Checking into some stuff but this is a good site: I'm currently looking for some other graphs depicting collapses, explosions, underground and
otherwise so that I may compare them to the ones from WTC 1 and 2 and learn more about s and p waves.
Also, take a look at this:
What's interesting about the last link are these statements.
"The catastrophic events at the World Trade Center, as might be expected, produced much larger seismic effects than the bombing of the World Trade
Center in 1993. The seismic effects of the collapses are comparable to the EXPLOSIONS AT A GASOLINE TANK FARM AT NEWARK on January 7, 1983, which
were detected up to 130 miles away."
As might be expected, produced much larger seismic effects than the bombing of the World Trade Center 1993??? No KIDDING.. Like I'm been thumping all
along, the bombs that were in the truck (1993) were NOT "coupled" to the ground.
Here are some facts to keep in mind: This stuff also seems to be consistant throughout all the sources I've been looking at.
The readings of WTC 1 and 2 collapsing were on the order of about 2.1 - 2.3 (equivalent seismic)
The Plane strikes were not even half of this. (0.7 to 0.9)
***The colllapse of building 7 was 0.6. (AGAIN not even half of the WTC 1-2 and less than the strikes even)***
MOST importantly.. the DURATION of each events is follows..
Impact 1 at North Tower 12 seconds
Impact 2 at South Tower 6 seconds
Collapse 1, South Tower 10 seconds
Collapse 2, North Tower 8 seconds
Collapse 3, Building 7 **18** seconds
Ok.. why is the duration of the building 7 collapse nearly TWICE as long as the duration of the WTC 1 and 2 collapse? Physically, building 7 took
about 6 seconds to fall with WTC taking about 11. (Obviously because they were taller) Keep in mind: just like the WTC 1 and 2, building 7 was
deffinitely in "free fall".
So far fishy indeed.
Going further.. You will notice that the time stamp on the graph (30 second) starts right at exactly the time the buildings 'actually' started to
fall. After this point it takes 16.95 seconds for the "spike" (WTC1) to show up on the graph (Well after the building is physically done
collapsing). After the point building 1 started to fall.. (09:59:04.0) It's pretty obvious it took a few seconds (almost all of the collapse time)
for the debri to hit the ground and thus generating the alleged ground movement showing up on the graph. QUESTION.. 1st plane hit at 08:46.26.0 You
will notice IT ALSO took exactly 16.95 seconds to show up on the graph after it hit the building. HOW could there be a spike starting exactly 16.95
seconds after the building started to fall (according to the time stamp correlation) when it's obvious that's not possible (Using the plane strikes
as a reference) because even though building 1 "started" to fall at 09:59:04.0 debri didn't have the chance to relate appreciably to the ground
until an additional 10 seconds (roughly) had gone by. You can't escape this correlational evidence. Looking at the 30 second graph, using the
(silence) between 0 and 16.95 seconds as a reference, the time between 25 seconds and 40 seconds is QUITE noisy.. (Of course not as -noisy- as the
"spike" that started suspiciously at *EXACTLY* 16.95 seconds and ending at 25) Could 25 to 40 be the actual collapse itself? I'm telling you HR..
I'm having a hard time buying into this "hoax" thing. The more I learn about seismology, the more damning these graphs are!
ALSO, keep in mind building 7 barely showed up on the seismograph when it collapsed..
VERY VERY fishy indeed. Holes holes and MORE holes.
[edit on 28-6-2005 by TxSecret]