| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Basement explosions; A question about William Rodriguez story | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 15 2009, 11:06 AM (1,074 Views) | |
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 11:06 AM Post #1 |
|
If William Rodriguez' story about a basement explosion before the plane hit WTC is true, how could you explain the fact both buildings collapses from the top (from the destroyed floors, more precisely), not from the base? This fact is inconsistent with the theory they used explosives to weaken the basement structure. And if the US government plan was to demolish WTC making people to believe the buildings collapsed due to a plane impact around 80th floor (it means, the collapse was suposed to begin from 80th floor), what's the reason of weakening the structure of the towers base? Weakening the basement structure with explosives they could simply cause a collapse from the base, so it would be evident the collapses was not caused by a 80th floors plane implact. Just a kick in the own ass. |
 |
 
|
| JFK | Aug 15 2009, 11:15 AM Post #2 |
|
The way in which the towers were constructed if the core was blown out first ( or in this case weakened for future complete removal some 90 minutes later ) the exeoskeleton ( perimeter columns ) would stay intact until the weakest point ( impact site ) gave way.... Which would explain the breaking of the law of angular momentum as the top section was still attached to the core structure. It would look like it was a top down collapse when in fact it was a bottom central originating collapse. |
|
|
|
| DoYouEverWonder | Aug 15 2009, 11:45 AM Post #3 |
|
No one has ever taken down buildings as tall as the Twin Towers. Blowing out the sublevels and first few floors was much harder then bringing down the above grade floors because of major differences in construction. Cutting key columns in the sublevels was timed to coincide with distraction of the crash in the upper floors. Since the perps did things in order to lessen the loss of life, they timed the rest of the demolition to occur after most of the people were out of the buildings. Edited by DoYouEverWonder, Aug 15 2009, 03:30 PM.
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 11:49 AM Post #4 |
|
So, the plan was to destroy the core first. But what it happened was just the opposite: the exeoskeleton was destroyed first and a portion of the core remained standing for several seconds after the floors collapse. LINK |
|
|
|
| TDX | Aug 15 2009, 12:02 PM Post #5 |
|
Ahh, again so wrong that I don't know where to even begin. The basement explosions in the official story are explained as a result of jet fuel travelling down the express elevator shafts, namely the 6A and 7A. The cute fact is that these elevators were out of service for a month, and run through the center of the south edge of the core.What's funny is that only the south wall bowed.......... Do you see the problem here? Anyway any fuel would take tens of seconds to travell that deep down, yet the explosions were separated by less than 10s (dictafon tape). What would be the point here? Not all core columns were inside elevator shafts, so the acces was a little bit restricted. What you do is to severe a few (1..2...3) core columns in the deeper rows (800) in the basement to overload the rest of the core, it's nothing significant, but it does suffice. The second thing is to cut those (other) core columns in the elevator shafts at the impact floors and the 105th floor. (example 8 cuts at impact floors and 5 cuts at 105th. That way you will gain a massive pull-in force which will pull in the exterior walls.The inaccesible core columns in offices are then overloaded by the basement+impact floors+105th floor cuts and buckle...further destabilizing the tower And no, the spires had top(s) at 75th floor, just below the core box/WF column transitions ..this was a little faq Edited by TDX, Aug 15 2009, 12:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 12:34 PM Post #6 |
|
Ok. We can discuss the official version in other topic (let's keep the main discussion).
