Were the Twin Towers really the first sky scrapers to ever collapse from fire?

Question

I've been watching all those conspiracy videos about 9/11 but one thing that's caught my eye is that all of them claim that the twin towers are the only sky scrapers that collapsed due to fire. They cite all these buildings that burned for hours but never fell down.

So even a skeptic of those skeptics is forced to raise an eyebrow. So, please, help me not believe something crazy. I want to know about any other sky scrapers that collapsed without controlled demolition. please help!

Answer 1

You should check out tower  #7  that is the 3rd building to fall in the history of the world due to fire.  Look at Larry silverstein's pull it comment, study all you can on this topic.

According to the pancake theory, where did the indestructible center steel columns go? If you watch the governments own cad software demonstration of the buildings collapsing, they don't even show the center columns which should of still been standing like 60 stories up in the air.

Check out all the things Professor Steven Jones says on the subject.

He is the physics professor who actually coined the term "cold fussion" he is a pretty reliable source.

Look up the Northwoods Document

Study the constitution

Study the Federal Reserve system

Watch Aaron Russo's "Freedom to Fasism"

Study the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

Study the Verichip (see IBM's link to this company and how the american IBM provided the punchcard technology for Hitler to orginize the Jews and his war machine. Google "Pay for you drinks with a wave of the hand"

Study the Bohemian Grove (make sure you watch Alex Jones interview David Gurgin also)

Study all you can about this and as many other conspiracies you can.

Once you realize that the devil runs this world and we have all been raised by him and everything that we believe is from his teachings, then maybe you should go into creation science. This will show you how God made this world and evolution is a lie as well.

Jesus loves you and will guide you in your search.

Jesus is also the only one that can save you from your sins and the comming wrath of God on this world.

Answer 2

I find those that suggest the events of 9/11 were entirely falsified are embarassing - clearly passenger planes were flown into buildings, which then collapsed. The idea of controlled demolition is interesting, as the preparations for such an eventuality would require weeks, if not months, of preparation. These preparations would include knocking through entire floors, pre-cutting beams and concrete at points and rigging and wiring hundereds or thousands of demolition charges that require literally miles of detonator wire. I'm sure somebody might have noticed these preparations.

Another thing to consider is that this is an entirely unprecedented situation. Never before has anyone flown such a large incendiary object into a building - the closest example we have is of a 2-seater trainer going into a building - and it's very hard to draw an entirely certain picture of what occured within the buildings. Other fires have occured, yes, but they started within the buildings and didn't involve the structure suffering heavy damage on multiple levels with numerous accelerated fires occuring simultaneously. I don't find it so hard to believe that the buildings could have failed, in spite of their incredible saftey specs. There is no way we can really compare 9/11 with any other event.

I think something that you might consider is that the government might have known it was going to happen, and perhaps even allowed it to happen. If you examing the transcripts of NORAD response and the timelines of action, the reaction is hardly alacritous. Also, the timeline in terms of internation politics is kinda convinient - the Iraq war an' all that jazz. Are you looking for the right conspiracies?

EDIT:

Considering your other responder:

Building 7 collapsed because it had a huge hole in it. The side that faced the WTC caught a lot of the debris, which ripped huge holes in it. None of this damage is noticeable on the limited images we have on this side are mostly obscured by smoke. However, people on the ground said they saw large amounts of damage and very fierce fire within.

Very few of the people who comment on the collapses are actually qualified to, and you should be very careful of who you cite and who you listen to. I admit i know very little about engineering, but am by nature a skeptic, and find conspiracy theories repugnant. These events have no direct comparison. Anywhere.

Answer 3

I too saw the video to which you refer. I find some of the facts are believable others not. The buildings collapsed as a result of major structural damage due to the impact of the aircraft. The fires did indeed weaken the concrete and steel causing a pancake effect.

In fact those center steel and concrete supports added to the effect

by allowing them to fall straight down as they did. They acted as guides. As to why it is reported that the fires still burned for many days in the sub-basements at such high temps is beyond explaination as aviation fuel cannot burn at a high enough temps to explain it. Its clear that something else was going on in those sub-basements that is being withheld from the general public. Its abundently clear that our government is not exactly bloodless in this event or others that have taken place throughout history around the world. But, thats politics and since we don't get shown the Big Picture we can't really make assumptions as to why this or other things happen.

You can bet that somebody made a deal with Bin Laden to lay low and survive, just as the government did with Milsovech.