The SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ANALYSIS of the events of 9/11.

page: 22
54
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

No the lie is that Thermobaric Bombs are "quieter" or "lower in frequency" than normal explosives. That is a lie. A bold faced lie. a blast big enough to lift a floor one foot is going to be heard and seen. You are so religiously held to that lie it is scary. That is called disinfo. Your links and "research" is a shining example of disinfo as well. You post walls of words that look great, but still come apart the moment any basic research goes into it. I have read through your "Thermobaric Bombs" and all I get from it is that it was all thought up in the mind ofa conspiracy nut who has some serious issues in la la land. I'm not going to soil this page by bringing up his name here but, you use his claims of this special weapon but has NO actual back up. None. Reposting his crap is not posting up facts. Thermobaric bombs in the WTC is a laugh riot. Even the actual truthers think this is nutty:
911research.wtc7.net...

And yes, you are claiming these are silenced thermobaric bombs because YOU JUST SAID that they are so low frequency they can just be drowned out by the outside noise. I mean, seriously, YOU SAID IT first!! I have yet to see or hear a thermobaric bomb that is large enough to lift a floor that is one acre in size one foot, and yet totally be missed by anyone standing less than 100ft away from it, and also not seen prior to detonation. You have no idea of how a thermobaric device works at all. No matter how much you stomp your feet and huff and puff about how genius you are and how we are soooo uninformed, the actual facts are, thermobaric bombs are loud. VERY loud. The more powerful they are, the louder they will be. Period. end of story. Alas, you also ignore the challenges of rigging all of this, maintaining the equipment, and making sure it didnt prematurely go off in the impacts and fires.

Plus your definition of "thermobaric bombs" or "barometric" bomb, is a misnomer. It all stems from that idiot Riconosciuto (dang I had to use it) . Such a genius yet upon further review, hes just another whackadoodle nut with outrageous claims. And you lap it up happily and build more on it. Dont you know that building a building on a foundation of sand is folly?




posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: lexyghot

I am so tired of that nonsense about TB. he expects us to believe that TBs that are powerful enough to lift the floors (mind you each is one acre in size) are not loud enough to be heard over helicopters and emergency vehicles. I have yet to see or hear "quiet" TBs. and if he is pushing those Riconosciuto style bombs then God help us. Even those bombs are suppose to be near nuclear in strength and yet, we missed them thanks to those darn emergency sirens and helicopters.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: LaBTop
Originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: LaBTop

Do you understand at all the quintessence of it?

NO, we say that a PROTECTED steel frame can't collapse only due to fire in 101 minutes and many on here with that belief post the Windsor Tower 18 hours / 1080 minutes fire pictures as evidence of that.

So lets break it down into simple terms for you and the others.
''"with steel perimeter columns""
Windsor Tower Floor Construction
"" Originally, the perimeter columns and internal steel beams were left unprotected in accordance with the Spanish building code at the time of construction""

Did that UNPROTECTED steelwork COLLAPSE only due to fire ALTHOUGH it was not IMPACTED or DAMAGED ? YES

The unprotected steel-glass facade ABOVE the 17th floor was completely destroyed, exposing the concrete perimeter columns. The UNPROTECTED steel PERIMETER columns above the 17th floor suffered PARTIAL (NOT complete) collapse, partially coming to rest on the upper 16th technical floor.

So can a fire ONLY, cause UNDAMAGED unprotected steelwork to collapse? YES.

FINE. All Windsor tower perimeter steel above the 17th floor collapsed PARTIALLY, BECAUSE it was UNPROTECTED with fire insulation foam. That was the reason they started the renovation project work, to protect all that steel above floor 16.

The failing floor at the WTC 1N tower had ALL its steel solidly protected by good insulation.
SO, WHY SHOULD IT FAIL MASSIVELY IN 101 MINUTES / 1 hr 41 minutes?


It may be an age thing but remember the jets caused STRUCTURAL damage do you think the sprayed on fire protection or other fire protection such as sheet rock and vermiculite in the structure was undamaged!



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

He also fails to take into account the building inspection that had been done that showed the fireproofing in many areas had crumbled away. But then, that isn't all that unusual.





new topics

top topics
 
54
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join