9/11: EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY EXCLUSIVE - AE911Truth.org Jeff Farrer Physicist 1 of 3 .m4v

Born2Flesh Says:

Mar 20, 2011 - I'm not a "truther", you stupid ass....and I',m not here to convince you of a damn thing. The only thing that I see impossible about 9/11 is, the whole thing.

Nellynoodlebums Says:

Mar 22, 2011 - We have trolls.

pjt03 Says:

Mar 24, 2011 - 911 False Flag Attack.

WTC7SMOKINGUN Says:

Apr 30, 2011 - If the Calcium and Sulphur could possibly be dissociated from each other rom the wall board , you would also find the Calcium embedded in the steel pores as well as the Sulphur !

mohammedhegazi Says:

May 7, 2011 - @KevinMerckSpot on Kev. Scientific evidence is the only worthwhile evidence. Traces of nanothermite were found in the dust, and that is that. Forget about any other elaborate nonsense.

sssssjjjj1 Says:

May 18, 2011 - if you can't tell it was our gov and israel and therefore Britain you are an idiot. watch ODIGO calls two hours before 911. But don't miss, mossad caught in van on 9-11 "filled with explosives" gw bridge

Kmost213 Says:

May 25, 2011 - Lets see, if all it takes to perfectly bring down a massive building is jet fuel and some fire then why the hell ever go through the hassle of hiring a demolition company. Just pour jet fuel all over the build and set it ablaze. Right? Wake up sheep!!! To perfectly demolish a build into its footprint requires strategically placed explosives not a plane crash and some fire!

Funkadelic2 Says:

Jun 3, 2011 - Folks, it IS important that you show your sympathy with those seeking a new investigation, but it is important too, to really sign the petitions actually demanding a new, real, IMPARTIAL investigation:w w w 2.ae911truth. org/signpetition. p h pThank you.

EvEnt372 Says:

Jun 8, 2011 - lol of course burning jet fuel alone can't do anything but stripping all fireproofing + taking out many of the columns/floors with an explosion and having the remaining columns heat up exposed until they lose a lot of their integrity kinda will. Maybe if the towers were a regular girder cage structure like the empire state building then they wouldn't have fell. Blame whoever you want for the airplanes but really, the airplanes are enough to take the towers down thermite or no thermite.

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 8, 2011 - Sorry, its never been proven conclusively that the fire proofing was stripped, the fires could not get hot enough and did not cover enough of the floors to heat up all the steel to failure points and even though the planes exploded on impact, that had no effect on the rest of the towers so they should have resisted any collapse since they were made of stronger materials designed to hold up all the live and dynamic loads above them plus a 300+% safety factor

EvEnt372 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - These floors pretty much get sandblasted with airplane parts, I really think it is very much enough to strip fireproofing and not to mention fully expose the core since it is sealed only by drywall. The floor trusses which have the highest surface area should be to blame since they are the only connecting component between the core columns and the exterior columns as they sag and fail less keeps the vertical components from buckling.

EvEnt372 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - @lexicon008 As for the safety factor, I really don't think it possible for the lower floors to take the falling upper in the areas where the outside columns were snapped by the 767 and that is what you see in the collapse as those areas go down first dragging the rest with it sideways. Also seen is the outside columns straining inwards from the buckling floor girders just before they snap causing the collapse. The inside floors supported by these girders clearly pancake first going down.

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - Ok so lets get this straight,the planes crashed and sandblasted fireproofing and dry wall away, yet people who were on the floors that were hit survived? And how exactly did the plane "sandblast" the fire proofing unless is disintegrated? if it did that then how did it manage to damage the columns and beams if it was the consistency of sand? Do you see the flaw here? The whole fire proofing argument is flawed since the planes did not hit the entire floor at once. cont

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - it did not remove the whole floors fire proofing. Thus only parts of the floor were effected and thus you would have assymetric damage and assymetric collapse. you wont have a symetrical collapse of the whole floor in any impact scenario.As for the collapses. the floors below the impact zone had held up the wieght of all the floors above them for 30 years. They were designed to hold them and the maximum live/dynamic loads they could endure PLUS a safety factor of atleast 300%. cont

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - the exterior columns were designed to hold up to 2000% their live and dynamic load limits. This means that even if the upper floors dropped onto them they columns would at the very least stop the collapse for a brief period of time. Look at the work of David Chandler, he has shown that the upper floor underwent constant acceleration, that is not possible unless the floors below offered 0 resistance. If they resisted we would see a jolt as each floor resisted, we do not see this.

