Trying to resolve 9/11

Or just Gage falsely characterizing the air pushed out by “half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second“ carrying out the dust created by mechanical means.

i fail to see how a strong enough seal could of been made to create the air pressures from above to turn concrete to dust. Lets say the theory of air pressure from above causing the squibs is right. Why did the windows not blow out? This is the weak spot when a building has to contend with immense inner air pressures?

Just blatantly false arguments from Gage.

There are many false arguments around 9/11. It is up to each of us to decide.

a reply to: kwakakev

What
You

i fail to see how a strong enough seal could of been made to create the air pressures from above to turn concrete to dust

Quote where I ever said air pressure turned the concrete to dust?

I started with this....

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Dust is part of any building collapse no matter the cause...


I did post this to account for the Squibs. It says nothing about dust production.

www.skeptic.com...

4WHAT ABOUT THOSE EXPLOSIVE SQUIBS TWENTY STORIES BELOW THE COLLAPSE POINT, AND THOSE HEAVY METAL OBJECTS FLYING HUNDREDS OF FEET THROUGH THE AIR? During the collapse, one half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second, creating a “hurricane wind” in the building as reported by survivors, and blowing out windows, and with them the smoke from the fires and other objects.5

I then posted this...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The building floor slabs crushing the dry wall, insulation, and the floors below. Crushing and making dust. The speed the air was expelled. What did you not get about “ half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second“ carrying out the dust created by mechanical means.

Floor pans lined with lightweight concrete hitting floor pans lined with lightweight concrete makes dust. Lots of it when 110 floors slam into each other. I know it’s hard to imagine concrete hitting concrete makes dust.. what are the odds... now if concrete slamming into concrete made pixie dust, that would be something.

Then I posted this
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just your bewildered that a collapsing building full of light concrete, drywall, and insulation makes dust. Just your bewilderment a collapsing building forces out air, smoke, dust. Just your bewildered a building on fire making flammable gas? And the collapse of the building would push the flames out, and flammable gas igniting when it reaches fresh air.

Or just Gage falsely characterizing the air pushed out by “half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second“ carrying out the dust created by MECHANICAL MEANS.

Mechanical means such as falling floors crashing into dry wall, insulation, into floors lined with concrete.

Why did the windows not blow out?

A fan “doesn’t” have a seal, but a fan still moves air in a room.

Cite a source why the windows below out, link to it, then explain if it’s credible or not.

But it has little to do with “seal”. More to do with the speed and volume the falling mass of the WTC expelled air, smoke, flames, and gasses from thermal decay.

There are many false arguments around 9/11. It is up to each of us to decide.

No. There are arguments based on lies and pseudoscience proven by fact and science. It’s not an opinion piece.

a reply to: kwakakev

This is going to blow your mind...

Hydraulic jack demolition video…
Exclusive video from Ferrari Demolition in France.

The recent European Demolition Association conference in Stockholm comprised a number of impressive presentations and videos; but our personal favourite was this video of hydraulic jack demolition of a tower block in France.

Our personal thanks to Ferrari Demolition’s Daniel Rieber for allowing us to bring this great video to you.

www.demolitionnews.com...

Demolition by hydraulic jacks

m.youtube.com...

Crazy! A building prepared for implosion by hydraulics by removing the windows that made dust with no explosives. And had the force to push out dust!


And made “squibs”


Better get Gage, the “hydraulic”, wink, implosion has all the hallmarks of a Richard Gage CD.

a reply to: kwakakev

i fail to see how a strong enough seal could of been made to create the air pressures from above to turn concrete to dust. Lets say the theory of air pressure from above causing the squibs is right. Why did the windows not blow out? This is the weak spot when a building has to contend with immense inner air pressures?

Most of the dust cloud was caused by drywall, the friable fire proofing, plain ordinary dirt/dust being blown out through openings

There were mechanical floors every few stories which contained HVAC equipment -many of the "squibs" was dust being blown out vents where outside air was admitted

a reply to: neutronflux

Cite a source why the windows below out, link to it, then explain if it’s credible or not.

I cannot. I was trying to understand your reasoning.

a reply to: kwakakev

And you just posted a picture of the collapse pushing air out vents. Any sounds of detentions with the force to cut steel columns. No.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: neutronflux

Cite a source why the windows below out, link to it, then explain if it’s credible or not.

