Federal Grand Jury To Hear Evidence - World Trade Center 9-11 Was Controlled Demolition.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: mrthumpy

For a tower collapse? Yes that's odd. The characteristics as explained are for subterranean explosions

The impacts and collapses were different and recorded as such properly.

The 2 huge spikes are the oddity.

Wait, so is it insane to record 2.3 from dozens of kms away or not?

a reply to: tadaman

Then produce the WTC seismic data that shows three waves. You have only produced seismic charts showing only one wave format, Rayleigh waves for the WTC

You cannot produce a WTC graph showing P and S waves because there was no P and S waves generate.

Again,

Forensic Seismology
blogs.scientificamerican.com...

The analysis of seismic waves provided also insights on what happened September 11, 2001 in New York. Seismograph stations around the city recorded the signals generated by the aircraft impacts and the subsequent collapse of the two towers of the World Trade Center (the Lamont-Doherty Cooperative Seismographic Network provides a rich collection of datasets of the seismic activity around N.Y.). The collapse of the south tower generated a signal with a magnitude of 2.1 and the collapse of the north tower, whit a signal of magnitude 2.3, was recorded by 13 stations ranging in distance from 34 to 428km.
Also these seismograms show a distinct pattern if compared to the pattern caused by a natural earthquake. There are no P or S Waves, but the impacts of the buildings on the ground generated a sudden peak of short-period Rayleigh Waves.

What do you not get about” There are no P or S Waves, but the impacts of the buildings on the ground generated a sudden peak of short-period Rayleigh Waves.“ from the cited source

a reply to: mrthumpy

For a falling tower, yes. Odd

a reply to: mrthumpy

I thought magnitude was alwsys calculated what was produced at the epicenter.

a reply to: mrthumpy

So 2.3 is the magnitude at the WTC, not at the recording station.

a reply to: tadaman

The Rayleigh waves correspond to the impacts. Hence the quoted section before which you took out of context. Those and the collapses, 4 signatures, lacked seismic P and S waves.

The two large nuke looking underground spikes did produce all associated forces involved in subterranean explosions.

Hence the issues with the data not matching the official interpretation of what is known.

a reply to: neutronflux

2.3 is what was recorded in palisades. Usually more meters would give a better readout.

Its strange all the seismic meters in NYC were off huh.

a reply to: tadaman

What do you not get there is so seismic data that is indicative of a nuclear or conventional bomb setting off. None. A explosion would produce P and S waves with waves at higher frequencies than what was created by the WTC.

a reply to: neutronflux

I provided it. Now you are just repeating yourself without adding WHY

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: mrthumpy

For a falling tower, yes. Odd

What is normal for a thousand foot skyscraper collapsing?

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

2.3 is what was recorded in palisades. Usually more meters would give a better readout.

Its strange all the seismic meters in NYC were off huh.

Magnitude refers to the power released at the epicenter or origin. So the 2.3 refers to what was released at the WTC.

You would care about and calculate the power released at the origin.

a reply to: tadaman

Then post the seismic graph that shows the WTC produced 3 different wave components.

Again, for the WTC

Forensic Seismology
blogs.scientificamerican.com...

Also these seismograms show a distinct pattern if compared to the pattern caused by a natural earthquake. There are no P or S Waves, but the impacts of the buildings on the ground generated a sudden peak of short-period Rayleigh Waves.

There is not even evidence the seismic activity cane from under the WTC, much less there was explosions.

Sorry.

a reply to: tadaman

And you still need to answer to:
Then if an underground detonation started the collapse of WTC 2, how did its core fall after the floor system. How did the buckling occur at the point of the jet impact some eighty floors up with no visible failure of the the core failing or dropping. If it was an underground detonation, how did the core offer resistance to slow down the upper 30 or 29 floors falling into the building below.

originally posted by: UKTruth
I don't know what to make of this - On the one hand the collapse of the buildings has always sat awkwardly with me, but on the other hand my head simply can not accept that anyone could give the order to bring the buildings down with explosives with 1,000s still inside.

Humans can be quite cruel you know, especially when $ and power are involved.

a reply to: tadaman

Its strange all the seismic meters in NYC were off huh.

What an absurd thing to say? Who’s meters? By who’s orders?

Because they pulled out the one seismic station 15 years before 9/11?

And protec actual was taking seismic readings on 9/11 in Manhattan.

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 & 7 FROM AN EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT
By Brent Blanchard
August 8, 2006
c-2006 www.implosionworld.com

www.implosionworld.com...

a reply to: tadaman

For anyone interested:

911blogger.com...

