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.

 

POLITICS: Physics Prof Says Explosives, Not Fires Brought Down WTC Towers

page: 14
4
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it. Show me where they address the potential energy in the caps being insufficient to crush the rest of the buildings,


How exactly do you want evidence brought forth on something that didn't happen?.....

Can you not understand that most of the debris from the falling floors fell on the bottom floors and not on other buildings?.... Even the rubble that fell on wtc7 was not enough to bring it down, but it was weakened, and the fires inside wtc7 weakened the redundant structure even more precipitating the collapse of wtc7.


Originally posted by bsbray11
being much heavier than the caps. Show me where they explain the angular momentum. Well, actually, we have our own structural engineer here, MacMerdin, who has already commented on the angular momentum problem, but guess who he supported?


I guess you should go back and re-read what he said in the following page

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and perhaps we should ask him, if he has any knowledge of skyscrapers, how is it possible that the roof of wtc7 collapsed 6-8 second before the rest of wtc7 collapsed?.... How is that possible if it was a controlled demolition?... How is it also possible that noone heard the "explosions" that accompany "controlled demolitions"? Only a few people heard what they call explosions....how is this possible? Any explosives used to take down skyscrapers would have been heard for miles.

And I guess you missed what other engineers in these same forums have said, including Valhall and myself.


Originally posted by bsbray11
You put way too much faith into the guys that merely nod their head at the government, and assuming they take everything into account except politics is just foolhardly considering how many unanswered questions there are in regards to those collapses.


I put more faith on science and what my own eyes and common sense tells me, than "nodding my head" at every conspiracy theory, even those that don't make much sense....



Originally posted by bsbray11
Well you haven't been reading the responses to your posts then.

Here's 3 in the same pic:



Cheers.


......Those are not squibs from controlled demolition charges......

These are squibs from controlled demolition charges...notice how many there are, and they all are right in the middle where the building started collapsing.....

[img]

Some people, i am not saying you, also seem to claim that the dust clouds were made by explosions.

Let's see if there is any difference between the squibs made from controlled demolition charges and the "clouds" of dust and concrete made by the fall of a building.

Let me use one of wcip photos.

img129.imageshack.us..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

The squibs in the middle of the building as the charges explode are made by explosives.

The clouds of dust and concrete at the bottom of the building are made by the fall of the floors into the other floors and the bottom of the building.


Originally posted by bsbray11
And people did report there being massive, metallic roars as the buildings collapsed.


.....Of course there would be massive "roars as the buildings collapsed"....do you think they would collapse without making much or any noise?


Originally posted by bsbray11
That's not what I was referring to. The caps, crushing the rest of either building below them, was what I was addressing. Re-read my post.


How much debris fell on those buildings in comparison to what fell on the wtc towers?....



Originally posted by bsbray11
There were no firefighters in the building. yawn......


and i posted evidence and photos with the time they were taken that there were firefighters close to wtc7 as late as 4:25 PM or so.... despite the claims by some that there were no firefighters there after 11am or so...



Originally posted by bsbray11
Bush said he saw the first plane hit on live TV and thought it was a "bad pilot." He said this twice. The footage wasn't actually available until some hours later. Why would he lie about that? And so where exactly was he watching this happen from? It wasn't CNN; I'll tell you that.


President Bush thought it was an accident at first....that's why he said that....


Originally posted by bsbray11
Rumsfeld said Flight 93 was shot down during an interview on CNN. Look it up on Google for a transcript.


Really?....not according to what the wife of one of the passengers of flight 93 says when she was talking to her husband on the phone.... Her husband told her they were going to attack the terrorists and bring down the plane.... Do a google search for the transcript...



Originally posted by bsbray11
Are you seriously this naive?


And some people don't understand why i become sarcastic and respond to such comments as the above......



Originally posted by bsbray11
Factions within our government were plotting to stage a war on propoganda!


First of all....the military makes many contingency plans, that was a plan made by some within the "military" but it was not accepted....

