The collapse of the twin towers on September 11, 2001, released a toxic plume across lower Manhattan, containing 400 tons of pulverized asbestos and other hazardous materials. An estimated 410,000 to 52 people died in the explosions and fires that consumed both buildings. The dust, which was a highly alkaline mix, contained volatile chemicals and particulate matter (PM). The North Tower included hundreds of tons of asbestos as a flame.
The EPA knew about the toxicity of the air, and WTC dust contained asbestos and disturbingly high PM levels. Aerosolized WTC dust contained significant quantities of respirable asbestos and Pb particles, as well as other WTC Hazardous Substances. The collapse of the Twin Towers created massive dust clouds that filled the air, leaving hundreds of highly populated city blocks covered with ash, debris, and other pollutants.
Research shows that the dust thrown out by the collapse of the twin towers contained asbestos, heavy metals, lead, and toxic chemicals such as asbestos. Dust particulates from the World Trade Center were found at the Empire State Building, three miles away. However, contamination from the construction of the Twin Towers began in 1968 when asbestos was used in a slurry (combined with cement) as fireproofing material.
In conclusion, the collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, released a toxic plume of asbestos, heavy metals, lead, and toxic chemicals into the environment. The ongoing health effects linked to 9/11 exposures have been studied through an online exhibition developed by the World Trade Center Health Program in partnership with the David J. Sencer CDC Museum.
📹 9/11 Asbestos Exposure and Health Issues
When the Twin Towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, a massive cloud of smoke, dust and debris released hazardous …
What did Ground Zero smell like?
The author woke up in Hell’s Kitchen at 6am to find out that the World Trade Center had been attacked and gone. The fear of the collapse remained unfathomable until they saw the news on TV. Lower Manhattan was closed for four days, and Goldman’s offices were also closed. When subway service resumed, the author experienced the destruction firsthand. The smell of burning rubble and steel mixed with the pungent smell of nearly 3, 000 decaying bodies was a constant reminder of the tragedy. The fire burned under the rubble for three months, causing a metallic taste and powered gypsum from the imploded drywall.
Two weeks later, while returning home from work, the author felt a chill when they saw a National Guardsman step onto the train with a large automatic rifle and ammunition. He stood in the doorway, looked left and right, and stepped back onto the platform. The doors closed, and the new normal began. The author is proud of their country and NYC for their resilience in the aftermath of these attacks on their freedom.
On September 11th, 2001, the author was working as a Broadway performer in the revival of “The Music Man” and was three months pregnant with her daughter. She was in Uptown Manhattan when she heard the news of the World Trade Center attack and felt a sense of relief. She was also pregnant at the time and had been working on Broadway since the revival of “The Music Man”.
On September 11th, 2001, the author was 12 years old and in her second week of 7th grade at a public middle school on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. She was excited for the day, as she had band first period and was excited to learn how to oil the valves on her new instruments. However, after class, they were brought down to the auditorium for an assembly about the dress code. At the end of the assembly, they were told that two planes had crashed into the World Trade Center.
The author’s teacher continued to teach, but the names of students whose parents were there to pick them up were called over the loudspeaker. As the hours crawled by, the author wondered when it would be their turn to be picked up by their parents. They had friends in their class whose families were in Queens or the Bronx, and since they lived only a mile away, they thought their parents would be among the first to be picked up.
As the hours crawled by, the author wondered when it would be their turn to be picked up by their parents. It was not the worst case scenario, but her mom was on one of over 255 US-bound flights diverted to Canada when US air space was closed that day. She and about 6, 000 others landed in a tiny town called Gander Newfoundland, which had a population of around 7, 000 and an airport that normally sees just a few flights per day. The airport was so over capacity that it took them 19 hours to get off the plane.
The people in Gander were wonderful, providing food on the ice rink and making up beds everywhere they could, including on church pews. Her mom refused an air mattress her first night, but after one night on a church pew, she found him again and got the air mattress. She was stuck in Gander for one full week.
Back in New York City, it wasn’t until around 3pm when the doorman asked her father where she was that he realized he was supposed to come and pick her up. To his credit, he knew where she was and that he was safe. They lived on 93rd street, over 8 miles from the World Trade Center, and that night they stood on their roof with their neighbors and watched the smoke coming up from the buildings.
How many firefighters died in 911?
Michael Schreiber, a health and safety officer for the Uniformed Firefighters Association of Greater New York, stated that 343 firefighters were killed in an instant, with 370 dying since September 11, 2001. He also mentioned that several funerals had been held for firefighters who passed from 9/11-related illnesses. This would be the first time Schreiber has been away from New York on the anniversary.
What chemicals were released during 9/11?
The World Trade Center (WTC) dust, which contained hazardous substances like metals, asbestos, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), was found to have caused numerous illnesses during the 9/11 attacks and the cleanup period. The Twin Towers collapsed in less than two hours, resulting in a dense cloud of toxic dust, gases, and smoke. This dust cloud engulfed populated areas of southern Manhattan and Brooklyn, entering offices, schools, and residential buildings, and exposing people both indoors and outside. This information is for informational purposes only and should not be used to determine Program eligibility or certification of a WTC-related health condition.
What was the toxic dust in the World Trade Center?
The dust from the collapsed Twin Towers was found to be “wildly toxic”, according to air pollution expert Thomas Cahill. The majority of the debris was pulverized concrete, which can cause silicosis upon inhalation. The remaining debris consisted of over 2, 500 contaminants, including non-fibrous material and construction debris, glass and other fibers, cellulose, asbestos, lead, and mercury. The fires that burned for three months also produced unprecedented levels of dioxins and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).