So, the objective was to overload the columns (that was not severed) at the basement and cause it buckle, wasn't it? |
|
|
|
| TDX | Aug 15 2009, 01:53 PM Post #7 |
|
Yeah, you could be right. The towers were designed that way that all of the stell had approx. the same loading per cm2 (that has to do something with the wind problems.....) The impact zones were at cca 80th and 95th floor.The towers had 110 stories. In other words single core column at basement did carry the load of some 7 core columns at floor 95 (approx) When you severe a core column in the basement it becomes "invisible" for the entire structure, it's not there anymore. Every core column in the 800,900,100 row columns would carry let's say around 10% more weight in every location in the building (a core column at floor 75 which carried 500 tons would carry 550 tons, at floor 60 which carried 700 tons it would be 770 tons) - note that the tons are example numbers... 10% is not that much, but I "fooled" you at this paragraph, the real effect would in fact pronounce itself in destabilizing the closests core columns (to the ones cut at basement) via the lateral bracing.....and even more if it was cut at some higher location the point is that 3 simple cuts at basement would make a lot of harm to the structure Why explosions? Because thermite melting the beams is uselles, you can't use it to cut box columns, you would need 500kg of thermite or more (and I'm being f*****g optimistic here) /most of the floor-holding box columns terminated at floors 77-85/ note that they could do a little combo and use explosives for 3 columns and 2 thermite charges, but massive basement cutting via thermite is logistically impossible that's why they did use explosives (7-10kg?), maybe with some bag full of powder (100kg+...?) to contain the blast a little bit Edited by TDX, Aug 15 2009, 02:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 02:32 PM Post #8 |
|
TDX, So your explanation is almost similar to the official theory (the collapses began with columns buckling at the damage floors) and the difference lies on the fact you consider the structure was previously overloaded by cutting some columns. Am I right or are there other differences? |
|
|
|
| TDX | Aug 15 2009, 02:52 PM Post #9 |
|
if I could put it into few lines: they cut the core columns at three or 4 locations in the 1000,900 and maybe 800 row, some of the columns became overloaded or became dead load (even worse) the dead load pulled in the exterior walls and overloaded them (even though each tower had 24 out core columns, the bowing had it's maximum opposite to CC1007 in both cases, extremely unlikely coincidence if fires.....) The plan was genial and easy to accomplish, they could start the collapse with less than 30 charges , quietly (mostly) and easily. The nost problematic things were: getting the nanoaluminium for nanothermite and to program the airplanes to flew onto the beacons, because they were obviously not able to tweak the finall approach programing (time is time). Planting the charges was very easy thing to do. |
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 03:23 PM Post #10 |
|
That's OK, although full of speculation (I understand it's only a theory) your point at least make sense and apparently didn't contradict itself. Sounds different from the "classic CD theory". |
|
|
|
| Headspin | Aug 15 2009, 04:44 PM Post #11 |
|
"12 employees of Turner Construction were located in an office in the third subbasement of Tower 1, the north tower. Turner had been performing renovation work in various parts of the center ..." http://www.911blogger.com/node/19889 Edited by Headspin, Aug 15 2009, 04:46 PM.
|
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Aug 15 2009, 09:45 PM Post #12 |
|
TDX's views are his own opinion and go against what the 9/11 truth movement believes happened. There are several witnesses to an explosion in the basement levels just before impact. But it didn't stop there. There were many explosions in the basement levels and over an extended period of time after the impacts. Suffice it to say, one only needs to look at the videos of the collapses to see the thick smoke rising from the bases of the towers which is proof enough of the explosions in the basement levels:  |
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 10:44 PM Post #13 |
|
Like burning cars? Edited by oquestionador, Aug 15 2009, 11:22 PM.
|
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Aug 15 2009, 11:13 PM Post #14 |
|
Please explain to everyone what could possibly make cars spontaneously combust in front of the WTC. Your excuse is brought to us by your denial disorder and your ignorance of facts. There isn't a single video of the WTC with cars on fire in front before the buildings collapse. Your attempt at disinformation is noted. If you want real facts from real research, visit the link below that has witness after witness talking in detail about the multiple explosions that destroyed the basement levels, destroyed the parking garage, killed or severely injured people in the basement, destroyed a 10-ton hydraulic press in the basement, and the list goes on: http://www.studyof911.com/articles/BsB100106/ Do real research and learn some things instead of being an armchair debunker. Edited by BoneZ, Aug 15 2009, 11:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 11:23 PM Post #15 |
|
Bonez Watch this |
|
|
|
| oquestionador | Aug 15 2009, 11:26 PM Post #16 |
|
Who said combust spontaneously? |
|
|
|
| TDX | Aug 16 2009, 12:39 AM Post #17 |
|
I can tell you the chain of evidence, which supports my theory.