As an example...do you know what is one of the contingency plans NASA has to combat Global warming if things get worse?..... To nudge the Earth off it's course by using a comet by puting the Earth in an orbit farther away from the Sun..... There are many contingency plans that are presented, but it doen't mean any of these will be used...

Second..... there is a socialist/communist propaganda that is trying to split the US appart to control us....Howard already pointed out, and gave proof, that this professor is a Marxist.....or he appears to agree with the Marxist doctrine.... i wonder why most of the same points that some conspiracy theories have are the same points that the Communist propaganda is trying to revive....


Originally posted by bsbray11
And neither do I see any evidence to support the official story. Problem is, I'm actually looking.


You just can't accept the fact that Islamic terrorists could have done this, and instead you, as well as some others, are fixed in the idea that "the government was behind it" no matter what the evidence shows.......even though the terrorists did the same in Spain....even thou they did the same in Britain..... Even though they have been trying to make similar attacks, or even worse when they tried to make chemical attacks in France, in other European countries.....

---edited to correct spelling mistakes and add comments---


[edit on 23-11-2005 by Muaddib]




posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it. Show me where they address the potential energy in the caps being insufficient to crush the rest of the buildings,


How exactly do you want evidence brought forth on something that didn't happen?.....

Can you not understand that most of the debris from the falling floors fell on the bottom floors and not on other buildings?....


Dude, I'm not freaking talking about other buildings. I just told you this in my last post but apparently you weren't paying attention.

This is what I'm talking about:



Thanks to WCIP for the image.

But if I were talking about that, most of the debris didn't fall straight down. About 80% of it was ejected outwards, ie:



But again, that's not what I was talking about, and I don't really even know what you're trying to argue with that one.



......Those are not squibs from controlled demolition charges......


Then wtf are they, might you say? Air puffs?



Originally posted by bsbray11
And people did report there being massive, metallic roars as the buildings collapsed.


.....Of course there would be massive "roars as the buildings collapsed"....do you think they would collapse without making much or any noise?


x.x

You just asked why no one heard any loud noises. Now you say of course there would be massive roars? lmao, which is it man? I swear, conversing with you is like arguing with a know-it-all seven-year-old. I don't think you even keep track of what you're trying to argue about.


And I guess you missed what other engineers in these same forums have said, including Valhall and myself.


If you're an engineer, then I think I've proven my point on who exactly some of these guys are. I'm not even going to waste my time on the rest of my post. If 9/11 was a conspiracy, you would never believe it anyway.


XL5

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Loud explosions are different from a loud roar.

All squibs are air puffs, what made the air puffs is what matters.

If the WTC was brought down by demo. bombs and your proof is solid, why don't you try getting your story published in the news paper. Why waste your time here arguing against people who are imployed by the govt.?



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by XL5
Loud explosions are different from a loud roar.


Not when the explosions are timed so close to each other that you can't tell where one stops and another starts, eh smarty?


All squibs are air puffs, what made the air puffs is what matters.


Prove it. People have said this so many freaking times, with absolutely nothing to even suggest it's even possible. To suggest air is to show ignorance on how the WTC is set up and how air travels, and how pressurization works. The floors were being freaking ripped apart one by one; there is no way the air could have been pressurized with such gaping holes in the building, and no air being pushed downwards.

But, nevertheless, go ahead and try to find anything to even show that it would be even possible for air to have caused the squibs.

I hope you know that the syringe theory is something pretty unique to ATS; no government officials, etc. have ever tried to pass it off as science. Only those who don't care for facts, so long as the official story sounds reasonable to them, because that's all they want to believe anyway. It is the single most absurd thing anyone on either side puts forward so consistently.


If the WTC was brought down by demo. bombs and your proof is solid, why don't you try getting your story published in the news paper. Why waste your time here arguing against people who are imployed by the govt.?


*employed

And the only person I would believe to be a gov. employee would be Howard.