Many of the dispersed substances, such as asbestos, crystalline silica, lead, cadmium, and PAHs, are carcinogenic and can trigger kidney, heart, liver, and nervous system deterioration. A case report funded by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and performed by Mount Sinai School of Medicine observed carbon nanotubes in dust samples and in the lungs of several 9/11 responders. The composition of the smoke and dust in the air was not fully understood at the time, but it contained various harmful substances such as burning jet fuel, plastics, metal, fiberglass, and asbestos.
Did the World Trade Centers have asbestos?
Asbestos was employed as an insulator and fire retardant on the steel beam infrastructure of the World Trade Center, predominantly in the North Tower up to the 40th floor. During the destruction of the center, asbestos was released into the air.
How long did the smoke from 9/11 last?
The site emitted dust for a period of ten years, during which time a distinctive odor was produced and severe respiratory tract irritation was observed. This evidence suggests that the smoke did not linger.
Was 9 11 toxic smoke?
The 9/11 attacks in Lower Manhattan released over 70 known carcinogens and toxic chemicals, leading to the development of cancers and respiratory diseases in responders and survivors. Barasch and McGarry, a leading law firm, has recovered over $3 billion for its clients. The toxic cloud, consisting of 91, 000 L jet fuel, pulverized building materials, cement dust, asbestos, dioxin, gypsum and calcite, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), glass shards, silica, heavy metals, and numerous organic compounds, has affected thousands of individuals, including responders, workers, volunteers, residents, office workers, students, and teachers. The firm has successfully recovered over $3 billion for its clients.
What did ww2 smell like?
In 1944, Charles Crocker developed a formula to combat Japanese odors, Who, Me?, which included skatole, amyl mercaptan, butyric, valeric, and caproic acids. The formula was designed to evoke a range of unpleasant odors, including vomit, rancid butter, urine, rotten eggs, foot odor, and excrement. Crocker also developed a second formula to add cadaverous notes, incorporating alpha ionone to add a sense of eerieness.
Packaging was a major challenge, with technicians at Maryland Research Laboratories frequently covered in unwashable stench during handling trials. However, Crocker’s team successfully sealed tubes by building a rubber tubing lip into the cap, and 600 units of Who, Me? were prepared for deployment.
Crocker’s research on smell and flavor, which included evaluating flavor conservation methods, manipulating natural flavors through controlled heat, and studying the psychological impact of tastes, helped establish sensory science and food technology as scientific fields. Recent research has produced scentless cleaning products and odor-resistant clothing, and at MIT, chemistry professor Tim Swager’s lab invented carbon-nanotube-based sensors that can detect when meat and produce are past their prime.
What cancers are linked to 9/11?
9/11-related cancers, such as leukemia, prostate, and thyroid, were first diagnosed after September 11, 2001, due to low latency times. There are currently 34, 000 known 9/11 cancer cases, but this number is expected to increase as more people are diagnosed with cancer caused by previous 9/11 dust exposure. As of June 2023, 6, 314 enrollees have died from cancer, including all 9/11 illnesses and other causes of death.
What materials were used in the World Trade Center?
The towers were constructed using A36 structural steel, with higher strength steel employed in lower elevations. The composite slabs were constructed using 21 MPa (3ksi) lightweight concrete, with the exception of certain floors that were reinforced with normal strength concrete.
📹 How Did Jet Fuel Melt The Steel Beams In The Twin Towers? | Blowing-Up History
When it was completed in 1973, the World Trade Centre was the tallest building in the world, thanks to many of its revolutionary …
The way theses heros were treated by their own government is when I realized our government is still as evil, unfair, hypocritical and ruthless as they were during slavery and the American Indian Wars. They truly don’t give a damn about the American people. They despise those that do think the American government should put the American people first. Shame on them and shame on the media for working on their behalf
Around Oct 2004 I met a former firefighter at IBM in Durham, NC. He shared a story w/me that he was WTC during events of 9/11. He mentioned about the absestos effects it had on those exposed from the recovery afterwards. At the time I didn’t think much of it as far as long term and extension of death toll to 9/11. What remover most from his story was that it took a toll on his mental health he resigned afterwards and relocated to North Carolina for a better life. I was only a temp worker at IBM shipping and Receiving till January 2005. It’s been many yrs since then and hopefully he’s still doing okay health wise and living.
Saddest part is they were told it was ok. And now they aren’t willing to spend a couple hundred million to a billion to help all these heros out. But 250 billion to Ukraine is no problems, no problem at all. Matter of fact if you have an issue with 250 billion going there then you just might be an “Anti-American Bigot”…
I’m still amazed at how the black boxes, which are supposedly indestructible, how they were destroyed, but the passport of one of the supposed terrorists- a passport that flew right into the tower inside the plane- how that passport was somehow spit right out of the tower without any burn marks. Now that’s pretty incredible.
Everytime I see this article, it refreshes my anger.. not of those who committed the act, but those that are trying to hide the reality of the act. We’ve all grown up perusal all the effort it takes to drop a building into its own footprint. Serious predemolition work cutting steel beams setting det cord to explosives all timed exactly to ensure there’s no tipping of the buildings and destroying nearby buildings and property. In our minds eye, we see this construction of both towers and the angle of each aluminum aircraft slicing into its associated tower. One really near the top floors and the other in the mid section. Yet both towers dropped to their footprints as if exactly on cue. A few thousand Americans lost their lives… but that’s the cost of doing business with the powerful money hungry elite. The BIG PICTURE of Iraqi oil sits on the other side of the globe.. we need control of that resource.. we need to fire up the American people, get em mad at someone.. we need a war. Mr president, we need you out of the picture.. plausible deniability. A school, reading to children.. that’s a good cover. We’ll handle everything. The cogs of the American government were put on notice. Both towers need to go. 100% destruction. These towers, if we are to believe were hit in different places at different trajectories yet both collapsed in their footprints rather than slicing off their tops and tilting towards the least resistance… you’re incredibly stupid.
