it turned out that he was pretty much right on the money, that he said 'In its current state you have about 5 hours_
With its deteriorating condition being reported throughout the day, the collapse of Building 7 expected by the FDNY, bystanders and the media. Which meant at least 24 video cameras recorded some or all of the collapse. Everyone at the time knew what was coming and why.
th-cam.com/video/OY5S5k3tMHI/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=911InvestigationVids
Building 7’s collapse was totally different to the Twin Towers, harder to understand and most of the details difficult to see. This does not mean however, we can’t sort out what happened through careful analysis and observation before, during and after the collapse. What follows is *MY EXPLANATION* of the collapse sequence using the best available information and relying on no authority.
B7 was complex structure, a 47-story building built on top of a smaller existing 3-story building, requiring several lower floors dedicated to complex load transfer structures instead of usable office space. Of trapezoidal shape and all-steel tube-in-tube construction, B7 (above the 7th floor) consisted of a central core of steel columns carrying most of the gravity load, perimeter steel columns around the outside of the structure carrying the remainder of the gravity loads and long span beams and girders to tie those elements together and form the floors. On the outside of the building hung a moment frame - the last part of B7 to fall.
*Phase 1* : Collapse initiation for B7 is *notably quiet* with observers not realizing the building was collapsing! There was no audible warning in the form of say hundreds of eardrum busting 180-190dB explosive bangs preceding the collapse. The first externally visible signs of collapse initiation occurred at 5:20:28 pm. Here at 12:00 a local CBS affiliate reporter is talking 10 blocks from B7 when collapse begins. People don’t start to notice the collapse until 12:11. Then at 12:45 is the famous CBS fixed camera clip of Building 7’s collapse Again, note how quiet it is.
th-cam.com/video/t5tEy6mXSE8/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=fresnosean379
Collapse initiation was due to multiple lower floor failures above the load transfer region (7th floor) in the NE corner of the building. In this video at 0:45 you can see the NW corner from inside the building while under construction, with Column 79 just out of frame on the left. That big angled steel beam across the top of the frame connects to Column 79 at one end. Those girders connect to the beam. That beam and all those girders _depend on just one connection_
th-cam.com/video/nP3TNHPCIVU/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=EdwardCurrent
*Phase 2* : Lower floor failures left core Column 79 laterally unsupported over an excessive length and it buckled. If you look at a floor diagram of Building 7 (see above) and look at all the structures that depend on column 79 you quickly realize _this one column was a relatively isolated structural element on which a disproportionately greater fraction of the structure depended_ . Externally we see a vertical progression of window breakage along the 44-46 line and a kink in the roof of the East Mechanical Penthouse at the top of the building, consistent with C79 failure. The transition from full capacity to almost no capacity occurs in virtually an instant. *Once the buckling failure occurs there is almost no resistance*
Normally with a buckling column, the load could very well be redistributed to other columns, meaning the buckling could stop after a while. With C79 that is not the case - the failure did not redistribute the load, so the collapse rapidly progressed to the roofline, sinking the rooftop penthouse.
*Phase 3* : With C79 gone, B7’s progressive, non-symmetrical collapse continues with C80 and C81 at the east end of the core left laterally unsupported and quickly buckled and failed as well, sending the EMP down through the building. C79-81 all have no diagonal bracing, which I believe is a major reason why they could not redistribute a lot of vertical load among one another.
From there *collapse progressed from east to west through the central core until the core was gone* taking all of the interior floors and structures and probably most of the perimeter columns with it. You can see the horizontal progression of window failures low in the building and the dropping of the remaining rooftop structures into the building. One of the big takeaways from the NIST Building 7 study (that gets completely ignored) was their modeling which determined C79 failing under _ANY circumstances_ would have initiated the same collapse sequence.
*Phase 4* : After about 10 seconds only the exterior moment frame - a hollow shell mostly supported by the 4 corner columns and quite unable to stand on its own - remains, creating the illusion the building is still standing since little has changed externally. That’s just hollow empty shell. The north leans inward, forming a V in the roofline. The last remaining perimeter columns buckle under the strain so there is almost no resistance and the moment frame free falls, landing _on top_ of the 7-story high debris pile. This blocked surrounding streets, heavily damaged the Verizon Building and destroyed Fiterman Hall at 30 W. Broadway, all of that well outside of Building 7’s “footprint”. It is only here at the very end that a single measurement of alleged _free fall_ is taken.
Start to finish the collapse took 18-20 seconds, or *less than 1/3 of true free fall*. Not that we really care since how **_fast something falls cannot tell you what started it falling_** in the first place. The **_free fall_** argument is about the collapse of the outer shell AFTER *all* of the critical structure had already failed. It completely ignores about 80-90% - of the collapse. Folks who bang on about “free fall” don’t understand that on a fundamental level.