I cannot. I was trying to understand your reasoning.

You know how to tell those “ejections” are not from detentions cutting steel columns. Because they would not be shaped by the thin metal of the air ducts. Detentions with the force to cut steel columns wouldn’t be shaped like that. The detentions would have blown out the whole side of the building.

a reply to: neutronflux

And you just posted a picture of the collapse pushing air out vents. Any sounds of detentions with the force to cut steel columns. No.

Your desperation to debunk shows. How is an image file suppose to play audio? We have already talked about this with the ROARRR of the collapse if you cared to look.

The detentions would have blown out the whole side of the building.

Hmm...

a reply to: kwakakev

Funny🤪

Would you cared to quantify the roar of the collapse in some way? Like state how loud the collapse was in decibels? Compared to charges with the force to cut steel columns would be around 130 db? If the collapse of the towers was 110 dB, a 130 dB detonation should still be a hundred times louder. Is that false.

Then there being no seismic evidence of detonations cutting steel columns.

There is collapse video of people talking during the WTC 7 collapse where the conversation is heard despite the roar of collapse. People talking in the video where others had to point out to the person speaking to the camera the collapse had started.

There should be very distinct sounds of detonations echoing about manhattan before the collapse even began.

Explosive Building Implosion | Demolition Show
m.youtube.com...

In the linked to video above, detonations can be heard setting off while the building is collapsing. Is that false.

a reply to: kwakakev

Why would I be desperate. There is either evidence of detonations with the force to cut steel columns or not.

So far, you haven’t even provide any evidence concerning cut steel columns.

With video proof the columns were not cut floor by floor as the truth movement claims to achieve the witnessed collapse speeds.

So far, you haven’t even provide any evidence concerning cut steel columns.

If you are not going to be serious about this i am not going to help you with your silly games.

a reply to: kwakakev

Top picture. Damage from whole lengths of tower columns tumbling outward and crashing.

Middle picture of section of outer wall that tumbled and fell outward with broken welds and no visible effects of etching/erosion due to a blast working on the metal. No sounds of detonations from the collapse of the WTC with the energy to propel wall segments.

Bottom picture.

Can you link to the original picture before the truth movement got ahold of it. Please cite original published source. Claims the truth movement has “enhanced” photo to make it more glowy.

Bottom picture continue. What does the collapse of a building on fire resulting in smoldering debris pile have to do with proof of detonations to cut steel columns?

And you ignored..

a reply to: kwakakev

Funny🤪

Would you cared to quantify the roar of the collapse in some way? Like state how loud the collapse was in decibels? Compared to charges with the force to cut steel columns would be around 130 db? If the collapse of the towers was 110 dB, a 130 dB detonation should still be a hundred times louder. Is that false.

Then there being no seismic evidence of detonations cutting steel columns.

There is collapse video of people talking during the WTC 7 collapse where the conversation is heard despite the roar of collapse. People talking in the video where others had to point out to the person speaking to the camera the collapse had started.

There should be very distinct sounds of detonations echoing about manhattan before the collapse even began.

Explosive Building Implosion | Demolition Show
m.youtube.com...

In the linked to video above, detonations can be heard setting off while the building is collapsing. Is that false.

a reply to: kwakakev

So your down to posting random pictures with no context, with no ability to cite actual evidence of cut columns? With no ability to create a credible argument for explosives at the WTC. Nice.

"Every time you do Plasma Physics you learn something new."

Lockheed Martin: Compact Fusion Research & Development:




"And that means we can make our devices ten times smaller."



"You're probably more familiar with plasma than you think."

a reply to: NWOwned

To bad there was no plasm used on 9/11. No power source powerful enough. No way to port the energy required to the WTC. No indication of a source of energy powerful enough to create a containment field with the ability to create the resonance time required to direct enough plasma to contact enough steel of a single tower to cause collapse.

The truth movement itself said the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? Is that false.

What temperatures and what element of plasma are you claiming. Whatever element you claim was made into plasma would condense out into large deposits of that element on the WTC debris. Or if an gaseous element, some for of reaction?

What evidence do you have of a mechanism that plasma caused your proposed plasma induced collapse.