Anyway, papers don't care, and this is the only place where you can expose yourself to a lot of good info, given that you're open to it.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Are you sure about that? The system is set up quit well as you've just proved, I have to give them credit for that.


Oh yes I am.
i give credit to the US government for allowing me to have an education i couldn't even get in an European society because of my immigrant status if I continued living there, but the US government has not controlled what I have learnt and what I think, despite your claims, and anyone else's to the contrary...


Originally posted by ANOK
We have freedom but it's confined to an extremely small, artificialy created boundary controlled by other peoples ideas, outside forces such as media and peer pressure.


That's where you are wrong. People are weak if they give in to peer pressure. It is their own failure to resist peer pressure. I never did gave in to it even though I have known people who have and they have resorted to drugs and other criminal activities.

It is up to the individual to set their own goals and ideals and stand behind them. I am talking about ideals, not theories which obviously can be easily debunked even when some people still claim the contrary.

You always have the freedom to turn off the tv and think whatever you want even if it is different from what is shown on tv. I know some people who never watch the news and some who even don't watch tv at all, yet they have freedoms that many others in other countries would love to have.


Originally posted by ANOK
You may think you have free will, because you see freedom as it is handed to you through conditioning and minipulation of your right of free expression.


Is it freedom, or is it anarchy that you are talking about?.....

Of course societies need laws and rules and people in that society have to abide by them so there can be order. With freedom comes responsibility, freedom has never been anarchy.... and that's what I have seen some people not understand.


Originally posted by ANOK
It looks like freedom cause you've never seen what true freedom is.


And you don't know what freedom is and believe that freedom must be anarchy because you have never been opressed under a tyranical doctrine.... You have enjoyed freedom that many people around the world have never known, and now those who want other parts of the world, mainly Capitalist countries, to accept the same oppressive doctrines that have half of the world in suffering and under oppression have lured you into believing they can give you more freedoms which are the same excuses and promises they gave to those people that they now control and oppress....

Isn't it strange that the same people that claim they can give more freedom to "people living in Capitalist countries" are the same people who want to bring the same oppressive regimes that still exist in some parts of the world?...

I have seen people in these same forums claim that people like Chavez are "saviours who are fighting against Capitalism"....yet those same people don't want to see that those "saviours" just want you to surrender to their suppressive doctrines...


Originally posted by ANOK
Society itself stifles freedom.


You want to go live in a mountain by yourself? You are free to do that... but you are doing no favours by proclaiming and asking for anarchy to be the rule of society.


Originally posted by ANOK
If we are so free how come most people think, dress, talk etc..the same way?


Really?.....if we are so alike then why are we having this discussion?.....this thread and most threads in these forums shows you that we are not all the same. We all have different ideas, we all dress differently, talk differently etc....

I don't know in what world you live but I know that differences exist in this world.

We are all human beings, we feel, we love, we can even hate, we have dreams, etc, but we all have differences even in those basic emotions.


Originally posted by ANOK
Where is freedom of expression? Look what happens to people who try to express that freedom? Think about it.


What in the world is this forum all about?...... If you mean by "look at what happens when people try to express freedom" when they riot and break laws" and you use that as an excuse to proclaim that you are not free, then you don't understand the concept of freedom and the responsibilities that comes with it.


Originally posted by ANOK
We are told how to think, dress, talk etc...You are not acting on your own free will....


Then why in the world are we having these discussions if that was true?....
and yes, I am acting of my own free will, as you are. I think you are confusing anarchy with freedom, and that is the problem.


[edit on 24-11-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it. Show me where they address the potential energy in the caps being insufficient to crush the rest of the buildings,



Originally posted by bsbray11
Dude, I'm not freaking talking about other buildings. I just told you this in my last post but apparently you weren't paying attention.


You did say "to crush the rest of the buildings" if you meant to say the rest of the "floors", the engineers did not address there being "insuficient potential energy" just because there was more than enough "potential energy" to crush the rest of the floors......

