I started watching this DVD yesterday and found it fascinating. The premise is not to support a conspiracy theory but to scientifically prove that the twin towers and WTC building 7 were taken down with explosives. By who? Not sure. The architects, engineers and scientists that put this together go through mountains of evidence and research. It’s simple really. Steel cannot melt at 1800 degrees, it only bends, yet firefighters said they saw melting steel. Jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steel, the only theing that can is Thermite/sulfur which is a main ingredient in demolition explosives. It burns as hot as 4500 degrees.

Worth the watch.

13 Thoughts on “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth

  1. Angry Guy on December 15, 2008 at 12:52 pm said:

    Be careful DL, DooHickey posted conspiracy theories on VoicesCrazy, and now everyone thinks he’s a nutbar.
    Oh wait….

  2. Ghost of Dude on December 15, 2008 at 12:59 pm said:

    Just because the steel doesn’t melt at that temp. doesn’t mean it wouldn’t fail. Had the steel melted, the building would have sagged in the hot spots. The steel may have been red hot, but probably not molten. Materials’ strengths can be altered by heat – or cold, as was seen in the arctic during WW2.
    9/11 truthers are the weirdest kind of tin-foil-hat nutjobs. Popular Mechanics did a big expose on the whole theory and blew it away.

  3. I’m not saying I believe it all, but the video of WTC building seven collasping is very interesting. You have to remember who was preznit before (Clinton) and during 9/11. These two are about as clean as the back of my ball sack after a 4 hour bike ride.

  4. Warren Phear on December 15, 2008 at 1:49 pm said:

    I have to agree with what l3wis said in his last post. It’s been a few years since I read about this stuff, but you can’t help but go WTF. Building number 7 was 2 blocks away from the two towers, and was only superficially hit by debris when those towers collapsed. When you view building 7 going down, it is hard not to question what happened to 7. I would be curious to see the Popular Mechanics take on what caused 7 to go down.


  5. Johnny Roastbeef on December 15, 2008 at 1:52 pm said:

    If you want to read what Popular Mechanics said about this.


  6. I’m not as concerned about the twin towers as I am about building seven. How does a 47 story building that only has two floors on fire and barely any debris damage implode?

  7. Angry Guy on December 15, 2008 at 2:13 pm said:

    All of the buildings that “collapsed” that day were owned by one person, Larry Silverstein.
    “In January 2001, Silverstein, via Silverstein Properties and Westfield America, made a $3.2 billion bid for the lease to the World Trade Center. Silverstein was outbid by $50 million by Vornado Realty, with Boston Properties and Brookfield Properties also competing for the lease. However, Vornado withdrew and Silverstein’s bid for the lease to the World Trade Center was accepted on July 24, 2001.[14] This was the first time in the building’s 31-year history that the complex had changed management.

    The lease agreement applied to One, Two, Four, and Five World Trade Center, and about 425,000 square feet (39,500 m2) of retail space. Silverstein put up $14 million of his own money to secure the deal.[15] The terms of the lease gave Silverstein, as leaseholder, the right to rebuild the structures should they be destroyed and should he comply with the onerous financial obligations of the lease.[16]

    Upon leasing the World Trade Center towers, along with 4 World Trade Center and 5 World Trade Center, Silverstein insured the buildings. The insurance policies on these four buildings were underwritten by 24 insurance companies for a combined total of $3.55 billion per occurrence in property damage coverage.”

  8. Angry Guy on December 15, 2008 at 2:13 pm said:

    Sorry, I meant “leased”.

  9. Another interesting thing about buidling seven was that the floors that were on fire contained investigative reports on Enron (Securities and Exchange Commission) How ironic that all the records were destroyed in the fire and collapse.

    It think 9/11 is like the JFK assasination – we may never know.

  10. You have to know I’m enjoying this.

    If building 7 interests you, the Pentagon Strike will surely suck you in.


  11. Ghost of Dude on December 15, 2008 at 3:37 pm said:

    The insurance policies on these four buildings were underwritten by 24 insurance companies for a combined total of $3.55 billion per occurrence in property damage coverage.

    That may come close to the costs associated with rebuilding the WTC, but add the lost rental income to that and I’ll bet the insurance companies come out ahead. We’re going on eight years now where there’s been nothing done at the site – prime Manhattan real estate. That’s a lot of lost income.
    Somehow I doubt he had anything to do with it.

  12. sidestreets on April 24, 2010 at 10:02 pm said:

    Archetects and Engineers now have over 1000 licensed members now with peer reviewed material and are just about ready to go to congress demanding a new investigation. There are several new findings all based only on how. They are careful to not point fingers, just hard evidence.

    Personally I’m more intrigued of the coverup activities but so many people are coming on board. It will be interesting.

    If you want entertainment in this area listen live 7 to 9 to Truth Hertz – Charlie Giuliani or check out his archives!! His NE accent adds to the thrill.

Post Navigation