Thats cause steel work isnt physics.

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

I have given this before but you seem to always forget about it so here it is again.

I made many of these points earlier but was (dis)regarded as a "regurgitation of Alex Jones". As the link suggests, the fire wasnt hot enough to bring down the towers. The way it suggests WTC 1 & 2 fell is plausible but Ive never argued what did or didnt bring those 2 down. One point of contention is how hot the fires actually were due to the burning jet fuel. This link claims upwards of 1200F where as others state half that amount.

http://www.mepetroleum.com/jet_fuel.htm

However, the JOM article does lend credence to the orthodox explanation for the collapse of both towers. Too bad it doesnt help with my skepticism on 7 World Trade. I still believe Venusians beamed death rays on it.

Yes, the reports are always in defense of the two towers, saying the jet fuel, fire, heat, domino effect, etc. caused it. Even the 9/11 Commission Report completely NEVER address WTC building 7.
No plane hit this building. Larry Silverstein, owner of the towers and WTC7, is on a PBS broadcast, stateing... concerning WTC7, 'I told them there had been enough lives lost today, no need for anymore loss, (he gave the ok) and they told me they were going to "pull it".' or words to that effect. He did say "pull it", a term used in demolition to bring a building down in its footprints, using explosives. The building crashed to the ground, the same as the towers, in only 8 seconds!!!
In the videos of the towers, you can see the explosive charges igniting. Also in one video I watched, thru the black smoke of the burning towers, a helicopter is hovering, launching rockets into the building The helicopters, there were 4 I believe, were not investigated and they did not rescue anyone from the burning buildings, as people were jumping out of windows. What's with the cover up? Still so many unanswered questions. Makes one wonder... Inquiring minds Want to KNOW!!!

I don't know about building 7 but the main towers fell in 10 seconds not 8. Anyway with a demo you dont just explode things. The explosives are strategically placed (it would be hard for people to do this with noone noticing) and support beams are cut. The building wouldn't have been able to stay up with everyday activity if this was the case.

The main towers were taller than building 7. It fell in 8 seconds. Since you and many others do not know about building 7, why don't you research it? All 3 building collapsed in the same fashion. So... what made building 7 collapse in 8 seconds when it was NOT hit by a plane? Find the answer to this and we may know why a 3 buildings REALLY fell.

I know the charges are strategically placed, this is my point! There was not enough time to bring down building 7 by pulling it, unless all of this was set up, way prior to 9/11.

It can be done with no one noticing if it was an inside job. Bush's BROTHER was in charge of building maintenance. His contracted ended on 9/11. Something very suspicious about this, don't you think?

Also, there has been found, Thermite, in the rubble of the buildings. Thermite would make the steel hot enough to give way and loose it's strength. The 82nd floor which was struck, was an unoccupied floor, which had recently, at night, when many were not in the building, had BIG BATTERIES brought in. These BIG BATTERIES most likely contained Thermite. It was no accident the plane hit this floor. The rubble of the towers stayed red hot for weeks following the disaster. The tower structure with weakened support and dominoe effecting, would not cause this.

Go Figure...

if your "story" had any truth behind it the whole world would know about building 7...

See it for yourselves...

Here, you may view footages from CBS and NBC cameras. The longest clip is 36 seconds. The other 2 are less than 10 seconds. Watch for yourself, You can view all 3 in less than One Minute of your Life.

http://wtc7.net/videos.html

Here is the video of Larry Silverstein from PBS: The video is only 1min. 3sec.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTf91pusNXc

I picked the shortest time lengths, for all of those who just don't have the time to do the research.

Oh, and please excuse my ERROR.

WTC 7 fell in 6.5 seconds, not 8 seconds.

Sorry. I was remembering from my research a year ago.

and you think that the crew who planted the explosives and the people who witnessed the operation to place the explosives would up to this point has not spoken a word about it ...please...

you are forgetting we are talkinjg high quilty construction steel not pig iron...........this stuff doesnot melt like lead

The story...

Molten steel was discovered in the basements of the collapsed WTC. Fire couldn't raise the temperature high enough to melt steel, but explosives, particularly thermite, could.

As Lisa Giuliani put it:

The existence of these burning pools of molten steel were confirmed by:

- Mark Lorieux of Controlled Demolition, Inc
- Peter Tully, President of Tully Construction
- and the American Free Press newspaper

Please explain where these molten pools of steel came from, because hydrocarbon fires are not going to burn in an oxygen-starved environment as these underground fires did.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/312837.shtml

Our take...