For some reason you can't seem to understand that 10 floors falling on top of other floors, with the added weight from the aircraft, was too much weight for the already weakened redundant structure to support. Once the collapse started there was no stopping it, until there was enough resistance, which in the case of "skyscrapers" it is near the floor after most of the building collapses on itself.


Originally posted by bsbray11
This is what I'm talking about:




But if I were talking about that, most of the debris didn't fall straight down. About 80% of it was ejected outwards, ie:



Those are dust clouds and pulverized insulation and fireproofing....it is not 80% of the debris of the tower.



Originally posted by bsbray11
But again, that's not what I was talking about, and I don't really even know what you're trying to argue with that one.


Because you did not correctly explain what you were talking about.... Look at your comment at the beginning of this post....



Originally posted by bsbray11
Then wtf are they, might you say? Air puffs?


Yes they are air puffs.... But you are convinced nomatter what that they must have been explosives...

But what you, and others like you can't fathom for some strange reason is that when floors collapse unto other floors there is pressure...and that pressure has to go somewhere....if there were explosives in there, we would have seen a lot more squibs instead of a few air puffs.





Originally posted by bsbray11
x.x

You just asked why no one heard any loud noises. Now you say of course there would be massive roars? lmao, which is it man? I swear, conversing with you is like arguing with a know-it-all seven-year-old. I don't think you even keep track of what you're trying to argue about.


Perhaps you should read what I said, and what you responded again.....

I asked why was it that very few people claimed to have heard what they thought were explosions.....i didn't say anything about noise until after you proclaimed that people heard "loud metallic roars"..... which are not explosions btw......



Originally posted by bsbray11
If you're an engineer, then I think I've proven my point on who exactly some of these guys are. I'm not even going to waste my time on the rest of my post. If 9/11 was a conspiracy, you would never believe it anyway.


What in the world are you talking about?......never mind....


[edit on 23-11-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Muaddib, maybe you should consider studying a little psychology or sociology. You'd be amazed at the number of things we are taught, that are not natural to us, that are totally arbitrary and often limiting. Many social norms and customs are hindering to true, natural freedom, regardless of laws. One example is the idea that nudity is obscene. Another is that certain language is obscene. Another is that all conspiracy theories are silly and paranoid. Another, and a much more relevant one, is that being economically poor means that you aren't happy, or aren't successful as a human being. And another may be that homosexuals are disgusting, depending on how/where you're raised. All of these things, and many, many more, are sociological in nature, and are engrained into our society, and are counterproductive to absolute freedom. Yet people hardly ever think about these sorts of things. It's a very useful tool if you have the power to influence a society.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Muaddib, maybe you should consider studying a little psychology or sociology. You'd be amazed at the number of things we are taught, that are not natural to us, that are totally arbitrary and often limiting.


Those are brought also often because of culture, and it is part of what makes us all so different. At the end it is in the hands of every person to decide what ideals they want to stand by, and what to believe in, this is something that nowadays many people have forgotten, and instead want to take "personal responsibility" away and claim that what they do, or have done, they did because of society....

This is another reason why there is so much crime, and why we have so many problems, noone wants to take responsibility for their actions, and instead want to blame "society," or their parents, or anyone else...except themselves.



Originally posted by bsbray11
Many social norms and customs are hindering to true, natural freedom, regardless of laws.
......


You can always take refuge with a Buddhist monk, give away all of your material possessions, live in a monastery and meditate about nothing. But then again, you will have new restrictions placed upon you....

When you talk about "true natural freedom" you are talking about "anarchy"....that's the only way anyone can have "true natural freedom".... and anarchy does not work in a society, because at the end anarchy will destroy that society. It is like the law of the jungle, or the law of the fittest, at the end there is only one person standing.

There are restrictions in every society bsbray11, even when people live in tribes there are laws and restrictions put in place.

Anyways, we are getting way off of a tangent.