Lightning is a naturally occurring electrostatic discharge during which two electrically charged regions in the atmosphere or ground temporarily equalize themselves, causing the instantaneous release of as much as one billion joules of energy.[1] This discharge may produce a wide range of electromagnetic radiation, from very hot plasma created by the rapid movement of electrons to brilliant flashes of visible light in the form of black-body radiation. Lightning causes thunder, a sound from the shock wave which develops as gases in the vicinity of the discharge experience a sudden increase in pressure. Lightning occurs commonly during thunderstorms and other types of energetic weather systems.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Let’s put it in perspective. Lighting makes plasma. Lighting could not make enough plasma to destroy the WTC.

WTC hit by a lightning
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: kwakakev

The air blast from the displaced air was strong enough to pick up 250 lb firemen and throw down the stairs

These were the people trapped in Stairway B of North Tower , some 14 people, firemen, police officers and a civilian
were caught in the stairway by the collapse

As I stated the air blast was sufficient to pick up 250 lbs firemen.

Outside the air blast was strong enough to knock down people in the area and hurl debris

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: NWOwned

To bad there was no plasm used on 9/11. No power source powerful enough. No way to port the energy required to the WTC. No indication of a source of energy powerful enough to create a containment field with the ability to create the resonance time required to direct enough plasma to contact enough steel of a single tower to cause collapse.

The truth movement itself said the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? Is that false.

What temperatures and what element of plasma are you claiming. Whatever element you claim was made into plasma would condense out into large deposits of that element on the WTC debris. Or if an gaseous element, some for of reaction?

What evidence do you have of a mechanism that plasma caused your proposed plasma induced collapse.

Go to 13:16 and listen till the end:

originally posted by: NWOwned

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: NWOwned

To bad there was no plasm used on 9/11. No power source powerful enough. No way to port the energy required to the WTC. No indication of a source of energy powerful enough to create a containment field with the ability to create the resonance time required to direct enough plasma to contact enough steel of a single tower to cause collapse.

The truth movement itself said the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? Is that false.

What temperatures and what element of plasma are you claiming. Whatever element you claim was made into plasma would condense out into large deposits of that element on the WTC debris. Or if an gaseous element, some for of reaction?

What evidence do you have of a mechanism that plasma caused your proposed plasma induced collapse.

Go to 13:16 and listen till the end:

No. You quote what you think is false from my argument, and you give a counter argument.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: NWOwned

To bad there was no plasm used on 9/11. No power source powerful enough. No way to port the energy required to the WTC. No indication of a source of energy powerful enough to create a containment field with the ability to create the resonance time required to direct enough plasma to contact enough steel of a single tower to cause collapse.

The truth movement itself said the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? Is that false.

What temperatures and what element of plasma are you claiming. Whatever element you claim was made into plasma would condense out into large deposits of that element on the WTC debris. Or if an gaseous element, some for of reaction?

What evidence do you have of a mechanism that plasma caused your proposed plasma induced collapse.

Lightning is a naturally occurring electrostatic discharge during which two electrically charged regions in the atmosphere or ground temporarily equalize themselves, causing the instantaneous release of as much as one billion joules of energy.[1] This discharge may produce a wide range of electromagnetic radiation, from very hot plasma created by the rapid movement of electrons to brilliant flashes of visible light in the form of black-body radiation. Lightning causes thunder, a sound from the shock wave which develops as gases in the vicinity of the discharge experience a sudden increase in pressure. Lightning occurs commonly during thunderstorms and other types of energetic weather systems.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Let’s put it in perspective. Lighting makes plasma. Lighting could not make enough plasma to destroy the WTC.

WTC hit by a lightning
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

Is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?



I don't know what you're going on about really? I never once said lightning destroyed the towers.

I said "plasma might have something to do with it." What kind of plasma and how is it generated? I don't know I'm not a physicist. I've just been challenged and mocked over my 'magic force' (UCD) that destroyed those towers so now I'm looking for avenues of possible origin.

I don't presume to know yet exactly and I'm human and capable of making mistakes and of in being in error but also of correcting any course or hypothesis so I can pursue multiple leads if I choose I am not confined necessarily, to one particular pet theory etc.

Gravity and regular chemical explosives are very old technology, let's see what's truly available that could do it.