Does no one here realize that jet fuel is just like diesel and needs to be atomized? It doesn’t just continue to burn to open flame as a streaming or puddled liquid, that’s why injectors have spray patterns to run it through both diesel and jet style engines. SMH some of y’all need to do some serious life homework. 🤦♂
In their test they are focusing a flame that is so hot that its entirely blue, focused on a single spot of steel with not compromised fireproofing but abosultley no fireproofing coat, situated conveniently and directly under the weight. Is this what happened to building 7 when it didn’t get hit by a plane?
Most of the jetfuel would’ve exploded on impact, so the idea of a significant amount dripping down to the other floors is strange. Also, yes the impact area would have temperatures hot enough to bend the steel, but that temperature isn’t uniform throughout the building. So not all the steel is compromised, and this doesn’t explain the presence of molten steel found at ground zero, or the footage where there is thermite present.
Rest in peace to those who died My respect goes out to their loved ones I am so sorry Thank you to those who tried saving another life during this including firefighters, police officers, nurses and doctors 🕊🤍 Thank you to those who built the World Trade Center as well 💛💛 Hope they are doing well currently
How does weakened steel perpetuate the building to collapse on its own footprint? What is the explanation for the second tower falling first? How did some firefighters and police officers alike have priemtive knowledge that the buildings would collapse, including building 7? How does 1/3 of the building find the energy to destroy the other 2/3 of the structure below, in such a symmetrical fasion that BOTH building fall in their own footprint? Thw debunkers of years past have always claimed jet fuel falling into the elevator shafts. Never have they mentioned aluminum water explosions. Even so, how do the planes reach the molten temperatures required and how do they maintain that temperature long enough to severely weaken the structure to the point of symmetrical collapse near free fall speeds, TWICE!?
But the fire was NOT through the entirety of either structure. The cold, hard, thick steel columns below the fires, which were designed to support every floor above them, were un damaged. This explains neither the molten (liquid) steel pouring out of the tower(s) while they were still standing, nor the molten steel seen for months at ground zero after they collapsed. I’d say this is weak journalism, but they know what they’re doing.
Frankly incredible that they are testing “…floor beams indentical to those used in the twin towers”, which are completely different to the trusses that were actually used, which you can actually see in images shown in the film. Even the voice over calls them ‘beams’ and ‘trusses’ interchangeably, when a beam is a different object to a truss. The trusses were even more susceptible to weakening through fire as they are not solid beams.
Firefights saw melting ALUMINUM, which you can see for yourself in some south tower articles. Steel melts at 2,500 – 2,800 F. Aluminum melts at 1,221 F. “How did jet fuel melt the steel beams in the twin towers?” It didn’t, it significantly weakened it. I think the word “melt” was put in the title of this article on purpose, to attract people that will latch on to any perceived inconsistency, especially a false consistency presented here per the word “melt”. The description of the article, if some people here bothered to read it, clearly states “…jet fuel fires led to a weakening of the steel that held the structure together, and ultimately caused both buildings to collapse.” The Doobie Brothers said it best: “But what a fool believes, he sees”
Passenger Jet fuel will be JetA. It is similar to a high grade kerosine. You could say it is a very light cut of diesel fuel for those not experienced with kerosine.Moving along, liquid JetA would be fuel for basic combustibles. Wood, paper, furniture, etc.. Without pure oxygen, it cannot burn hot enough to melt steel. Period.
So you used kerosene to heat up the beams to 800° F. Ok The entire building wasn’t on fire. So howd the bottom free fall the same time as the top. In first diagram your telling us the kerosene went down the elevator shafts. So a majority of the fuel wasnt at the fire location any longer and it went into elevator shafts which were designed to cut ventilation from outside per the architect’s and maintenance man whom toured telling heroine experience.
5:55 Oh my goodness. So they take the very ideal case of one beam with all its fireproofing removed and heated to glowing red using an actual blowtorch to get it sag. Then they want to extrapolate that very ideal case to most or all of the beams on a whole floor, with most or all of the fireproofing scraped off, heated to glowing red not by a blowtorch but by burning office material, and that this amazingly ideal set of conditions happens not at impact, not after 5 minutes or 10 minutes, but at 102 minutes after the plane strikes the north tower. And the people who think this was a controlled demolition are supposed to be the crazy ones?
Does “pancaking” also happen at the same speed as gravity? Has ANY other building in history fallen this way? MANY buildings have been hit by jets over the years, but NONE of them have had a total structural failure. NO building has ever fallen into its own footprint. Only controlled demolitions do that.
2:30 Big plane (tin can) and slightly bigger plane (tin can), with similar fuel capacity. 2.39 fuel passed through 12 miles of shafts, hahahahahahaha (sorry, that’s absurd, the big fireball on impact took care of most of it, or was that caused by a passengers cigarette lighter that they forgot to hand in at security). “Spreading like wildfire”, there were no fires on the lower floors. 2:44 office furniture would have required a certain fire safety standard to even get into the building and if it spread unusually quickly it would go out unusually quickly once the material has all burnt. 3.35 ” it was impossible to imagine that these buildings would come down” YES, because it was IMPOSSIBLE. 3:54 “Exceptionally strong”, Base columns are 4″ thick (10cm) just take a second to think about this……. 4″ thick square section, this is huge !!! 4.11 ” Near the top only 1/4″ of an inch thick, YES because they are not supporting as much weight, and don’t need to… That’s called engineering, design, physics etc…. 4:17 Fireproofing easily dislodged? So it just fell off, throughout the whole building, why would engineers use shit fireproofing, safety standards would surely not allow that? 4:30 ” Could this be the downfall ” Could what be the downfall, you haven’t said anything that could cause it yet. FFS….. 5:00 “Fireproof coating can withstand the flames”….. You just said it all fell off… 5:14 “0.7 seconds” stripped all fireproofing, so…. it did fall off then…. ? 5:30 “Simulate” Just NO.
i’ve worked in the construction industry for over 20 years. i made it through only a few minutes of this article before i started LOL’ing. Discovery UK either doesn’t understand building code fire performance requirements, or they’re lying. and did the jet fuel explode into a ball of fire, or did it “pour down the elevator shafts”? they shouldn’t have produced this article.