[edit on 24-11-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
You did say "to crush the rest of the buildings" if you meant to say the rest of the "floors", the engineers did not address there being "insuficient potential energy" just because there was more than enough "potential energy" to crush the rest of the floors......

For some reason you can't seem to understand that 10 floors falling on top of other floors, with the added weight from the aircraft, was too much weight for the already weakened redundant structure to support. Once the collapse started there was no stopping it, until there was enough resistance, which in the case of "skyscrapers" it is near the floor after most of the building collapses on itelf.


It's one thing to say that.

It's another to prove it.

Show me that those small fractions of the buildings had the energy to crush everything under them into beams and dust.


Those are dust clouds and pulverized insulation and fireproofing....it is not 80% of the debris of the tower.


You can prove that, too.

And here's you a photo to help you get started:



Or these:




Looks to me as though most of the debris isn't in either footprint.


Yes they are air puffs.... But you are convinced nomatter what that they must have been explosives...

But what you, and others like you can't fathom for some strange reason is that when floors collapse unto other floors there is pressure...and that pressure has to go somewhere....if there were explosives in there, we would have seen a lot more squibs instead of a few air puffs.


I thought I asked for some evidence that the air b.s. is even possible. You gonna offer any, or just repeat your opinion that the problem is my comprehension of the problem?

The problem that you aren't considering is that there was a massive hole in each of those buildings from where the collapse was initiated. Where does the pressure go? Out of those holes! Seriously, do you think the air is going to be compressed down into a collapsing building as each floor is being ripped apart from above? The air wouldn't go down in that case; it'd go out in all directions just like all the debris.

Again, all I ask is for you to prove the puffs of air b.s. is even possible. Not even asking you to prove that's what it was. Only that it was possible. Go ahead. Let's hear what pushed the air down further into the building when the plunging force was a big freaking hole.



You just asked why no one heard any loud noises. Now you say of course there would be massive roars? lmao, which is it man? I swear, conversing with you is like arguing with a know-it-all seven-year-old. I don't think you even keep track of what you're trying to argue about.


Perhaps you should read what I said, and what you responded, before you make more of a fool of yourself....

I asked why was it that very few people who claim to have heard explosions.....i didn't say anything about noise until after you proclaimed that people heard "loud metallic roars"..... which are not explosions btw......




Maybe you should learn what the demo theory argues before trying to argue against it, because what you're claiming should have been loud, and was a massive, metallic roar, and yet no one heard it, despite the fact that it was very loud and of course people heard it... is all one and the same.


If 9/11 was a conspiracy, you wouldn't believe it, would you? With the same circumstances, I mean: NIST coming out with these reports, etc. Would you buy into it? Or do you think you'd give it a fair hearing and realize something was up? Eh?


Edit: In response to your last post, I simply suggest you study psychology/sociology.


When you talk about "true natural freedom" you are talking about "anarchy"....that's the only way anyone can have "true natural freedom".... and anarchy does not work in a society, because at the end anarchy will destroy that society.


Here you show what I was getting at perfectly. A stereotypical, mass-produced thought on anarchism.


[edit on 24-11-2005 by bsbray11]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
It's one thing to say that.

It's another to prove it.

Show me that those small fractions of the buildings had the energy to crush everything under them into beams and dust.


You are kidding right?.....

Where in the world do you think that debris would have finally rested when it reached the floor level? (street level).... Do you think it would have opened a 20 floor hole and rested there in a small area for your convinience?.... Or maybe it should all have stayed in one little nice pile.......Now that would be impossible....there was too much debris to have "rested" in one small area....... but as the debris was falling and collapsed against other floors there wasn't enough resistance to stop the falling debris or to deflect most of it, instead it kept falling straight down.

Of course when the debris finally settled it rested on a larger area, the floor gave more resistance to the debris hence it didn't open a hole 20 floor hole, or settled in a nice little pile for your convinience....