My belives are acctualy what the top notch reserchers in 911truth think. |
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Aug 16 2009, 09:17 AM Post #18 |
|
While that video does show where some of the smoke came from at the bases of the towers, it doesn't explain it all. I noticed that you didn't even look at the link I posted. Is that because you're here to troll or don't care? There are many witnesses reporting multiple explosions in the basement levels. Those explosions heavily damaged the lobby, destroyed the parking garage, and destroyed a machine shop. Had you looked at the link I posted, you would've read about how a 50-ton hydraulic press was completely destroyed. A 300-pound steel and concrete fire door was wrinkled up "like a piece of aluminum foil" and laying on the floor. The parking garage was completely destroyed. Not to mention the people down there had a hard time breathing due to the SMOKE. Very high-powered explosives were detonated in the basement levels and reported by numerous witnesses. And don't even try to say it was from the jet fuel because most of the jet fuel burned up in the fireballs outside of the buildings. And not to mention that if the fireballs could barely knock off the aluminum cladding at the impact area, then it most definitely will not destroy an entire parking garage, 50-ton press and 300-pound door. There were other explosions on other floors as well. You can watch FDNY firefighter John Schroeder talk about his experience. He describes being at his fire station and watched the plane hit. Then he talks about how they "saddled up" by getting their equipment, then they had to travel to the WTC. They made it into the WTC and got their orders from the command post in the lobby of the WTC, then an explosion rocked the basement levels damaging the lobby. This was a long time after the first impact which means no possible way it was from any impossible fireball. He also describes how the first tower got rocked with an explosion as the second plane hit the second tower. The explosions in the north tower bounced them around in the stairwell like "pinballs". If you look at videos, you can see the smoke become disturbed in the north tower as the south tower was impacted indicating some sort of event in the north tower. He describes getting down to the 3rd floor and the stairwell is collapsing around them. While looking for another stairwell, they see a dead body in a closet. Could that have been somebody that knew about 9/11 and had to "disappear"? The stairwell collapsing around them would be from the continued explosions in the first tower. Remember the south tower collapsed first and both towers were still standing at this point. Then he talks about how the lobby is completely destroyed, obviously from continued explosions. Then he describes running to the river, then the south tower collapsed, then the north collapsed later on. Here's the short version of his interview: There is also 47 minute version on YouTube or Google video as well. These eyewitness testimonies are key to understanding what happened. How does the stairwell in the north tower start collapsing in the lower levels unless from explosives? How does the lobby become damaged and destroyed not once, but at least twice without explosives? How does a 50-ton hydraulic press and a 300-pound fire door become destroyed without explosives? How does the parking garage become destroyed without explosives? You will never explain these facts away from simple fireballs when most of the explosions happened well after the impacts and were happening up to the time of the collapses. Not to mention that the fireballs could not do the extensive damage described by numerous witnesses. |
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Aug 16 2009, 09:21 AM Post #19 |
|
Really? I happen to be one of those researchers and am also a member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice. I don't recall seeing your "beliefs" acknowledged by anyone at either of those organizations. Do you have any names of these "top notch researchers" in the 9/11 truth movement that can lend credibility to your "beliefs"? |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Aug 16 2009, 10:47 AM Post #20 |
|
BoneZ You are not being very careful in the presentation of your case. You have gone from a 10 ton hydraulic press in the basement to a 50 ton in consecutive posts. Not that it makes much difference; you do realize that the tonnage refers to the pressure it can apply and not the weight of the machine ? A 10 or 50 ton press is really very small. |
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Aug 16 2009, 10:50 AM Post #21 |
|
OMG!!! That means I'm human and misspoke! I actually couldn't remember the tonnage until I went back to the link that I posted. If that's all you've got to counter the evidence, then I'm doing pretty well, thanks. |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Aug 16 2009, 10:57 AM Post #22 |
|
BoneZ No. that is not all. You seemed to be implying that this press was a substantial piece of equipment and difficult to destroy. Do you now accept that a 10 or 50 ton press is in fact pretty small ? |
|
|
|
| Miragememories | Aug 16 2009, 10:58 AM Post #23 |
|
For those who wish to gain a more detailed understanding of the basement and low level explosions, this is a good thread; http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/1701709/1/#new MM |
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Aug 16 2009, 11:07 AM Post #24 |
|
I accept that fact that you are here trolling and can't explain how a machine shop, a 300-pound fire door, the entire parking garage, the elevators, and the lobby, were all destroyed without the use of explosives. Or any of the other explosions and destruction that I pointed out in my post. You're just nit-picking and you're doing it because you can't debunk the facts. |
|
|
|
| Alfie | Aug 16 2009, 11:25 AM Post #25 |
|
BoneZ I don't believe there were any explosives in any WTC buildings for a variety of reasons. Not least of which is that there was no opportunity to install them. Now, a couple of posts ago you were making a big deal of the destruction of a hydraulic press in the basement as proof of explosives. You seemed to think this was some massive machine. How is it trolling or nit-picking to point out to you that a 10 or 50 to press is something you could put in a domestic garage ? Was not the supposed huge size of it central to your argument ? |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic » |
2:46 PM Nov 30