Building 7’s progressive, non-symmetrical collapse was incidental and unintended collateral damage due to the combined effects of fire + time + gravity started by the collapsing North Tower. That is *true no matter who planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks or why* . The collapse was of so little consequence it barely even registered at the time, a mere footnote.
You’re welcome. I sincerely hope this helped. Serious comment or questions are welcome, one point at a time please. No Gish Gallop whataboutisms.
How about the 90% ? The thousands of bodies never recovered?
@@MFitz12 Yeah, I've seen and read other explanations and have a basic understanding that the north tower's collapse was the cause. I was just hoping to see a video made by these same folks because I feel they did such a good job with this one.
@@RogerThat1637 - They did, about 3 weeks ago.
I like that the plane is fully intact after going through all that steel in the animation kinda funny 😂
This is because this whole thing is fake. There were 100s of reasons exposing the whole thing as a lie. What crashed into the towers was not the passenger jets. If you dig in you find reason after reason after reason the official story was a fake. Perhaps the easiest to listen to was the air hostess who deduced from the clues given what actually did happen to the passengers and where they were taken.
And IRL too. Even the tips of the wings were able to slice through structural steel, if you like lesics, believe the official story.
@@JohnSmith-pn1vv the 9/11 conspiracy theory is the most cringe thing to ever happen...
@@Legendaryium 12 seconds means free fall speed which is impossible for a structure. Clearly the building did not fall, no debris on the ground. We can see that it actually turned to dust starting at the top.
You have to be fully retarded to believe the narrative of Building 7 and the pentagon strike narrative… every single physics/structural engineering model shows that the only way building 7 collapsed was by the simultaneous failure of all the supports, and multiple witnesses reported hearing a sequence of explosions. If you believe the “non-conspiracy” explanation of building 7 then YOU are the actual conspiracy theorist man.
I still can't believe it's been over 20 years since the Incredible Hulk sliced the WTC with an Ali Baba sword..
He's a bastid
It wasn’t the hulk i just gotten notice of who was responsible it was the same wolf who blew down the 3 little pigs houses that wolf huffed and puffed and blew the towers down into their own foot print
What blows my mind more is the self lifting crane relying on those little support pads to get it up in the air 😂
God this video is so good. Thank you for explaining in this detail. The collapse does look very odd but it's due to the unique engineering of the building as you expertly explain. Again, very grateful as there are so many conspiracy theorists that run rampant and hard to disprove without content like this
No he don't))
As a structural engineer, I think it's funny when average people think this guy is "expertly explaining" anything
@@mlegere16he doesn’t explain 3000 bodies disappearing very well ( not at all)
How about they explain what happened to the bodies in the shanksville crash that was supposedly blown out of the sky they found seats but no body parts
So demolishing 2 towers only takes extreme heat at one section of it and the rest collapses at free fall speed?
people believing the official story are clinically stupid and don't understand physics.
It’s called weight and gravity
it was so "hot" that there were survivors from within the impact location. The extreme heat is bullshit. All jet fuel burned up in the fireball on impact.
3 towers…. Never forget..
@@Matttskith-cam.com/video/ZE6VUpSgx9Q/w-d-xo.htmlsi=_LayOZ3ma2Mkx9S6
0:18 tf is hulk doing cutting down the world trade center
💀
💀
thats what happened
Is just see inside
Didn't watch the video but came straight to the comments and I'm not disappointed. 😂😂😂
In the next video, we need to see the physics behind Tinkerbell's pixie flight dynamics ☠️
Your mother and I are going out to dinner soon, want me to bring you some chicken nuggets?
@@Seltkirk-ABCthat's an AI good luck banging the motherboard 😂
@@Seltkirk-ABC lmao what
Haha same, wont lie I came to see the comments too
Do they still make the passports that can withstand fires destructive enough to take down steel skyscrapers? Asking for a friend..
Yes the fireproof passports are available at the gift shop in NYC. If you wanted to know where the disappeared bodies went to you’re out of luck . Three thousand of them have never been recovered
I wouldn't know. But since such passports have been around since at least 1937, and pretty much anything else is able to resist such by not actually being in the fires...I don't see how it matters?
Meanwhile, do "truthers" still have nothing but nonsense that is 20 years out of date? Asking for me.
@@mooneyes2k478they have 3000 bodies that say you’re wrong planter !
_"Do they still make the passports that can withstand fires destructive enough to take down steel skyscrapers?"_
Tell your friend that the passport was found before the first tower collapsed and therefor wasn't exposed to the fires you mentioned.
@@brucelansberg5485so 3000 bodies were never recovered but one passport was??!!
The video is showing a different collapse to reality. Good job!
Ya, I noticed that too. Just a simple mistake in the digital rendering. In reality the towers fell from the top starting at the impact point, downward, a floor at a time instead of starting from the bottom and bringing the tower down.
@@redhunter68i thought you Americans believed in govt involvement, so was that a joke?
@@Playerone1287 is every American one entity? please use your brain for a single second
@@Playerone1287 We do believe it was a controlled demolition. Those of us with a brain do, anyway.