I’d ask any one of the conspiratorial fiction writers to put together a comprehensive analysis with factual proof to dispute what this analyses determines. I bet you can’t do it. In fact, I know you can’t. You’ll just spew out nonsense. Talk about obscurities and undefined shapes. Like you have done all over these comment sections. Because you all have nothing.
In response to Mr Washburn comments, I first have to say thank you, for this most valuable information, and that Yes, that a 3600 degree temp is probably a good number because that engine spool is turning at a hight rate or RPM once those engines spool up as they say, BUT as soon as the plane / engines slam into the steel and concrete sky scraper structure, those engines shall stop turning, and a cooling will immediately start to happen, but the big deal about it, is once again the volume. This time not the fuel volume, but this heat source volume, which is minuscule in relationship to the airplane. Most airplanes are made of Aluminum (2024 / 7075 for just two examples) but the engines, and engine struts because of the massive thrust loads associated with holding onto those jet engines and producing that kind of power actually contain titanium, steel, and stainless steel but these parts only represent 1 percent or less of the million plus parts that assemble into each Boeing Jet airplane, so the engines of coarse do a big job, but their literal impact on these sky scrapers were so small. And also keep in mind, that each floor of the world trade centers twin towers were about an acre per floor, and that the engine spool cylinder volumes of Both engines combined would only equate that of a small conference room, or a large office. And that may be enough to take down a structural member or three at the max, but you would never in Gods’ earth ever be able to destroy all of the structural members in such a symetrical way at the same moment, as to have those buildings fall into their own foot print, they way they did, which completely looks like controlled demolitions.
Love how they said the core was just extra support edit: -Oh wow, this comment was supposed to be a joke. “just extra support” meant to indicate there’s way more to it than that. -This account is a side hustle to bring together playlists of the most controversial events on American soil that I don’t have much time to look after. -Also there is further proof that a plane actually hit the pentagon. Also realize the planes themselves can be guided remote missiles. Remote aircrafts were a thing decades before 9/11. And in more recent decades the remote controls were a safety feature some companies implemented in case of a hijacking…..
For the sake of discussion let’s go along with the narrative that the fire retardant got blown off and the beams were on fire from the jet fuel near where the planes hit. Then how could lower beams, also covered in fire retardant, have caught on fire? They wouldn’t have. So to suggest that there were fires below where the planes hit could not have happened.
Pile-driver theory doesn’t work. The top structure “driving down” would not stay intact. So basically it would’ve destroyed itself as it met resistance. Don’t know exactly what happened but some shady shot occurred. It didn’t happen just once but two separate skyscrapers the an office fire collapsed WTC 7?🤦🤭😔
And that experiment was just so pitiful, please put in some better effort next time will you please. Narrator “Similiar to the steal that was found in the towers 😆 really??? That steal was thin as hell and not to meation not even secured it was just put on two metal table like stands lol… and im not even going to meation the focused blowtoarch to the one area of the beam cause thats a great empirically method in recreating what occured I’m sure. 😆 Whats that you say? You still dare to question their highly scientific results? How dare you, ok than lets look at an aluminum can which is pretty much the same as a square steel beam watch what happens when I press my finger up against it while applying downward force with my hand. Boom….see that shyt…case close. And anyone questioning this further or implying that this was somehow an inside job is not only a communist but a conspiracy nut and at worst simiply unpatriotic towards his country…how dare you sir…enjoy your false freedom of perusal mind numbing garbage on your tv eat that processed garbage that they call food only to later die of sometype of cancer from the shitty food they have given us and their banks taking back all the property you worked your entire life for. God bless America indeed…the new Rome 2.0😁
If the Twin Towers truly fell from jet fuel and fire on the upper levels these buildings would have crumbled slowly over 20 hrs or more. Maybe a big chunk of the building above the plane impact zone would have tipped over but other than that the building would have torn off and fell one piece at a time. Not completely fall to the ground in 10 seconds. The debris from the towers as it did fall were blown outward which can only happen by a force making it do that. Gravity pulls straight down and some of these metal pieces of the towers weighing tons were not falling straight down by gravity but propelled and shot outward by an external force. As one of the firefighters who was later interviewed said…” We came towards the tower and into the lobby and it was as if an explosion went off in there. We thought there’s fires many stories way up there and now this happens to the Lobby?….down here? Something wasn’t right in Denmark that day my friend. “
Odd this has never happened to any other steel frame high rise building where an internal fire has occurred. The load test appears to be suspect as the load is concentrated in one point only and the heat is not only being applied to one section of the beam, but a gas jet is being applied. Gas in this instance normally burns at a significantly higher temperature than jet fuel and furniture. Also bear in mind that there must have been a lot of smoke in the floors on fire so the oxygen level – unlike this test – would be restricted leading to much lower temperature, This low temperature burn in the building has been demonstated by the very black smoke; contemporary jet engines don’t produce smoke like this when they burn their fuel efficiently. Clearly a government influenced article.
So he pin point a blow torch for 11 mins on the centre of the beam at the centre of the load. The jets fuel was ignited and used up in a matter of minutes. That’s what the initial explosion showed. Big burst of flames. Now you have office furniture burning. A typical house fire can reach 1100 degree ( 593 Celsius ). That would be contents and structure burning. The black thick smoke suggests a starving fire. I would think that each of the many supporting beams would need a blow torch to heat them up. Lets say the upper floors did collapse as they infer, how does the small amount of weight in comparison to the rest of the building completely pancake and pulverize the other 85 plus floors. And how does it happen three times. You’d think there may be some variation between the collapses. I still have trouble understanding how the fragile shell of a plane, which birds strikes damage plane, can penetrate all those beams and still exit out the other side of the building.