So we have three sources? Maybe not. Let's go back to a more complete telling of the story.

Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself "the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures."

Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived on the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation.

AFP asked Loizeaux about the report of molten steel on the site. "Yes," he said, "hot spots of molten steel in the basements." These incredibly hot areas were found "at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven [basement] levels," Loizeaux said. The molten steel was found "three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed," Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.ht

^^^^...and that story was published August 28, 2002...so after over 7 1/2 years has there not been any new evidence and if that evidence is so conclusive then why is it still just sitting on the internet?

its a big cover up thats why.

how can it be a cover up when you claim there is evidence to prove your claims....the so called evidence is exposed so who is covering it up?

Yes, there has been new evidence found.

http://www.zeitenschrift.net/news/sne-12207-911.ihtml

9/11 — Who Put Thermate in the World Trade Center?
by Christopher Bollyn
18 January 2007
Reporter Sans Frontières

When a former worker from the World Trade Center came forward recently with crucial and verifiable information about what was really on the 81st floor of the South Tower (WTC 2), he broke up a logjam of unanswered questions about the source of the molten metal seen falling from the tower before its collapse on 9/11.

Based on this important piece of information from a former IT professional who worked with computers in the Twin Towers, I was able to determine that the two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 had directly impacted secure computer rooms in both buildings:
• the first on the 95th floor of the North Tower;
• the second on the 81st floor of the South Tower.

This information raises new questions:

• Were the computer rooms equipped to play a role in the crime?

• Were there homing devices or computers in these rooms that used precision-guidance systems to direct the planes into the towers?

• Did these computer rooms contain pre-placed explosives or forms of Thermite to destroy evidence, create an incendiary spectacle, and weaken the structure prior to the collapses?

EVIDENCE OF THERMITE
Photographic evidence strongly suggests that the secure computer rooms in both towers contained forms of Thermite, which had been pre-placed to destroy evidence and facilitate the collapse of the immense steel-frame towers while creating a deadly pyrotechnic spectacle.

After examining the photographic and physical evidence, Professor Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University has concluded that the yellow and white glowing metal pouring from the east corner of the 81st floor of the South Tower was, most likely, molten iron created by a Thermite reaction.

It could not have been molten aluminum as the federal government's Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers (NIST, 2005) speculates, Jones says, because, among other things, molten aluminum at that temperature would appear silver-grey in daylight conditions.


Having tested pieces of hardened molten metal from the twin towers, Jones found that they were composed primarily of iron, not structural steel. This is positive physical evidence of an aluminothermic reaction, more commonly known as Thermite, having occurred in conjunction with the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7.

Aluminothermics refers to the intense exothermic (heat producing) reactions that occur when powdered aluminum is mixed with powdered iron oxide and/or other elements and oxides. Copper, potassium permanganate, zinc- and barium nitrate are among the additives Jones has found evidence of in the dust from the World Trade Center .

The Thermite reaction produces an extremely hot reaction (up to 2500 °C or 4500 °F), which creates molten iron and aluminum oxide. The molten iron produced from Thermite is white hot and the aluminum oxide is a white smoke.

EVIDENCE OF SULFIDATION
Thermate is a variant of Thermite that contains additives to enhance certain effects. It may contain pyrotechnic additives, such as barium nitrate, for incendiary purposes.

The addition of barium nitrate increases its thermal effect, creates flame in burning and significantly reduces the ignition temperature.

The addition of 2 percent sulfur to Thermite improves the steel-cutting properties by creating a eutectic that will melt steel at much lower temperatures.

Eutectic comes from the Greek word "eutektos," which means "easily melted." Thermate cuts through steel like "a warm knife through butter," Jones says.

The FEMA-sponsored Building Performance Study of 2002 contains evidence of melted steel caused by sulfidation and oxidation. This is found in the "Limited Metallurgical Examination" written by Professor Jonathan Barnett. The NIST report, however, fails to address the evidence of sulfidation found in the structural steel from the WTC.

Barnett examined two pieces of melted steel: one from the WTC 7, the other from the Twin Towers . About the first piece, Barnett wrote: "The thinning of the steel occurred by a high-temperature corrosion due to the combination of oxidation and sulfidation." This was done by "a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel," he concluded.

Barnett found the same sulfidation in the piece of melted steel from the Twin Towers . "The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event," Barnett wrote. "No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified."

Professor Jones points to Thermate, with 2 percent sulfur, as being the most likely culprit. The oxidation and sulfidation of the steel requires the oxygen and sulfur being "intimately in contact with the metal at high temperature," Jones said.

again you didnt read it. It says in the article that the steel didn't melt. Have you ever heard of the term yield strength?