I've got to hand it to those engineers. The structure they built for the World Trade Center is the reason thousands of people went home to their families that day. The towers held at least 14,000 people at the time of the attacks, and stayed standing long enough for most of them to get out. Can you imagine how much worse it would have been if the WTC immediately fell sideways?
@@WHATISTRUTHTVTrue.
a LOT more to the kill count if it fell sideways...
@WHATISTRUTHTV They wanted to hurt New York, Not cripple it. Would have ruined the financial centers falling through through the city
There is no convincing explaining of how they went down just like a planned destruction. And thats both of them
@@WHATISTRUTHTV Anybody with the word 'truth' in their username ironically seem to have zero concern for truth, only conspiracy. Why is that? The terrorists never thought the towers would fall so what do you mean, fell as planned? Are you one of these crackpots who thinks this was a controlled demolition against the word of literally every demolition expert on the planet? Lol, but you guys know better 😉👍🏽
Looking forward for the pentagon explosion explanation as well!
Is there much to explain?
@@Olliekay lookup
“EX PLO SIVE EVI DENCE: EX PERTS SPEAK OUT” may have to switch to search by rating
I guess? there's not much mystery or confusion around that collapse right?@@intyrnet
@@Olliekay The mystery already starts with the flight controller who was responsible for looking at the radar: he said that it is impossible for a passenger plane to fly in such a small curve so near to the ground. And the mystery ends with the rubble photos showing an engine that does not belong to a passenger plane but a small old fighter aircraft
so whats the theory? there was no jet? thats such a horrid thing to say considering all the people who died on it @@jdd818
Good video.
One missing detail is that as the tower began to collapse, reverberations ran up and down it, like a taut spring. This energy mostly remains within the system, so the forces quickly become much more powerful than the materials' ability to resist these forces. So there was a LOT of distortion and shearing of materials happening very quickly with the first moment a floor dropper which almost instantaneously caused the collapse to become less localized and throughout the entirety of the structure.
Basically, within a couple of seconds, every floor of the building was just hanging in midair, and it all came down together, not in a pancaking manner.
Thanks for the explanation, Rabbi.
Was wondering what physics brought down building #7?
7 was heavily damaged from towers collapsing and them several hours of uncontrolled fire (the fire suppression systems went down)- basically the same thing that happened to the towers , structural damage then fire weakening the steal structure leading to a internal cascading collapse.
@@nortavon
So the collapse of building 7 had nothing to do with being struck by an airplane or jet fuel and just fell into its own footprint like a controlled demolition? I guess we've been paying these demolition experts too much if it's that easy
EXACTLY the same thing except there wasn't any plane. The collapse of the twin towers initiated a fire in the WTC7 which wasn't controlled because the building was empty and everyone was already busy trying to save lived in the debris. So what happened is exactly the same thing: Fire melted the steals structure which was unfortunately designed as bad as the twin towers. Some firefighters even said they saw that the WTC7 was about to collapse because the same phenomenon as in this video was the steal columns was visible. I apologize for my bad English, it's not my native language.
@@c420harris I watched video of the collapse of building 7 and it was nothing like a controlled demolition.
@@c420harris Yeah, just like a controlled demolition. Without the distinctive sound of explosives. Riiight. 🤦♂ I know, I know, nAnOtHeRmItE 🤦♂
5:42 I love how the airplane stays together as a solid rigid object in the animation to signify that it had the momentum required to shear through multiple steel beams
[rest of my comment]: Nice gaslighting!
its made of aluminum for all the dis believers out there
Exactly lightweight rigid aluminium firm ridged perfect for fly but on impact to mega thick steel columns it would just crumple how did the huge steels collapse faster than a pool ball falling it just doesn't make sense how a demolition expert can say it was a perfect demolition all on its own
That one stayed intact. The one in Pennsylvania and the one in DC vaporized. Hmmm.
Yeah, this vid is BS. Too many things signifies so.
Wow! Excellent job of explaining.
When people tell me the Hulk didn't do it, now I have this video to prove my theory.
😂😂😂
@@mcmandy086 la vanalidad siempre asomando sus narices!
.....es war King King ,sorry ****🎉❤🎉
@@Kapuzinerkressesuicide not allowed
@@mcmandy086suicide not allowed
How do the architects and engineers involved in the design and construction of the twin towers feel about this explanation. I just find the speed of the collapse downwards, without any resistance from the concrete reinforced constructs giving any pause for the collapse, astonishing.
the dancing israelis didn't find it surprising
Minoru Yamasaki was the architect of wtc, and he was notorious for designing buildings with catastrophic flaws.
The Towers were NOT concrete reinforced.
Again, one of you "truthers" fails in their premise, therefore making any conclusion laughably false.
*World trade center towers did not have any reinforced concrete.* They were made of steel plate boxes (down to quarter inch thin at upper floors) and I-beams, all sprayed with loosely adhering fire retardant foam. Upper floors had original, asbestos based, crumbly foam.