As a YouTube engineer. Just want to add the trusses/beams comment after reading the other comments but want to seem like I havent read the other comments and im having an original observation. So.. Trusses and beams are different. The guy tests beams but trusses were in the original build and are even weaker. You must know this.
No. Melt is a straw man. Nobody says the beams were melted. They were WEAKENED and compromised. 1500 degrees is enough to heat a steel beam to the point of failure. They don’t have to melt. The upper levels do the rest of the work. What’s more is that concrete loses its strength and structural integrity with continuous application of heat.
The Russian Military explained it nicely that plane would have to be traveling at Mock 3 to penetrate that buildings steal. Also the floors didn’t collapse like they say they were turned to dusk. Only. Underground nuclear explosion could achieve that. It also explains the radiation at ground zero. You know the weapons of mass destruction Iraq had.
Straw man argument. The steel didn’t “melt” b/c temps didn’t reach that high. BUT the fires were plenty hot enough to weaken the steel structure (in parts) enough to initiate collapse. Once collapse was initiated, gravity did its job. Anyone making other assertments is taking the piss and needs to quiet down for the adults in the room.
If pancaking floors was actually the correct collapse of this building, the 47 steel columns at the center and the elevator shafts would have remained even as the floors fell around them. They would not be pulverized to dust like its concrete. They would still be intact as the floors fell around them, they dont just disappear into thin air without explosives or being chemically dissolved. This part of the collapse is what gets glossed over even in movies as there with so many other facets, but this is the most important case for controlled demolition vs a natural building collapse.
In almost all footage of both towers dropping, you can clearly see explosions taking place well below the collapsing point at each moment. It happens so fast, it just takes a close look. How do you explain that with this line of thought? Pancaking would have involved multiple stopping points in the collapse, and there would likely be maybe 30 or more floors left, as the pancaking would involve the upper layers “sliding off” the stack to whichever direction involved the most weakened supports…could go on all day.
It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at . This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. steel melts at a temperature of 2,777 degrees Fahrenheit, but jet fuel burns at only 1,517 degrees F
It’s more basic mathematic physics. Law of Gravity and Acceleration. Unless ALL the intact beams below the impact site are completely compromised by very high temperatures at the same time. The beams that are not as hot will resist against the free fall speed of the building. it should slow down very substantially if it did start to collapse. The time of complete symmetrical flattening should be looked into, to the highest most accuracy in structural mathematics.
what makes me mad is that they know what they are explaining is complete rubbish and has no sense whatsoever but they just had to do a job and go through with it, some of the steel beams were turned into molten lava flowing as if it was volcano but the way the fire was burning made no indication of extreme heat to a level of melting the beams, almost as if it was oxygen deprived with black sooty smoke…i’m sorry to the real victims of this deception but this was the biggest lie of the century, where have you ever seen buildings of that size and magnitude fall so quick and in such orderly manner and so controlled like, and what kind of fire burns for a 100 days by jet fuel. They still can not explain how the surround buildings got demolished as well and some went down the same way the towers did. Only a devil and dark people would keep such a lie and deception going for so long. This is the reason why they sensor and control every information disseminating outlets to control and steer the narrative and outcome to their liking and choosing. This is sickness of the highest order and the people involved got to be very dark and extremely evil to the core.
It wasn’t only jet fuel, but also tons of burning and melting aircraft aluminum. Do you know what happens if melting aluminum comes in contact with water from the still working water sprinkler system of the towers?? It violantly explodes! That’s what finally brought the already weakened structure of the towers down.
It doesn’t require much thought to understand that the fire didn’t actually melt the steel, it weakened the steel by up to 80%. Now add that to the amount of the structure removed by the impact of the planes and the weight of the remaining floors above. You clearly see the walls move inward on WTC2 just before the collapse, and it collapsed on the side that Flight 175 impacted. The WTC was designed for optimum floor space to lease out. The entire building was basically hollow and the floors were held by the four inner columns and the outer walls. There is a picture of the towers after construction when no tenants were there and you can see the sun passing completely through the building. It’s not hard to figure out why and how they collapsed. It’s amazing they stood for as long as they did that day.
Lol….o my bless your heart to the discovery producers and its handlers in conjunction with their so called experts trying yet again to miserably failing to explain what is otherwise an scientic impossibility. Although I did enjoy the article for my amusement had me laughing and shaking my head at the same time…haha What did that one so called structural engineer say or rather the narrator say?” Pancake effect” simple brilliant…I see the funding hasn’t stopped yet for allocating funds for disinformation. 😁
1) Aviation fuel burns at about 1200c when perfectly supplied with air. At that temperature it burns blue as in a jet engine. Without perfect levels of oxygen it burns black (soot) or red (burning) with temperatures around 850c. As seen in this footage. 2) Newtons Law allows compression until it reaches resistance equal to that compression. How did the buildings collapse totally then? 3) 11 Seconds to completely fall is equal to the fall speed without any impedance. Not possible as each floor acts as a shock absorber slowing the rate of fall. 4) Columns were seen cut at 45 degrees at ground level. A sign of perfect demolition technique. 5) Thermite is used to demolish steel structures. It heats to circa 3500c which might explain why Ground Zero still had molten metal there for weeks. My point is? I’m not convinced by the explanations given.