 

Seismic Signals Reveal Explosives Were Used at the WTC on 9/11, according to geophysicist André Rousseau (*)

Doctor André Rousseau, former researcher in geophysics at CNRS and specialist in sound waves, presents us with the results of his analysis of the seismic signals recorded on September 11, 2001 in New York and gives his point of view as a specialist on the question of the destruction of the three towers at the World Trade Center.

even if the Twin Towers could be considered identical in terms of the spatial origin relative to their distance from the recording sites. The calculation of the propagation speeds, as shown in the graphs of figures 1a and 1b, where the origin was fixed according to the corresponding crash, indicates 2900 m/s for WTC1 and 2150 m/s for WTC2: we are obviously dealing with Rayleigh waves. Even if they were considerably amplified, these signals could not have been generated by the crashes into the Twin Towers - the actual waves generated by the crashes were deadened before hitting the ground (assuming that we were dealing with the same (low) frequencies). 

Frequencies of waves generated by explosions are on the order of Hertz - which is the case here - while those of crash impacts are above 10 Hertz, often around 100 Hertz. Furthermore, the range of the recording instruments cited does not allow for the recording of such waves. As to the theory of the oscillation of the Towers to explain these signals, as defended by Irvine (2001), it doesn't hold water because in such a case we would have had a "square" signal of long duration and a constant amplitude, while in actuality we observe a "bell" signal, representing a strong and brief explosion, which is particularly evident in the case of WTC2.

To the degree that it is geophysically impossible to have two different propagation speeds for the same wave at the same frequency - because the surface waves are dispersive, which means that their speed depends upon their frequencies - travelling the same path at a few minutes interval, one must bow to the evidence that the supposed origins of the recorded waves are incorrect, and that they are not linked to the crashes but to another origin, such as an explosion, with a non-identical time displacement for the two towers in relation to the impacts of the two planes. As well, the difference in the magnitude of the two signals can only be linked to different parameters relative to the volume of explosives and/or their distance from the surface

That's the seismic evidence. I would rather like to talk about thyroid cancer in NYers and the link to noble Zenon and radiation exposure.

a reply to: tadaman

Unfortunately he is full of false narratives. The truth movement is full of charlatans.

Now,

Then post the seismic graph that shows the WTC produced 3 different wave components.

Again, for the WTC


Forensic Seismology
blogs.scientificamerican.com...

Also these seismograms show a distinct pattern if compared to the pattern caused by a natural earthquake. There are no P or S Waves, but the impacts of the buildings on the ground generated a sudden peak of short-period Rayleigh Waves.


There is not even evidence the seismic activity cane from under the WTC, much less there was explosions.

Sorry.

And

And you still need to answer to:
Then if an underground detonation started the collapse of WTC 2, how did its core fall after the floor system. How did the buckling occur at the point of the jet impact some eighty floors up with no visible failure of the the core failing or dropping. If it was an underground detonation, how did the core offer resistance to slow down the upper 30 or 29 floors falling into the building below.

a reply to: neutronflux

Unfortunately that's just your opinion.

Now thyroid cancer. Why is this a problem for my people now in record numbers?

Edit to add:
You keep saying this and I think you don't know what it means.

Primary and secondary waves. They were detected. LoL

In fact, the recording for WTC1 demonstrates the three types of wave characteristic of a brief explosive source ("Dirac" type) confined in a compact, solid material: a P wave with a speed of 6000 m/s, the typical value for a very consolidated crystalline or sedimentary terrain (which is the case in the bedrock of Manhattan), an S wave with a speed of 3500 m/s and a surface wave with a speed of of 1800 m/s (Rayleigh wave). These values match with those registered by an earthquake or seismic drilling.

a reply to: tadaman

Again, if explosives were used. Then there would be P and S waves. The frequency of the wave components would have been higher.

Would you like to show where Doctor André Rousseau work has completed the discovery process, all his work and calculations given full accces to a peer review?

And you have Dr Wood saying there is no evidence of detonations in the WTC.

So who is correct Dr Wood?

The Below paper?

Seismic waves generated by aircraft impacts and building collapses at World Trade Center, New York City

Won‐Young Kim, LR Sykes, JH Armitage, JK Xie, KH Jacob, PG Richards, M West, F Waldhauser, J Armbruster, L Seeber, WX Du, A Lerner‐Lam

Scientific American

blogs.scientificamerican.com...

There are no P or S Waves, but the impacts of the buildings on the ground generated a sudden peak of short-period Rayleigh Waves.

Or Doctor André Rousseau who purposely plays only to conspiracists, and will not actually do anything to commit to peer review?

Effectively, on the Richter scale, they were higher than 2 for the waves emitted at the moment of the collapse. It is impossible to get such a magnitude only from the falling of the debris, more especially over a duration of ten seconds!!

Even if the entire tower had been compacted into a tight ball, it would have necessitated the speed of a meteorite, in any case, more than that caused by the Earth's gravity, to even approach such a magnitude!! 

Moreover, we must note that the magnitude attributed to the subterranean explosion at the WTC1 is ML=2.3 - comparable to the earthquake that hit New York January 17, 2001 (ML=2.4) - while the magnitude coming from the WTC2 explosion is ML=2.1, thus weaker, and this disparity - consistent with the explosions described - is particularly appreciable in this logarithmic scale.

Given the Twin Towers were of similar height and mass, the falling debris should have generated similar magnitudes, if they were the source of the waves...

LOL