Scenario where heavy airplanes at full speed hit the buildings and initiate a sudden multistorey fire fueled by office combustibles was WAY BEYOND THE SAFETY DESIGN LIMITS and the fact they stood for so long goes to show how well they were designed. Contrary to this video's false idea, any other classical steel building with evenly spaced columns would fall very fast or almost immediately from the impact alone.
@@Cpt.PickHardThat is pure slander and idiocy. Yamasaki was the architect, not the structural engineer. You don't even know what those jobs are.
I'd like to see the video explaining how an airliner basically flew at ground level and hit the department of the Pentagon in charge of the 1.3 trillion dollars missing 🤷
I'd like to see you explain your comment.
Why do you think a plane cannot fly close to the ground....you suggesting they don't take off or land?
No money was missing but go ahead and try and logically explain that theory. Explain how the largest robbery in world history took place and not a single person gives a $hit and looking for the money? Explain why a plane would be needed to cover it up?
2.3 trillion.
@@Shamino1 and now they've 'lost' another 4.6 trillion. The military has the worst accountants
the 2.3 trillion announced missing the day before 9/11
we are just conspiracy theorist...even if there was 80% of the plane missing. also jet fuel just this time melted steel beams...
ok you kind of convinced me, thank you
Convinced that a building collapse could make 3000 bodies disappear??!!!
@@Larry26-f1wa lot of bodies would be crushed, no?
@@dumbest_person_in_the_worlda crushed body is still a body . 3000 bodies were never recovered
What about the bodies in shanksville crash that was supposedly blown out of the sky it’s been 23 years and not one body part was ever found
BEST QUESTION: Why did the owner of building 7 give the verbal order to ..."Pull it" Silverstein said ..." We had such a heavy loss of lives so I told them, pull it."
Pull it is a demolitions term.
It would take several weeks to set up the proper demolitions throughout building 7 and it would've been impossible to send in a team of experts to demolition that building.
Go ahead.... Explain that.
Pull it is not a term used for detonation and Larry gave no such order. Stop
@@TheMiddleClassholes I didn't write "detonation".
I wrote it is a demolitions term and it means to push the plunger and thereby detonate a building. Yes, Silverstein clearly said it. Everyone has seen that video so that means you're not telling the truth.
hey @@skyseasun_333 , ignore the disinfo agent
Pull it means push? Plus we havent used plungers for a long time before
@@skyseasun_333 Correct. He did say "pull it" in an interview conducted 1 year after 9/11. It by no means was an "order" to do anything. Shall I post the entire quote and we can go over it? If you're interpreting it as an order, then you're interpreting it as he told the fdny to blow up his building. Is that what you're saying?
Definitely looking forward to building 7 explanation the science behind it
The science behind it was a need for the perps to have a building for you to look at so you'd believe the controlled demolition explanation...
That is the key to the whole thing.
Im not a 9/11 expert but I remember hearing the entire fire suppression system was down due to the collapse of the towers disrupting underground watermains. Fires burned for over 7 hours so its shouldnt be unfathomable that a collapse would occur. Ill never understand why people will deny the "possibly" of this let alone the high probability of this being the case.
7 was heavily damaged from towers collapsing followed by 7 hours of uncontrolled fire (the fire suppression systems went down)- basically the same thing that happened to the towers , structural damage then fire weakening the steal structure leading to a internal cascading collapse.
th-cam.com/video/PK_iBYSqEsc/w-d-xo.html
@@nortavon
The mainstream narrative and the collective Consciousness that's been manipulated states that without the jet fuel the the powers would not have collapsed
Really informative! Next could you do a video explaining why WTC7 also collapsed?
Answer: Controlled demolition
Same as what brought down the Twins
@@ultrafaga1947Yeah no kidding eh. This video is nonsense.
It collapsed from debris of the south tower falling onto it and sparking fires which burned and weakened the steel beams as well.
@@carlosmedina1281 😆😆😆
@@carlosmedina1281lol
Very informative and easy to understand. Thanks for also providing the demonstration with the coke can.
Can you make a Video how the Pasport of the Terrorist survived this?
And please do one on how the Third Building collapsed the same way without even getting hit by a Plane.
...and the Pentagon 'airplane' that hit the exact office that was investigating the missing trillions of dollars from the Department of Defense.
Oh good jesus.
Paper gets blown by wind, whereas a building DOESN'T get blown away by wind.
Dumdums, you lot are dumdums.
@@sana-cm7oc
Tin foil sales do well around you.
I'd suggest you invest all your money in tin foil shares.
Actually Building 7 looked more like a controlled demolition where as the twin towers were turned to dust from the top down.
@@wayland7150
So you haven't watched it then..
Cause there are fires across entire floors, which spread, no water sprinklers cause of damage in that area.
The floors collapsed before the outer structure.
Would you like to explain how you came to a different conclusion....