It’s an understandable statement to announce the weakening of the structure caused by intense heat exposure. But what about all of the hundreds of eye witness reports of hearing what sounded like multiple bombs going off seconds before the World Trade Center towers came down? And what about the scattered chunks of molten steal that was discovered within the wreckage by rescue workers days after this attack took place? These are the matters that call the question on whether or not terrorism was truly to blame. But against all odds, countless lives of innocent civilians and first responders were lost that day. Many more went unaccounted for. And families from all over the United States as well as the rest of the world were left devastated. In honor and respect for those names engraved at the Ground Zero Memorial and their friends and family, there must be a deeper investigation into what else may have happened the day the world changed. I mean these words in no disrespect and in every way encourage you to commence your own research on the matter before you jump to any conclusions.
Here’s a thought it’s been 20 years since this tragedy happened and people still want to say it was a cover up etc. With the time and energy they have wasted in 20 years of coming up with conspiracy theories these individuals could have been leading much better lives, and also probably be successful in some way or form. As the old saying goes 3 people can keep a secret if 2 are dead I’ll just leave it at that…
Melt?? it didnt nor did it need to… hot enough for long enough with ENOUGH WEIGHT on top (thats why the second tower hit fell first) will make the steel fail … watch that blacksmith vid and learn why you wouldnt want to shoot a gun or work under a jack that had been in a fire even tho it never melted
Jet fuel burns at a max of 1810 DF under proper conditions, meaning ample oxygen intake, and maximum burn ration. The smoke coming from the towers was black, meaning it was oxygen starved and carbon burning in nature. So the maximum temp allowed to cultivate was less than 1000 degrees. Sure, enough to soften the girders, but doesn’t explain the article or personal representation of the firefighters that these rich bastards are letting die, with no benefit to their families, that acknowledged the molten steel running down the website rails like, and I quote, “Molten lava”. Fuck this reiteration of history. I was alive when this happened, I watched it happen on live TV and I have listened to the testimony, no longer available via YT or FB or any other means of mass exchange, which challenges the “official” testimony of what happened that day, where they didn’t even test for explosives, which is DEM101.
Experts agree that the steel frames DID NOT need to melt. DID NOT NEED TO MELT They just had to LOSE their STRUCTURAL STRENGTH Steel begins to lose strength at 750 degrees F. Steel loses roughly 50% of it’s strength at 1,100 degrees F. At 1,800 degrees F, it loses 90% of its strength. The spray-on fireproofing is lightweight and fluffy, and what fireproofing was not blown away by a giant ass airplane can end up trapping the heat that reaches the steel. Also that does not include everything inside the building that was flammable, intensifying the fire and heat.
If the beams are thicker starting at the base of the building to hold the total weight and the aircraft damaged the upper part of the building why didnt the upper part collapse leaving the stronger base? Also why did both buildings collapse downwards in precision instead of to the side where the planes crashed and damaged supporting beams?
I saw it all happen on live TV. I deployed twice to Afghanistan afterwards. I don’t know what to believe, meaning who did this, but I do know this day and the residual effects changed my life, and I’m sure so many others, forever. I know exactly how many people I killed in Afghanistan, I do not know exactly why anymore. I know that I have PTSD any many other issues but at least I’m still alive. I cannot imagine the pain felt by those in, around, and by those that lost loved ones in the towers that day, and beyond do to illness. I was proud to go fight for them. We’ve lost numerous service members, including my friends, in the longest war in U.S. history that followed. I survived it all but died inside. Again, I don’t know what to believe. My heart is broken. If I am to believe my government did this, then most of my life is a lie too. That’s so much to bare. CW4, U.S. Army, Retired (31 years), age 54
I’m a real structural Engineer, and this guy’s test is all based around the “extreme” heat involved. There is no way, on this earth, that burning kerosene can cause steel to hit the temperatures he is using to yield the beam. Yes, if it were true then what he says after is possible, but I’d debate it with him still, but my main point stands.
I’m still just confused why so many people doubt how hot the fires were… you ever see a draft furnace before? As the fire spread in the top floors, it sucked up air from the lower floors to feed the fire. The towers had a large number of elevator shafts after all, not to mention what was considered by many to be the most advanced air-conditioning systems in the world, designed to pipe and push air upwards hundreds of feet, cycling nine million cubic feet of air per minute. All that considered that fire was anything but a normal office fire it was a giant blowtorch. The reason no other building has burned like this before, is because no other building had such a spacious design with so many nice big vents just primed to fuel a fire in the upper floors. Or do some people just think people were jumping from the upper floors because it was just mildly uncomfortable up there? You can look at architectural design around the world ever since the collapses, there’s a reason no one has ever built a building like that since. Engineers can now see the flaws in that design, unfortunately all too late.
What a load of propaganda bs from the shills in the media. Architects and Engineers for 911 have a rather different opinion. What about all the money that went missing? 47 reinforced steel columns thicker than tank armour all gave way at exactly the same time so the building fell in free fall…. Yeah ok, if you say so. The only steel structured buildings in human history that have completely collapsed due to fire???
The fuel burned up in the initial impact. It was gone, the only thing left was office furniture. Both did not have the possibility to soften or even melt steel. Even if that were the case, that would still not explain a simple gravitational collapse. Newton’s third law is not a joke here. Only explosives could bring down the whole building.
Stop this nonsense now thermite residue was found even after the USA government shipped it off to china to be melted and destroyed, the collapse was 100 percent a controlled demolition, exactly the same as that building that collapsed without planes even hitting it, and the crazy thing is, most people don’t even know about building 7
I believe the lies they told us in fact George Bush Senior and Dick the Dick Chaney had nothing to do with the orchestration of this Evil act for dangerous political reasons like reducing freedom the fire fighters and many others heard demolition like explosions as the head in charge of the buildings security was one of Bushes Sons and the owner of the towers who was there every day decided that day to go for a walk with his lovely billionaire daughter he also told many tenants to take the day off and those tenants told their managers and certain chosen workers not to go and about a mile away another brick bull was burned also,call me, label me a conspiracy theorist,it beats eating the bullshit on a plate,and me feeling stupid. And that’s all I had to say about that Lieutenant Dan.