Could destroy the towers right where they stood etc.

I'm not part of the or any Truth Movement so I wish you would just stop mentioning it.

Like you, I believe Richard Gage is misleading people.

So my reasoning stems from that in part. Right? Like if the Truth Movement was created not to get to the truth but to mislead and everyone in it is like in cahoots with each other about the misleading and not really calling each other out then, it only stands to reason, that they're hiding something collectively etc.

And it has to be something "Yuge" (as Trump would say). Don't you think? HUGE.

You think Gage wouldn't rather be sailing or building cabinets in his garage workshop? But no it's endless lectures that lead nowhere. 15 years worth! Something is definitely up. What's in it for him really? Is he some confused misguided super patriot or is he on someone's payroll? I go for the latter. Me, I don't trust him. I don't trust any of them.

Forget the truth movement it doesn't lead anywhere. Find out for yourself. They're all hiding something Huge.

What is IT?

FIND OUT.

Maybe you shouldn't conflate multiple points in a post if you think I'm not addressing the proper one? Just make short posts instead. Ones about one issue or one question and make sure you're careful with the spelling and word structure and for crying out loud, use question marks at the end of questions. Or is English not your native language? Sometimes I read your sentences and I struggle to see what it is you're really saying.

Now, you show a pic of lightning hitting the antenna of the north tower, again, I don't know why.

So I counter that by showing you a video of lightning hitting a guy twice in one night! And the guy gets up and walks away!

Stop talking about lightning I never said lightning destroyed the towers Ok?

Next you'll probably say, "Well there was no sound of thunder when the towers 'collapsed' so I guess that rules out plasma!"

Right? Probably.

But if you listen to the portion of the clip I indicate the narrator talks about "plasma" as well as "neutrons" and "gamma rays".

And weirdly, twice he says "neutron flux!"

What a coincidence!

Strange.

a reply to: NWOwned

You

Now, you show a pic of lightning hitting the antenna of the north tower, again, I don't know why.

I asked:

To bad there was no plasm used on 9/11. No power source powerful enough. No way to port the energy required to the WTC. No indication of a source of energy powerful enough to create a containment field with the ability to create the resonance time required to direct enough plasma to contact enough steel of a single tower to cause collapse.

The truth movement itself said the fires were no hotter than normal office fires? Is that false.

What temperatures and what element of plasma are you claiming. Whatever element you claim was made into plasma would condense out into large deposits of that element on the WTC debris. Or if an gaseous element, some for of reaction?

What evidence do you have of a mechanism that plasma caused your proposed plasma induced collapse.


Then to put everything in prospective. I cited where lighting creates plasma.

Lightning is a naturally occurring electrostatic discharge during which two electrically charged regions in the atmosphere or ground temporarily equalize themselves, causing the instantaneous release of as much as one billion joules of energy.[1] This discharge may produce a wide range of electromagnetic radiation, from very hot plasma created by the rapid movement of electrons to brilliant flashes of visible light in the form of black-body radiation. Lightning causes thunder, a sound from the shock wave which develops as gases in the vicinity of the discharge experience a sudden increase in pressure. Lightning occurs commonly during thunderstorms and other types of energetic weather.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Then I showed lighting that creates plasma, had hit the Twin Towers with no adverse effects.

WTC hit by a lightning
m.youtube.com...

How much power does lightning have?

There's Way More Energy in a Bolt of Lightning Than We Thought

www.sciencealert.com...

Power is energy per time, and our measurements of fulgurites suggest that megajoules of energy make rock in thousandths to millionths of seconds. So a gigawatt is actually on the low side – lightning power may be a thousand times that, reaching into the terawatts, though the average is probably tens of gigawatts.

That’s enough energy to power about a billion houses, albeit only for a few millionths of a second. Unfortunately, given its sporadic and unpredictable nature, no power grid will ever be able to harness lightning effectively.

But with that much power, perhaps breaking the space-time continuum in a souped-up Delorean is not so unfeasible after all….

Soooo.

“lightning power may be a thousand times that, reaching into the terawatts, ” has no history of damaging the WTC with plasma.

So. Again...

To bad there was no plasm used on 9/11. No power source powerful enough. No way to port the energy required to the WTC.