He’s over here explaining how the towers collapsed and I’m over here like “wow I cannot believe people can build things like this” or “wow its crazy they thought of that” type stuff. How far we have come is crazy
and that was 1960s knowledge & technology
Most people don’t understand how big these towers were. They were really really big.
Make a video about Tower 7, it will be more interesting to see an expert deny all the very concepts of engineering and physics.
Several buildings have fallen the exact same way 7 did all over the world. I suppose they’re just a part of the conspiracy right 🤔
Why? you even get that denial right here The structure of WTC1 & 2 is falsely reprisented & 0:07 is not physics, but a cartoon.
Building seven had a bunch of carpet fires. The building couldn't take it.
@@strikeryachtscarpet fires? Was it thermite carpet?
@@strikeryachtsthe building couldn’t take it?! It was a freaking steel frame building reinforced by concrete and granite 😂
Do a video on the invisible plane that hit the Pentagon?
the one that left a 16ft hole before the roof collapsed?
@@10percent4DaBigGuyThe pentagon has the most cameras on a building in the world. Proof it and release the images. They won’t, because you know why…
That was a missile
The shame of this video! So insulting
A missile flew over DC? Nobody saw it? You are aware, like the busiest hwy on the east coast goes right past the pentagon?
Why would it all fall at once? The fire would be more concentrated in certain areas, would one side fall before the others? How does it all go at once?
You know the answer
I want you to do one on the physics of building 7. Good luck!
it was done, then banned from yt
World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours, according to a Federal Emergency Management Agency report. It said the collapse of the building was a direct result of fires stimulated by debris from the collapse of World Trade Center Tower 1.
@@gorgeousfreeman1318 lololololol why was it burning again?
@@gorgeousfreeman1318🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@drunvert he literally said why
Amazing explanation
🫡💩🪴
4:42 🗿
Average metal pipe 219x6 enjoyer
🗿
🗿
🗿
🗿
Love to see your explanation of building 7
Probably the same as the twin towers. Explosives.
Everyone knows that the NYC fire department intentionally demo'd the Building 7 on 9/11 after Silverstein gave them the command to 'pull it'. Amazing that these men could pull of such a major operation on such a busy fire day!
It was pulled, just like the other 2. It was not so obvious for 1 & 2, but digging a little deeper....
Can you explain, how a alloy plane cuts straight trough thick steel?
Well you see, when something is going REALLY REALLY fast...
The plane has mass and velocity - this gives rise to momentum (the simple product of m * v) and kinetic energy, E(kin) = 1/2 m * v^2; velocity is squared here, so the high speed of the planes is very important.
To stop the enormous momentum of that mass, and to dissipate the extreme kinetic energy, requires a hell lot of force - more than the building's steel structure was designed for. In fact, the designers KNEW already in the 1960s that a large jet plane would cut clean through the walls.
Notice how I haven't even begun to mention the "hardness" of the materials involved?
That's because it matters little: The plane could have been liquid (imagine, if you will, instead of fixed wings there are just wing-shaped rubber blades filled with jet fuel): It would still break through the steel walls! (You know that there are machines that cut steel using high-pressure / velocity water jets, right?).
So even IF the aluminium alloys of the plane's structure were as weak as you think, they do break through on account of their mass, high velocity and hence momentum and energy. Doesn't matter very much that the plane itself gets ripped to pieces.
BUT you are under a misapprehension: The alloys used in airliners are actually very very VERY strong - some are stronger than the strongest structural steels used in the WTC! I bet no "9/11 Truther" ever told you that fact, right?
If you imagine a plane is just a hollow skin of alu foil of the sort you find in your kitchen drawer, you are essentially mistaken. Underneath that skin, a plane of course has a very strong structure made of beams and trusses, much like a steel-frame building - only better! Because a plane must resist extreme dynamic forces in many situations.
I hope I gave you some good ideas to help you understandbetter :)
@@PapaOystein but the building has to With stand much bigger forces and if you watch the beams on the pictures (after the crash on grund Zero) it was what We call a dubble T beam with like 2-3 inches of steel, against that everything on a plane i Aluminium foil i thaugth and what wondert me too is that the beams had a clean cut at grund Zero not ruptured or bucherd only a diagonal clean cut. And what i also dosent undestand is where the 1000 degree Celsius is comming cause Kerosin is burning at maximum 990 degree Celsius?
@@gorgeousfreeman1318 but even if it goes realy fast it doesent makes any sense why the plain should stay together this long cause that would meant that a plan crash (With other buildings or infrastructure) would only in a few special okasions mean that everybody on bord will die.
@@iljasauterthe building does deal with larger forces, but not at a concentrated point like when a plane hits it.
Great video explaining the collapse, better than the "official" statements. Where is the video explaining Building 7?