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - The towers were also designed to have all the perimeter columns on 2 sides removed and then be exposed to a 100 mph wind and still not collapse. And btw, the whole pancake theory was discounted along time ago, the current is the inward bowing theory. This theory is also ridiculous since it requires the trusses to sag something like 50 inches and testing has shown that they wouldn't sag even 1/3 that much in hotter and longer burning fires.

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - One thing people forget about the collapse is that the antenna dropped first. Yes there was bowing, but if the antenna dropped first that means the core columns collapsed first, not the outer walls. This is not likely given the sheer strength and amount of connections needed to collapse the core. Even mist admits that only between 13 and 21% of the core was affected by the crashes. What happened to the other 80ish% that caused it to collapse?? A demo takes out the core first..cont

lexicon008 Says:

Jun 9, 2011 - Also consider this, Nist claims the trusses sagged in WTC 1 and 2 due to fire. If they didn't no collapse. Yet they claim the steel in WTC 7 expanded due to fire..if it didn't again no collapse. So how do they explain it sagging in one scenario and expanding in the other? If you were to have expansion in WTC 1 and 2 then no collapse, if it sagged in WTC 7 then no collapse. Interesting huh

evilpiggehz Says:

Jun 14, 2011 - yup u just have to have eyes, have seen a controlled demolition before on tv or otherwise and not be a brain dead idiot :P

ed11561 Says:

Aug 3, 2011 - So how do they explain it sagging in one scenario and expanding in the other? Simple. Nist is a government agency.Government agencies are corrupt liars. The government lies & the governmental agencies swear to their lies. Need i remind you of Iran-contra-cocaine? Of that's right they never published the cocaine part in the media did they?Pure scum.Reagan-selling weapons to Iran our supposed enemy.Clinton-selling missile secrets to China-gee funny how they were his $ supporters.

ed11561 Says:

Aug 3, 2011 - What the fuck kind of censorship is on this page? If you put any capitals on this page or 2 letters in a row...like $ twice-then the fucking comment will not print? What the fuck is that?

wiscokiddd Says:

Aug 4, 2011 - ZioNazis did 9/11. They control the monetary & majority of military power of the world. 9/11 was not an inside job unless you believe the people know that the 'god' on the dollar bill is the 'Synagogue of Satan' Rev 2:9 & bow to it. Many demolicans & republicrats do. Are a treasonous kippah wearing cabal members like GWB insiders? They hate the US constitution & call common working people goy & chattel. I voted for Russ Feingold & Charlie Chaplin is my hero I am not antiSemitic but antiZioNazi.

amzuel420 Says:

Aug 6, 2011 - Somebody finally got me to look at a video of bldg 7 and I thought he was joking when he asked me if I thought it was a demo. I started laughing and asked him, "why wouldn't I think it was a demo". He told me the gov. said it fell because of fire and it wasn't a demo. I thought he was B/Sn me. I told him that I even heard the owner of the building say it was a demo. Then he started crackin up because I still didn't know they were saying it wasn't a demo. Imagine my surprise.

culturebully3 Says:

Nov 6, 2011 - steven jones admitted he was wrong bout the wtc7 collapse time. he admitted that he IGNORED THE EVIDENCE. lol, so what other BS have you guys been swallowing from this guy and others like him?ItWasTyped. com for the story and MORE on conspiracy theories

rbirkin Says:

May 25, 2012 - Notice how this is just one big conversation ONLY of conspiracy theorists? Let's just ignore that Bin Laden took credit for it, or that there were 19 identified conspirators, yadda, yadda, yadda. It can all be rationalized away for whatever preferred theory you have.