It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 21
33
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2019 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

Proof or evidence? You do know the difference right?

Where is your evidence that I posted the wrong type of seismic data?

Elaborate and show us an example of a proper graph. If you were not lying through your teeth.



You keep posting the WTC seismic charts that only show surface or Rayleigh Waves. I am sorry.




posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux




You keep posting the WTC seismic charts that only show surface or Rayleigh Waves. I am sorry


So post an example of a proper chart. You will never do so. Because you can not.

Because you have failed to provide an adequate counter-argument.

Forever, you will not be able to. Because you will forever be a liar to me and anyone who sees you for what you are.

How many times have you badgered honest people trying to help figure this all out?

Figure that out. That's how many times you were wrong and how "sorry" you should be.


edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

And just to drive it home to you just how foolish you look.



Are we done?


There is no P or S wave in the above chart. The arrows are pointing to amplitudes along a Rayleigh wave. Again, by definition a P wave, a S wave, and a Rayleigh cannot be the same wave. They all move through the earth at different frequencies and direction of motion. If there was more than one wave, a second wave would cross or intersect the Rayleigh wave. Therefor the above only shows a single Rayleigh wave.
edit on 18-1-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

See post above.




There is no P or S wave in the above chart. The are arrows are pointing to amplitudes along a Rayleigh wave. Again, by definition a P wave, a S wave, and a Rayleigh cannot be the same wave. They all move through the earth at different frequencies and direction of motion. If there was more than one wave, a sectwave would cross or intersect the Rayleigh wave. There fire the above only shows a single Rayleigh wave


Also, that was complete gibberish


edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman



So post an example of a proper chart


There is no proper chart. It’s just the WTC seismic waves from 9/11 are all surface waves.



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.
blogs.scientificamerican.com...


The earthquake seismic chart from Jan 2001 for the Manhattan earthquake shows all three seismic waves. The WTC seismic chart from 9/11 shows only surface waves.

There is no proper chart. They are what they are.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

No. You don’t like it because it’s shows the WTC seismic data from 9/11 by definition only shows one wave type, and that is surface waves.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

So post an example of the type of graph that you like.

I will find one for the 911 attacks. I know where to look.

edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

If there was more than Rayleigh waves from the WTC seismic data for 9/11, there would be a second wave at a different frequency. You keep posting a single wave at its own frequency.
edit on 18-1-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Can you post an example of the type of graph that you speak of?

No? Thats odd. Then what the hell are you talking about?

Atmospheric readings?
edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

Can you post the graph you speak of?


I don’t have to. You are the one that keeps posting WTC 9/11 seismic charts that shows only one wave at its own frequency. None of the WTC seismic charts for 9/11 you posted shows a second wave at a different frequency.
edit on 18-1-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

You do have to. I just said you lied and that would prove you did not.

Unless you do not want to prove that you have not been lying to us.

That would be a fail though if you did not. You insisted SOO much, and to be wrong after all that and to not be able to show face except by trying to bury the posts showing your lies with spam, would be awful.

Just awful. Does it feel good? To lie about a mass murder tragedy only to push propaganda upon fellow citizens, possibly helping the real perpetrators to hide their crime?

Is that a good feel?


edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman



Atmospheric readings?


Explosives cut steel columns by a pressure wave. Why explosions blow out windows. A charge that would be needed to cut structural steel at the WTC would create a pressure wave that would generate a sound of explosion at 130 dB. That force in the atmosphere can be measured as a change in atmosphere pressure. Explosions that generate seismic activity can often also create measurable shockwaves in the atmosphere.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Where is the example of the proper type of seismic chart you lied about?

And while we are at it, please explain the basics in seismograph data interpretation.

This should be good.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

So you were referring to the atmospheric data.
That was easy.

I'm not talking about that data set from an entirely different type of instrumentation.

The created graphs from each type of equipment are different. One measures the vibrations in the planet. The other the changes in pressure in the atmosphere.

Welcome to 1st grade. Seismographs don't measure the atmosphere.

edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

Where is the example of the proper type of seismic chart you lied about?

And while we are at it, please explain the basics in seismograph data interpretation.

This should be good.


How is the below a lie



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 is not specific about “There are no P and S waves”


Because you have a single Rayleigh wave with the amplitudes of that single wave mislabeled P and S waves?



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Spam again? At least rewrite the old posts you are copying and pasting.

Still waiting for you to provide an example of the type of seismic graph you speak of so as to prove you are not a liar.

edit on 1 18 2019 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

So you were referring to the atmospheric data.
That was easy.

I'm not talking about that data set from an entirely different type of instrumentation.

The created graphs from each type of equipment are different. One measures the vibrations in the planet. The other the changes in pressure in the atmosphere.

Welcome to 1st grade. Seismographs don't measure the atmosphere.


No show there was atmosphere proof of detonations at the WTC.

And please explain how a supposed bomb in the basement creates over pressure event, left the core intact, no visible shockwave, somehow caused inward bowing and inward buckling with no ejection of material to initiate collapse.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

I will do just that. But first say you can not post the example of the type of graph you speak of.

If because you can't find it, are lost and confused or just derelict in morality.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

Spam again? At least rewrite the old posts you are copying and pasting.

Still waiting for you to provide an example of the type of seismic graph you speak of so as to prove you are not a liar.


The question was how the below is a lie


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.


Specifically there is no P and S waves.



posted on Jan, 18 2019 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: neutronflux

I will do just that. But first say you can not post the example of the type of graph you speak of.

If because you can't find it, are lost and confused or just derelict in morality.



Another blatant falsehood by you. Answered with you own chart here
www.abovetopsecret.com...




top topics



 
33
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join