Must-see video clip

[no_leaf_clover]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I

Oral testimonies and first-responder transcripts have provided evidence of "secondary" explosions throughout both buildings between impacts and collapses. For some examples see this page (includes videos of firefighter testimonies): http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_firefighters.html

However, in the above video clip, after WTC2 fell but before WTC1, you can actually hear two such explosions, and watch the firefighters' reactions, rather than just having it related by the firefighters.

[cainam_nazier]

One of the things that I don't understand is why this just keeps getting bigger and bigger.  I also don'y understand why people, more so those propigating the lie, continue not to believe what happened.  Most of these are based on either bad science or theory only with no real world aplications.

In this case secondary explosions are extreamly easy to explain and have been.  I don't know if any body here has ever been near an electrical transformer when it has blown.  Even a small transformer like one in your computer can sound like a book hitting a desk when it blows.  Building like that have ones that have 100,000 times the load on them.  When they go they can be heard and seen from miles away.  Also a building that size could have well over 100 of such transformer all various sizes.  Not to mention all manner of other mechanical devices, pumps, motors, compressors, water heaters, and so on.  Any on these things could have problems after a mass shock to the main systems of a building.  I could go on.

But have you noticed a lot of the things being said about the Pentagon have stopped since the recording of the plane actually hitting it went public?  However because of the scope of the Towers we may never know the actual order of events or what were some of the things that people heard after words.  We have at the very best educated guesses based on known building design and logged information about what was going on that day and with what.

Personally I don't believe that the action was grander than it was.  I don't think the government did it or was involved in it.  The only thing I think they may have done was drop the ball on the information that they had.

[no_leaf_clover]

I don't know if any body here has ever been near an electrical transformer when it has blown.  Even a small transformer like one in your computer can sound like a book hitting a desk when it blows.  Building like that have ones that have 100,000 times the load on them.

They do explode, but I fail to see how such a transformer would blow in such a manner from fire, let alone fire on floors much higher up in the buildings. These things would have been located in the core structures of the buildings, on lower floors (if I'm not mistaken, it's a fire hazard to have these sorts of things above certain floors in skyscrapers, and thus illegal). I also doubt that you can hear them blowing for miles.

From safety videos I've had to watch on electricity (I'm studying computer electronics engineering), these kinds of failures occur from strictly electrical problems, like fuses will explode when they are installed despite being rated below the amount of current actually designed to flow through the given system, and then exploding when the system becomes live again. For fire to cause a failure, a component would at least have to be directly exposed to the fire, because a break in the circuit higher up would not result in an explosion at a transformer lower down, just as it wouldn't result in a sudden, massive spike in current. And a sudden spike in current would be cut off by breakers, for sure.

[cainam_nazier]

I was 150 feet away from a small one, a 240/120 step down, when some one in a crane cruched one of the breaker panels it was servicing.  Everything was okay until the emergency power system kicked in and re-supplied power to that unit.  Then it popped.

Yes they are located in desinated areas however they can be any designated area in a building.  We have at least 6 different ones in our building that are above 480v that I know of.   And they are scattered through out the building in electrical/mechanical rooms.  I know that we use up to the 660 step downs in three different spots.  And these are all 400-600 amp circuits.  And this is only a 7 story building.

But then I also think about generators and such for emergeny systems that would have been scattered through out those building too.  We use two back up generators, one is 1.5 Mega Watt and the other is 1 Mega Watt.  A building that size would need 4 or 5 more those sizes and they more than likely need to be put in more than one location because of distance to service areas.  That or they would need to be considerabley larger and need to run up to comperable transformers.

Like I said also there are also other equipment that a building like that would need that would also be scattered through out the building.  Boilers, chillers, Air Handlers, motors, pumps....the list is rather long.  All of these things are for the most part safe under normal operating conditions but when a buildings structure starts to become damaged these things can do all manner of things.  Anything from simply shutting down to going critical and exploding.  I have also seen a boiler that went critical and jumped 9 feet off it's pad ripping all the connected piping loose.  This was just before the gas line exploded that was connected to it.  That pushed it another 4 feet.  They weren't sure if the gas ignited off of the hot metal from the boiler or the electrical that was connected to the boiler.

I know the only OSHA guildine for most instances of equipment is that it is in a location that is acessable for equipment removale so that it does not become trapped.

[kiwibonga]

It's no use debating this anyway. The only way to know for sure is psychic means -- don't waste your time on either the official or unofficial versions, just get your own version

[Arn de Gothia]

The official story is total lie, the towers were blown up with thermate, that has been proven. I know it must hurt when your own government  wants to kill you, but if you are in denial of it, well that's just stupid

[MisterJingo]

The official story is total lie, the towers were blown up with thermate, that has been proven. I know it must hurt when your own government  wants to kill you, but if you are in denial of it, well that's just stupid

Proof?

[MisterJingo]

Something of an interesting read can be found here: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

[Arn de Gothia]

Q: Why did liquid metall pouring out of the building as seen in video footage.

A: Because, Controlled demolitions Inc. blew up the building with thermate.

I could not find this question in that lame report.

[MisterJingo]

A building blew up with thermate would see liquid metal pour from the building in the time from detonation to the time of full collapse (seconds)? Please provide sources.

[no_leaf_clover]

A building blew up with thermate would see liquid metal pour from the building in the time from detonation to the time of full collapse (seconds)? Please provide sources.

Thermate is a derivative of thermite (basically fine aluminum particles + fine iron oxide particles ignited at very high temperatures). It's an incendiary, and does not explode, but results in very hot, brightly-glowing molten iron/steel.

Here is a picture of a thermite reaction:



Here is a video showing thermite dumped onto dry ice, a car engine, and used to eat into a gas tank and cause an explosion: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7231843493488769585

And here is an image of bright orange/yellow/white molten metal pouring out of the corner of WTC2, right where an important box column would have been, if not severed by a jet impact:




Research physicist Dr. Steven Jones has shown in papers (such as one that's been peer-reviewed two or three separate times now just because people like to complain about the reviewing instead of addressing any of the actual information contained within the report) that the above could not be (a) steel melted by fire, because hydrocarbon fires do not produce temperatures high enough to melt steel, or (b) molten aluminum, because molten aluminum always appears silvery in broad daylight, and never bright yellowish. As you can see from the photo/video of thermite, however, it does appear as the material flowing from WTC2.

[MisterJingo]

I can be open minded to this (the thermite) - although i'm not a total believer. I still don't see why it has to be a Government conspiracy rather than explosives planeted by either the terrorists or other cells to ensure of demolition.

[patapouf]

I'm not surprised at all that what some people call the ''globalists'' commanded those attacks. I was surprised to hear that they possibly blew those buildings also. But by reading what they had to say; I understand now why many of them doubt the official version. Those building fell just too perfectly like a castle made out of cards... The best example we can have is if we look at this WTC7 video and compare it to a failed implosion:

WTC7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL0zYx-FQ3Y


Nice implosion in Dallas (not even as good as WTC7 clearly...):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIOgpxyzqq4&mode=related&search=

And a not so good one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzUUU5zarzM


In the WTC7 video, we can clearly observe the puffs of air going out (look top right side of the building) and a much better implosion (if it is the case...) also. Since when buildings falls entirely on their own weight like that so perfectly? Are they so cheaply built! Those where made with a steel frame! Even implosion with dynamites placed everywhere in the building can't match the ''accident'' collapse of the WTC7 it seems... Look at the last video again for a good example. A lot less of air puffs coming out of the building clearly... And a failed attempt also.

When we compare those videos, I think it is clear to understand why some people doubt what happened.

[BadCookie]

911 was an inside job