The footprint of hundreds and thousands of tons came down on it and was on fire all day long... get over it
He just posted it 👍🏻
No collapse occurred according to statistics. 90% of the bodies cannot disappear in a collapse . I hope this helps
@@Larry26-f1w shut up
LMFAO
Can you do one on the pentagon crash. You know where the plane completely "turned to dust"? No plane parts seats luggage ect. found. No mention that the gov was audited right before all of this & was missing billions.
no, they would have to bring in a whole bunch of physics that hasnt been discovered yet to explain that one. LOL. but im surprised they havent.
No physics needed to explain the pentagon crash, just reason and logic, and a little understanding of the area helps also.
2 trillion was reported missing the day before by Donald Rumsfeld.
A lot of the reason for the lack of damage is that the part of the Pentagon that was hit had just finished a massive renovation a week earlier, where the government had basically rebuilt that entire section of the building and fitted it with anti-terrorism measures.
Also, big difference in a plane slamming into steel columns vs slamming into a stone wall
well, apart from all of the plane parts that were found and the ones visible in the photos
The buildings fell at free fall speed and check out how material was ejected laterally from the building AND just how the much of the building was pulverized to dust. Then there's the witness accounts from the firemen who were inside the buildings before, during and after the collapse.
_"The buildings fell at free fall speed"_
Apart from the fact that there is no such thing as free fall speed, none of the towers collapsed at free fall acceleration.
_"check out how material was ejected laterally from the building"_
There were no ejections. I admit that it does look like that every now and then. Yet, if you would take a look at the overhead pictures taken immediately after the collapses, you will see full slabs of connected perimeter panels covering the ground. What we see is not ejection, but falling.
_"just how the much of the building was pulverized to dust."_
Probably most of the sheetrock was indeed turned into dust. This is also what the several dust analysis studies show us. 70% of the dust was Ca, the main ingredient for both sheetrock and concrete.
_"Then there's the witness accounts from the firemen who were inside the buildings before, during and after the collapse."_
What about those accounts?
1) They didn't collapse at freefall.
2) What material was ejected laterally? Are you not talking about the columns/panels that simply peeled away? Specify what you're referring to exactly.
3) Only things like the concrete floor slabs & gypsum plaster boards were pulverised to dust. Isn't that to be expected given the immense forces & energy being released?? Why is that unusual for you?
4) Witnesses to what??
@@dirkdiggler8260 ROFLMBAO! If after almost 23 years, you've not seen 1 doc on this subject, then you don't wanna know. Ie. The area around the Pentagon had 100s of video cameras and theres not a single video of a 757/767 flying into it. You could at least time the collapse which you could do, but you dgaf, so....
@@brucelansberg5485 ROFLMBAO! You're right! Just like you're right about the tooth fairy being real too! After almost 23 years, ya don't know cuz ya don't wanna know or ya know but you want some attention. But consider for moment what I posted was factually correct, what would that then mean to/for you? Perhaps that's why you think the "tooth fairy" is real.🤔
@@vannevels6758 That’s a great argument and all, but could you please be a bit more specific and explain what I’m wrong about an why?
To this day, there's a leaked emergency line call that still haunts my dreams. A man on one of the higher floors had called 911. His last moments were filled with terror as the building collapsed beneath him. I wouldn't be surprised if the people on the other end have PTSD from the event.
"Leaked"? Or maybe intentionally released, or even fabricated. Don't put anything past a government that is not controlled by the people anymore.
where i want to hear it
He’s probably talking about kevin Cosgrove. Him and few of his coworkers were in his office on the phone with a 911 dispatcher, and a few minutes later the south tower collapses.
@@wiiplayxbox360 damn i just watched it
Agreed! That was in my opinion the most haunting 9/11 related call. Kevin says they're not ready to die and have not given up till the end. He had an online memorial page where people could leave messages of support and love, I think that was back in the early 2000s. I hope his family is doing well nowadays.
I agree with your video detailed theory/explanation. I am also through choice subscribed.
What happened to the building 7 video that was supposed to come out ????
‼️🪴🪴FAKE PLANT ALERT‼️‼️🪴🪴
What does fake plant alert mean?
@BenMosesGames I share in your skepticism
Benmoses, it’s called the nutter conundrum.
@@dikranovichk5889DIGGLER PLEASE ‼️‼️‼️
nice animation, crazy so many architects and engineers don't know what they're talking about . Please do another video on building 7, this time use Godzilla, not the hulk.
🤣🤣
godzilla is kind !
...
(but the vast majority of muslims are kind too, maybe that was your point.)
Godzilla would definitely be more plausible than this theory.
@@patheticmediastudios8868lol the whole US airforce couldn't knock them buildings down.
So they called Luke Skywalker out 😂🤣😂🤣
Can you see where @johnkoutsantonis7187 is using sarcasm here
If you look at the footage, the second plane clearly crashes on the side of the building not down the center.
In other words, one side would have warped metal much faster and it wouldn't have neatly fell like that.
The top would have toppled on its side.
Footage clearly shows it did.
the top is going first to a side, and then 'somehow' straight down...