Here is some more info for you AND A report from a WITNESS.

VISIBLE EVIDENCE OF THERMATE
The molten iron seen falling from the South Tower 's eastern corner before it collapsed must have weighed many tons. One cubic meter of iron weighs about 8.5 tons and it certainly looks like several cubic meters poured from the 81st floor shortly before it collapsed. But what could have been the source of so much iron on the 81st floor?

The NIST report gives no answers to this crucial question. In this respect, the NIST report is a good example of studied ignorance. Not only does NIST fail to provide any information about what was on the crucial floors of the South Tower (79, 81, and 82), but they actually suggest that these floors contained normal office materials.

"There were vigorous fires on the east side of the 80th through 83rd floors, especially on the northeast end of the 81st and 82nd floors, where the aircraft had bulldozed the office desks and chairs and added its own combustibles," the NIST report says in its "Account of WTC 2."

From the NIST report the reader gets the impression that these were normal office floors with "desks and chairs," although that was definitely not the case with the 81st floor while the contents of the 82nd and 79th floors remain unknown.

Fuji Bank was the tenant of floors 79-82, yet for some reason the NIST researchers were unable or unwilling to provide any description of the contents of these crucial floors – four years after 9/11.

A former Japanese bank employee recently came forward and explained that the 81st floor was an entire floor of server-size computer batteries:

Fuji Bank had reinforced the 81st floor, he said, so the floor could support more weight. The entire floor was then filled with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.

These units were bolted to a raised floor about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. "The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.

But were they really batteries or were they Thermate?

"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."

See: http://www.iamthewitness.com/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF THERMATE EXPLOSIONS
Were these batteries the source of the molten iron seen falling from the 81st floor? Was Thermate in these "batteries"? Is there evidence to prove Thermate was used on the 81st floor?

Before addressing these questions, allow me to explain how Thermate may have been used in the crash zones (this is just a speculation for those of you who often ask us to provide a scenario on what may have happened):

The perverse terrorist team that planned the destruction of the Twin Towers apparently used Hollywood expertise to create an incendiary spectacle.

They employed remote control devices and precision guidance systems to fly the planes into the towers at precisely the points where they had pre-placed explosives and Thermate incendiary bombs.

Immediately before the planes, or specially prepared drones, hit the towers, missiles carried beneath the fuselage or wing were fired into the buildings. These missiles, which apparently contained depleted uranium (DU), caused the white flashes seen before the planes hit the towers.

This white flash is evidence of a pyrophoric white-hot uranium penetrator, which bores through everything it hits and creates a super-heated space as it burns at extremely hot temperatures. Asked if a white-hot DU penetrator would set off Thermate, Jones said, "Definitely."

More about the uranium possibility here:
Bollyn-DU-Missiles.html

The DU penetrator would carry on through the tower unless it were stopped by a core column or some other extremely dense object. In fact, a white-hot burning object with the characteristics of a DU penetrator is clearly seen coming out ahead of the fireball that engulfed the South Tower .


If DU missiles were used, they would have created a super-heated space in which any combustible, such as atomized jet fuel, explosives, or Thermate, would ignite immediately.

While the orange and black fireballs caused by the burning jet fuel are easily recognized in photographs, there is visible evidence of Thermate seen in the dust and smoke – the conspicuous white smoke of aluminum oxide.

Interesting that the Tenate of these floors was a BANK... if you know anything about the Federal Reserve and their plans for the future of America... Interesting to say the least.

Lol that article says missiles were fired from the planes before they hit the towers. Those were commercial planes, they didnt have missiles on them

we have hashed this over and over dude, they built the towers to withstand the impact of a 707 a fully loaded 707 isnt all that differant from a half empty 767, the engineers would have factored in all the variables includeing any fuel fires. they call it a pancake theory because they cannot call it a pancake fact, being that they would or could simulate the load bearing truses and what not and prove that they either had defective steel or bad engineering, they cant so you get treated to a pancake theory not an engineering fact. It is being swept under the rugby its lack of seriouseattention by the mainstream media, recently Willie Nelson came out against the pancake theory on a talk radio show and basicly said the officail 911 story is a bunch of BS...now had willie gotten drunk and had a high speed chase down the highway you would have had 24/7 news coverage, he comes out against 911 and you only pick it up by a few websites. whats up with that?

Is that the ONLY thing you disagree with in the article?

I find this explanation much more believable than the fictitious story FEMA and our government wants us to believe.