Structural Redistribution and Failure in the Twin Towers The Twin Towers, icons of modern engineering, were constructed with a unique architectural design that relied heavily on the distribution of loads between the central core and the perimeter columns. At the heart of this design was the hat truss, a critical structural element located at the top of each tower, which connected the perimeter columns with the core columns, effectively balancing and redistributing loads. However, during the catastrophic events leading to their collapse, the hat truss faced unprecedented challenges. When the core columns on the mechanical floors were compromised by strategically placed explosives, the hat truss had to compensate for the sudden loss of support. The mechanical floors, essential for housing heavy equipment and providing structural reinforcement, became vulnerable targets. The explosive force blew out the diagonal cross beams and core columns, disrupting the vertical load paths. Consequently, the hat truss was forced to shift the weight that the core once carried to the perimeter columns, significantly increasing their load-bearing demands and pushing them towards failure. Simultaneously, the application of thermite to the perimeter columns on a specific floor introduced an additional, devastating factor. Thermite, known for its intense exothermic reaction capable of reaching temperatures high enough to melt steel, was allegedly used to weaken these critical structural elements. The melting of the steel columns, a process visually supported by the presence of molten metal—resembling lava—flowing from the South Tower, resulted in a dramatic loss of structural integrity.
WHY are all compilations coming out these years NOT showing the molten steel you show here. It have been erased my friend! WHY are building 7 left out in the clips coming out these years? Because it cannot be logically explained. Building 7 were left out of the 9/11 commission report for the same reason. Building 7, a huge building, were NOT hit by an airplane but still fell with gravitational speed, all corners at the same time, hours after WTC1 and 2, that also fell with gravitational speed, THAT are ONLY possible when the resistance are removed below and THAR are only possible if the below are removed in a controlled demolition. Witness after witness have explained how they heard a series of explosion as the building fell. There were 2 planes in New York but 3 buildings that fell in the same way. Very telling that all these compilations do not include building 7. The explanation for buildings 7´s collapse cannot be made that are why the 9/11 commission excluded that building and why we do not see it here. The power “some” have are more than real. If any wanna comment on this then please start by explaining building 7`s collapse. NO other rebarbed concrete building in the world have ever done what building 7 did. Look up the owner of building 7 and watch him say, the day after, that “it were decided to pull the building” and then ask a demolition company how long time it would take to plan such a demolition let alone prep the building itself with explosives. WTC were filled with asbestos and had to either be renovated for a huge amount or demolished.
People keep thinking that metal has to melt to be destroyed, but you take a steel rod truss and heat it to 1300°F with 4 inches of concrete over it and only hooked to the side of the building with a tiny 90° bracket, the bracket is the weakest link and once it fails then say goodbye to the one acre of 4 inch concrete slab floors, especially after you use a Boeing 767 traveling 400-600mph thru it destroying 8 floors almost instantly from the start… Building was designed in the 70s to handle a slow hit from a 707, biggest jet of it’s time, the bigger and faster jet was 4-6 times more force & fire than the building was ever designed for. The design had flaws, someone discovered the flaws, and penetrated those flaws – it wasn’t indestructible like many would choose to believe, very rarely is anything indestructible once you know the biggest flaws and figure out a way to exastebate them like 9/11 did.
Regular people think steel must have ‘melted’. No need for that. 1 hour at 1000F flame, the steel will lose a good amount of its strength. That’s well before melting point. Look again at those sword making shows. Steel doesn’t have to melt in order to become less strong. Even just 30% less strength would have been catastrophic give the structure was already heavily damaged.
No one could have possibly imagined the towers could collapse because this is the only example of such a thing at this scale and the evidence was shipped to China as scrap. Funny how a story becomes history after its repeated enough times. Engineers and architects from all over the world have studied and debunked this story. It pains me as an American and enrages me as a former member of the military. We had the support of the entire world after 9/11. When will we learn from history? Politicians lie for a living. We, the people need to put the trivia aside long enough to fix this corrupted system.
First of the fire does not concentrate on one pressured area like they are doing with the torch with consistent direct heat of 1300°F. Secondly the aluminum can demo only show that if upper floors somehow gave out it will only topple over due to resistance of lower floors which are not compromised by anything, look how the middle of the can he thoched or shall I say compromised folded, even can being aluminum prove topple over not stright down, and for the record the only thing that was aluminum was the airplane . Fires burn hotter in random areas which would allow temperature drop on some areas, the only way that building’s came down the way it did is for lower floors to be compromised. Now comes building 7 collapsing in the same manner, enuff said.
I’ll always love reading comments on a 9/11 article. For everyone that claims the collapse was symmetrical, I suggest you watch the live article again. The first tower to collapse started to fall on the weakest side (point of impact). You can see as the tower falls that the top 1/3 is leaning, it certainly wasn’t “straight down”
Im really intrigued by all this, i think its definitely plausible that heat caused the failure, but i definitely question it. Because did the plane fuel find its way onto the floors as i dont believe the furniture etc would’ve burned hot enough alone. What about the external frame it was designed to hold much of the weight and i don’t think the heat from the fire on the internal colums would’ve been enough to cause its failure. Was the building engineered to be strong enough if the steel was down to 50% of its strength from the fire. We just will never know. The collapse was just too perfect in my eyes but at the same time was it even possible to make a building like that fall so perfectly. Both buildings fell exactly the same, whats the chances of that. Were both planes carrying the same amount of fuel ive heard 9000gal in one mention and around 20000gal in another. Surely this would affect things.