It doesn't work like that. Many hundred ton steel structures are designed to carry a vertical load and resist lateral wind loads while firmly supported at their foundations. Lean the structure even a few degrees from vertical and especially without full and even support from its base or foundation and it will crumble like so many toothpicks.
Man, the laws of physics don't change. If one side goes first, it should come down a little on it's side. It doesn't have to lean and fall sideways but at least it should come down a little on it's side. Not perfectly down like some one squashed it from the top.
Ever seen those failed demolition videos where not all the TNTs blow up, and the building ends up falling on its side?@@holdernewtshesrearin5471
@@sspanjersbergNewtons law of motion explain this behaviour. Once the top part of the building is no longer connect to the bottom part, the bottom part of the build can no longer apply a force to the top. That means the only force acting on top part of the building is gravity and gravity acts straight down, and the body then moves in the direction of that force.
the intro caught me off guard 🤣🤣🤣
EDIT: YO HULK????
I think another factor besides the size of a plane hitting the buildings was it's speed. The planes that hit were travelling at about 500 mph which is is way above the speed a plane would be travelling at basically sea level. A plane at low level has either just taken off or is coming in to land so would be travelling at maybe less than 200 mph. That makes a huge difference to the force of the impact and therefore on the damage caused.
The B 767-200 is not twice as big as a 707. The length is very similar, the wingspan differs within just a few meters. Only the cabin width is considerably different. Concerning the MTOW, a B707 can be even way more heavy than the 767-200.
Aluminum does not stand up well against steel. I have seen what a duck can do when a plane hits one. I find it rather difficult to believe that much of anything of the planes would have been left to do the amount of damage required to bring down any steel and concrete structure loaded with fuel or not. On a side note the black smoke indicates a low burning temperature
It's less about the dimensions and more about the mass. Further, the collision scenarios set out by the architects envisioned a mid-sixties 707 nearly out of fuel flying low and slow, as opposed to a heavier airplane near-fully fueled for a trans-continental flight.
Fully loaded the 707 is 267,000 lbs. the 767 is 168,000 lbs
@@ericackerly4877 "On a side note the black smoke indicates a low burning temperature" well for one this is completely wrong, black smoke happens with hotter fires for natural material or fires involving man made stuff like rubber or fuel in general. you know, like a plane that blows up.
Now as for the rest of that comment, wood is also known for being much weaker than concrete, however there are some images of tornado damage that appear to show otherwise. Its like questioning how paper being weaker than skin can still penetrate and make you bleed.
@@ericackerly4877 think of a lead bullet hitting a steal plate. lead much softer than steel will still go right through a regular steel plate. its more about mass and velocity than a materials hardness.
So how does this explain the collapse of the third tower which was never hit by a plane?
@EchoAccord Where and how?
@EchoAccord It was damaged on the roof, yet collapsed from the bottom.
Try and 'logic' your way out of that.
@@redpillaware5101 Have you ever wondered why buildings beneath the world trade centers were destroyed after the collapse?
Climate change
@@granddadmiralmoments I've wondered a lot about the physical impossibilities that happened that day.
Great video.
Can you do one on tower 7?
I second that
Why?
@TH-cammessedupmyhandle because it would be interesting to know how tower 7 collapsed without a plane hitting it.
That fell because of debris from the collapsing north tower caused damage and fires.
@@567xd but bits of a plane did hit it, plus bits of a 100 storey skyscraper collapsing, meaning it had an uncontrolled fire burning most of the day.
By the likes, it looks like there are STILL too many people asleep at the wheel.
I'd love a video explaining the paper trail of the insurance money
Or the SEC insider trading investigation that was triggered in the days leading up to 9/11 due to airline options jumping up more than 1000% in volume. The SEC investigation was eventually forgotten but if you track who made those trades one of the biggest groups was led by an ex-cia official.
Look inside your rabbit hole
Erm, Larry Silverstein's conglomerate took out the policies & put the claims in after the attacks. They fought for a long time to fight for a double pay-out, arguing it was two planes & therefore two separate attacks (which anybody in their right mind would do), but they lost & got paid only half of their claim which didn't even cover the cost of the rebuild. They lost a fortune in the event between costs they had finishing the rebuild as well as the huge amount of money lost in revenue the entire time they had no functional office space. Hardly suspicious.
@@salokin2410 That's been debunked too. Look up 911myths insider trading. It's not how truthers have tried to make it sound.
@@salokin2410 There was a website years back that documented all the trading that went on leading up to the event in meticulous detail. Has been scrubbed from the internet now, unfortunately.
13:00 there were a few other factors too like the Empire State Building's facade being a limestone curtain wall with the structural support being the interior. Another was the bomber was trying to land after getting lost in the fog (this is what led to flashing lights at the top of buildings). Lastly, there wasn't anywhere near as much fuel on it to start anywhere near as large a fire. Empire State is also smaller as it goes up, so less weight on top than the equal sized floors of the World Trade Center.
