It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
LT March 11, 2012 : Did you see that video where the camera man is running for his life, while holding his still running video camera in his hand, its lens aimed at the thundering down debris from the tower collapsing behind him.
I used that video to show the majority here, that the collapses took much more time than needed when in free fall.
The first outer panels (Vierendael triplets, portions of three facade columns welded together) hit the ground just 30 meters away from the bottom facade, about 9 to 11 seconds after collapse started high up.
Its an even more interesting theory for WTC7, since that was a bottom up implosion. Thus, that by NIST proposed single column piece (Nr. 79) breaking away over a height of 14 floors which breaking started, they say, internally at the fifth floor or so (hold your breath now), must have impacted nearly instantly (half a sec or so later) the bedrock WTC 7 stood on. Then we had to wait out the penthouses sinking (8.2 or 8.3 secs), and then the whole damn building came thundering down.
Ehh, NIST, that's not what the seismogram shows. That shows for a starter, about 16.5 seconds before the needle reacted on the first dent forming in the east penthouse roof-line, a slight oscillation of the needle, then a few seconds back to normal, then the onset of the biggest magnitude of seismic peaks (and that's definitely not normal, it should be the smallest peaks first to show one column breaking and falling), starting still about 7 seconds before in Manhattan anything happened on the WTC7 facades or on the roof(s). That pack of peaks then died down totally, still 3 seconds before anything moved outside at WTC7, and then after those 3 seconds the sinking of the two penthouses into the roof started in Manhattan which did cost an extra 8.3 seconds precious time.
And then, after those 8.3 secs, the quite smaller magnitude of the next pack of seismic peaks set on, indicating the global collapse had begun. And died also down 10 to 12 seconds later.
Do you get the crux of the matter?
A single one column breaking (Nr. 79) is according to NIST causing the biggest seismic reaction on that whole damn seismogram. And then later, when all the other 30 or so, just as thick columns are thundering down together with those extra strong crossbeams spanning over the ConEdison electric station situated in the bottom 4 north side floors, the same way that single column went, NIST says that indeed, that smaller pack of peaks at the end of that seismogram shows that massive collapse of the whole weight of that 44 stories high building.
And NIST does not give in, they even try to explain away the 2.3 secs free fall of all the facades in a fluent fashion, at the onset of global collapse.
I won't bother you with that, this is enough to seriously ask yourself, why they seem to think that you are part of a silent majority.
1. 330 pounds of high explosives shatters cars. (That was the original title)
2. That's not a thermobaric explosion. A real one requires previous dispersion of the explosive. That's a common explosion.
----- 2a. No. there just has to be a scatter charge before the fuel load is ignited. Ideally it works better in a fuel air bomb situation where it's much easier to do that but there is no reason why this could not be a thermobaric bomb. If you watch it at the 600fps section you can see a scatter charge going off first. It's not necessarily the most efficient one....
----- 2b. You're describing a fuel air explosives, which is a specific subclass of thermobarics. This is aluminum dispersion, which is just a means of enhancing blast duration for a thermobaric effect. Widely classified as thermobaric by numerous military organizations.
3. Ansley212 : Not Thermobaric.
This bomb is burning off the extra fuel/O2 after the detonation. A thermobaric explosion CONSISTS of the fuel/O2 detonating itself. This is merely a OB+ explosion burning off residual fuel. But if one wants to quibble that it produced "heat" & "pressure" and therefore is "thermobaric", then all explosions are "thermobaric". Impressive, but mislabeled.
----- 3a. Ironically there was also a large tank of gas strapped to this vehicle....which may have added to the theatricality of it (and longevity and the fireball). Wondering if maybe some people have trouble seeing the forest for the trees focused on only the explosive itself? I'll be honest I have no idea, just a curiosity.
----- 3b. Ansley212 : Your previous comments show you THINK you have a profound grasp of blast characteristics, but I reckon you are a typical Youtube General who likes playing with fireworks. I directly responded to your earlier comment. The fact you admit you can't tell the delta curve of a blast by the environment tells me you are an amateur. Sling ad hominems all you want. I simply do NOT agree this video shows a thermobaric detonation.
----- 3c. I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. Thermobarics disperse THEN detonate. This was a detonation, with subsequent burn off of the excess fuel/air. The conflagration was not contributing significantly to the blast like a thermobaric would.
----- 3d. Ansley212, posted 1 year ago.
(at : Steve Johnson.)
"SJ : Just because this mixture was extremely over fueled does not mean it wasn't thermobaric"
A212 : Just because this explosive WAS extremely over fueled doesn't mean it was thermobaric. The problem is you didn't study the pressure wave in the slow motion footage. I am not saying this wasn't a large explosive with a large blast radius...for a standard HE detonation. *BUT...based on the point detonation and expanding deflagration clearly seen in the slow motion, I will not agree this was a thermobaric explosion because the detonation was a point detonation, and not protracted.
You can try and be cute by calling me "grand master of explosives" like some sarcastic little snob, but don't you realize YOUR sarcastic remark is inherently hypocritical?
ANSWER TO YOUR SNIDE QUESTION: The blast wave was point sourced! All the pretty effects afterwards were not part of the detonation. THEREFORE...NOT "thermobaric".
Other conspiracists like DR. Wood debunk sciesmic activity due to bombs and charges.
What I find interesting, you are the only conspiracists that keeps talking about seismic proof here
Seismic activity is not a smoking gun, it would have gained traction from the repeated times this scam has been tried over the years.
That is why NIST report cannot, and will not be Peer Reviewed, because it cant stand up to real scientific scrutiny.
One, are the scientists of LEDO wrong in the examination of their data. It's their scientific conclusion no seismic evidence.
This lines out with no physical evidence. Funny how that works? How are the scientists of LEDO wrong in their data is misused.
Two, same sciesmic misrepresentation used over the years debunked over and over.
Three, funny it's always the NIST reports. But the insurance companies, colleges, engineering firms, scientists, and universities fire collapse models are never addressed by conspiracists?
Four, beacuse it over scaled and resized data placed out of context. It's not even science. It's like debunking the flawed work on the papers on thermite.
The insurance companies have accepted it.
They had 4.55 billion reasons to fight it.
To say it's my opinion shows your lack of research and how you don't dare read anything that might shake your view.
Have presented links from skeptics that show seismic evidence has been debunk over the years.
I did not believe time is precise.
To use R waves in a meaningful context, the exact composition of the earth must be known to create 100 accurate travel time calculations.
It is not even PM opinion. Is a collection of data that references very real, very serious, very diverse group of scientists.
I know it's hards to believe because you are used to the sensationalized YouTube videos which are the producers opinion.
If you are going to tackle the paper "What Did and Did not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York" which makes use of the R wave seismic data from the WTC by very real engineers, no point in debate.