Okay listen up, if I take a 1 inch thick carbon steel bar, 3 feet long, I have done this btw, and I heat the centre 6 inches with acetylene to 800 degree Celsius, I can bend it with my hands, relatively easily, no beams melted, they were simply weakened to the point of no longer being structurally integral, also remember that the impact will have sheared a lot of bolts in the ironwork
Notice that this vid never explains how the buildings collapsed at freefall speed…. No way that 10 damaged floors in a so called pancake scenario would cause the other 90 floors to vanish and pulverise as though the support for those undamaged lower floors was suddenly gone.. and falling into their own footprints.. OR that both collapsed the same way and in 10 seconds. All one has to do is look at / read the opinions of demolition experts who have watched the collapses and say it looks just like a controlled demolition.
This guy destroys his credibility with that soda can stunt. Firstly, to compare an engineered building to a soda can is so ludicrous. But he actually proves the opposite point to that which he is trying to make. (!?) So if you put a kink in the side of the can and press down on it, notice the can doesn’t completely collapse. No, it actually bends over, down the path of least resistance and further bends the ‘kink’. You can see this in the article. In other words, it toppled over and bent sideways where the kink was. It didn’t completely collapse. A completely collapsed soda can would be flat, like those we’ve all seen that have been stomped on from the top. One would have expected the towers to collapse similarly to the pop can, bending/breaking/collapsing toward the damaged area, where there is less resistance. But they didn’t. They fell straight through the path of greatest resistance in an even manner. So, if this guy put a kink on one side of the can, it would make no sense for the can to ignore the kink (where there is less resistance) and crumple straight down, evenly and symmetrically. Again we see this in the article. The can followed the laws of physics and crumpled over toward the damage instead of evenly on all sides. We all know this. If you stomp on a bent soda can, it’s not going to crumple evenly into a nice circle from the top down. Its going to crumple into an asymmetrical shape based on where the damage is. So he disproves his point….. 🤷🏽♀️
I just cant grasp the fact that both buildings pancake perfectly like a controlled demolition. Ok yes the top part would have collapse but the bottom part should have withstand the pressure since it didn’t burn at all. The metal beams were still fully intact but studently they failed? I’m not concluding any conspiracies, I’m just saying that this theory doesn’t make a lot of sense. RIP for those who died.
“it’s easier to fool someone than to convice them that they’ve been fooled” I feel lIke these conspiracy theorists don’t understand that it applies to them. my guy it’s as simple as there not being a conspiracy I understand you can’t live with that fact because your world view relies on it but you gotta face that eventually
Fuel\t Flash point\t Autoignition temperature Gasoline (petrol)\t−43 °C (−45 °F)\t 280 °C (536 °F) Diesel (2-D)\t >52 °C (126 °F)\t 210 °C (410 °F) Jet fuel (A/A-1)\t>38 °C (100 °F)\t 210 °C (410 °F) Kerosene\t >38 °C (100 °F)\t 210 °C (410 °F) Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F). Air-acetylene produces a flame temperature of around 4000° F (2200° C). This is hot enough to solder aluminum work glass, repair radiators and braze plumbing fixtures. It is not hot enough to weld steel. When acetylene is burned in pure oxygen, the flame temperature may be as high as 5730° F (3166° C). Thermite – When ignited, the reducing agent steals oxygen from the metal oxide, producing intense heat and molten metal as a result. This exothermic reaction can reach temperatures of up to 4500°F (2500°C), making it an incredibly powerful source of energy.
Lies these were control detinations . So there going to sit here and forget about what security guards witness days before the attack. There were vans parked below each towers the security guards reported and they got ignored. This was well plan out and allowed to happen by our government. This a personal oil deal that went wrong behind close door between Bush and Bin Laden. In the 1970 Bush and Bin Laden had business ties together than suddenly Bin Laden brother died in a freak accident in the U.S. His brother died in airplane crash in Texas they flew in to a power line. So now do you guys understand.
If you dint the can and apply pressure, the top half folds over the bottom half like a melting icecream cone. If the pancake collapse caused it why don’t we see the outer steal walls fray out like a banana skin. That’s not what we see, what we see if more indicative of blowing out the bottom support and the entire building coming straight down like a controlled demolition. Now explain building 7 that wasn’t hit by an aircraft.
this test is invalid, come on now. they focus all the heat and weight on one single pin point of coures the steel bends, in reality the whole beams not a beam would be holding the weight evenly destributed not all in one small area and the heat from the fire my have been 1300F but not on one spot alone to glow red hot, which makes this test void, along with the fact of they didnt test multi beams joind which would prove to be much stronger, if this test was accurate after 10 min when the fire had made the beams 1300f the beams would have caved it wouldnt have taken 105 minutes.
Go watch what happens when a fire erupts after an accident from a fuel tanker truck or something similar under a bridge, the bridge ends up collapsing almost every single time if it is left to burn. There are countless accidents where that happened, these bridges collapse not because the fire melts the steel but because it compromises the integrity of the structure, it droops and sags which then allows the weight of the structure itself to destroy itself. That’s exactly what happened on 9/11 (not to mention the structural damage from the planes and the weight of those planes too). As further proof, the fire didn’t have to burn nearly as long in the south tower because the plane hit it at a lower spot causing more of the weight of the building to be on top of the fire causing the collapse to happen a lot faster.
To the person who made the comment about the passport and the black boxes…..the pesky govt must be on to us and they won’t let me reply to your comment. Anyway, The passport was probably in the guys pocket or maybe he put it somewhere in the cockpit. It’s a loose object that’s light weight and can easily fly out. The black box is in the internal part of the plane attached to the plane that was on fire. We don’t need the black box there’s dozens of articles of the plane crashing into the building and there’s air traffic control recordings. Black boxes are only necessary in circumstances where you don’t know what happened to the plane and how it met it’s demise. We know exactly what happened so your point is moot. We can see it all. What does it even matter? Critical thinking….not your strong suit, eh?