Explain the 52 story build that free fell with no plane hitting it or jet fuel?
@@hiddenintheshadows530Tune in next week.
Same as small houses being so old that the only thing holding them up is the layers of paint throughout the years
@@hiddenintheshadows530 WTF? Please at least TRY to use the English language when you post. I’d like to hear what you have to say, but I can’t read the gibberish.
@@o2benaz"Explain the 52 storey build that free fell with no plane hitting it or jet fuel"
HOW are you having trouble with that?
Awesome I was hoping you would do a follow up on building 7
Naww they don't wanna talk about that
@@fredzilco3943 They will. I bet the WTC 7 video will trigger a lot of the conspiracy nutters.
@@takotako3321 take a another vaccine while you’re at it
don't forget to talk about it being reported that it also fell into its own footprint 10 minutes before it actually fell
@@rollnstone5539 It didn't fall into it its own footprint. The collapse of WTC 7 severely damaged the Fiterman Hall and the Verizon Building (restored at a cost of US$1.4 billion).
"The nice aspect about religion is that one doesn't need to know. It's enough to believe."
~Volker Pispers
Did anybody else laugh when Hulk chopped the towers in half? It was so unexpected for such a sensitive event. Lol
The Hulk isn't exactly known for his sensitivity 😊
How else were they going to collapse in freefall speed. ? Cmon man
@@broadkast477 lmao
Finally some explanation because I could totally believe the explosives at the bottom of the building story.
Yeah.... that wouldn't make any sense.
@@TheMiddleClassholes ‼️🪴‼️🪴‼️🪴
FAKE PLANT ALERT ‼️
Fake comment
Fake reply
Same faker
The explosives at the bottom of the building happened in 1993.
The bodies disappeared in 2001 , thousands of them which disproved the building collapse hoax
Sabin Matthew has a series of major errors in his thinking. The ablative foam thermal protective coating on the steel would have protected it much longer, as it did with tower 7, but the coating was hard and brittle, and most of it was shattered off of the steel in the impact zones by the force of the explosions. Tower 7 burned many times longer before collapsing.
Sabin's worst error is the statement about the size of the airliners involved. At 10:50 in the video, it's said that the Boeing 707 is "half the size of the one that actually hit." This is blatantly false; the most common variants of each, 707-320B and 767-200ER, are very little different.
To summarize the aircraft:
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds.
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds.
The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet.
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.
The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet.
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet.
The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel.
The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel.
The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s,
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s.
The REAL difference between the engineers' test and the incident was the engineers' assumption that the collision would be accidental; it wasn't. The test was for what they considered to be the most likely scenario; a 707 near the end of its flight, with most of its fuel used up and slowed down to landing approach speed (161 mph) in poor visibility. What happened was a 767 very near the start of a long flight, with nearly a maximum fuel load, flying in clear air and broad daylight, at full throttle top speed (558 mph); a worst case scenario that the engineers had no logical reason to consider.
And building 7 was the cities command bunker. Reinforced to withstand direct attack. But some burning debris made it fall at free fall speeds. Oh and the air was safe to breath, nobody in Government would ever lie. All the first responders that died horrible deaths was just a coincidence, right? The FBI agent that warned about the pilots and them being escorted past their visa checks was in one of the buildings and died. Israel, on state tv interviewed people that claimed they were there and filmed it because then knew it would happen. Ignore the explosions that were going off and the witness testimony to that effect. The truth is out there but you straw man with your numbers.
Also no one ever considers the speed limit of airplanes at that height. Airplanes flying at that height are not to exceed 250 mph. No one in their wildest dreams could have imagined a scenario like that could have happened. Simply put the physics of this crash were never taken into account, mainly because the planes hit at a speed limit that was over double what was legally allowed
Maybe when they said half, they compared either the volume or cross-sectional area. However, you still make a great point. Nonetheless, I do appreciate the video, as I thought it explained the main engineering concepts fairly well.
@realtechzero, according to your research, the 767 weighted 60,000 lbs more than the 707. That additional 60k lbs is roughly the weight of two F18s. I guess my question is, how much more force does that extra 60,000 lbs bring to bare on the impact of the building?
im not american, can you explain what you're implying? who did it??
Thank you for this video, I argue common sense general physics to people who still believe that the building were brought down by demolition charges. One thing that would be great to add is the effect of wind essentially turning the impact craters into pig furnaces. A similar technology we use in heating and forging different alloy steels. This would attribute to higher temperatures that may have further gotten the steel to critical or melting point faster.
Most people don’t use physics to understand how 3000 missing bodies made the building collapse fairytale absurd . Mathematics was the only science necessary to understand the impossibility of 90% of the victims never being recovered from the debris. If no building collapse in history had these statistics who would reason it happened for the first time twice in one day to two identical skyscrapers at the same location ? ( are you a tiller ? … or perhaps a planter ? 💩🪴🫡?)