Originally posted by bsbray11
You can prove that, too.


Really?....

Can you prove to us that the dust cloud seen in the following image is also 80% of the debris from the collapsed building?.... If it is, how is it possible that the buildings where the "dust cloud" reached were not demolished because of the "dust cloud"?......







Originally posted by bsbray11
And here's you a photo to help you get started:
..............
Looks to me as though most of the debris isn't in either footprint.


and do tell us bsbray...where do you think the debris would have finally rested when it met the resistance from the bottom floor? (the street level)... Perhaps the debris should have dissapeared into oblivion with the explosives and the squibs that should have been there if it was a controlled demolition huh?....... actually I think you would believe that for some reason.....


Originally posted by bsbray11
I thought I asked for some evidence that the air b.s. is even possible. You gonna offer any, or just repeat your opinion that the problem is my comprehension of the problem?


You are saying that the pressure should have gone the same way the pressure started from?....

Yes, do think about it and see if you find the logic on that....

Perhaps you should watch a video of any of the towers collapsing and see that when the large clouds were formed the upper parts of the tower were collapsing on the lower floors....pressure does not go out the same way it starts..... it goes out through the path of least resistance, and the path of least resistance is usually not going against itself.....but out some windows. If the windows and the walls of any of the towers were about 20 feet of solid concrete, the pressure would most probably have gone up, but this was not the case....

If what you say was true, which is not, then people wouldn't be able to inflate ballons by blowing into them, since according to you, the pressure should escape through the same gaping hole that it came from, in this case the open mouth as they blow air into the ballon.



Originally posted by bsbray11
Maybe you should learn what the demo theory argues before trying to argue against it, because what you're claiming should have been loud, and was a massive, metallic roar, and yet no one heard it, despite the fact that it was very loud and of course people heard it... is all one and the same.


You are kidding right?.... If there were any explosives, they would have been heard for miles before any of the towers started collapsing yet no such loud explosions were heard....what was heard was the mass of falling debris as the debris and steel beams fell and were twisted by the weight....which of course made a loud sound.... or do you think that the sound should have dissapeared and instead people should have heard birds singing?......



Originally posted by bsbray11
If 9/11 was a conspiracy, you wouldn't believe it, would you? With the same circumstances, I mean: NIST coming out with these reports, etc. Would you buy into it? Or do you think you'd give it a fair hearing and realize something was up? Eh?


Would i believe 80% of the debris from the collapsing tower should have rested in a small space or somehow opened a 20 floor hole to finally rest there, and that most of the squibs and the loud explosions from controlled demolition charges dissapeared into oblivion if NIST or FEMA put it in their report?.... no....


[edit on 24-11-2005 by Muaddib]


XL5

posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Well to say that air didn't blow out the windows means that they would need to place the explosives next to the windows or at least in the room (not where the supports were).

If the explosions were so close together that no one could tell the difference, then how could it sound like bombs? Do bombs make a roar, no, but a bunch of stuff getting compressed and fractured does.

If the news doesn't care about corruption, then why did they milk WTC, Exxon and Clinton+M.L. (look ma' no hands!) as much as they did?



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   

The North Tower at 7, 13.3, 14.5, and 22 seconds into its collapse.
Picture numbering by me :
1 - 2
3 - 4
These pictures seem to been taken from a helicopter to the north, which moved to the right between pic.1 and pic.2, then stopped, and the photographer was then zooming in and out a few times.
You clearly see in all 4 of them, the WTC 7 building.

At the nr.2, 13.3 sec picture, you see an immense outburst of debris originating from the north face of WTC 1 hitting WTC 7's south front. So that's cleared, that probably caused that huge center hole reported by a few firefighters later on. We still have not located any picture of that hole yet, however. But let's guess it was there for now.
That still doesn't give a reason for WTC 7 to collapse in the manner it did in the late afternoon. Such a heavy damage at the south front center would in fact logically cause WTC 7 to topple over to the south, and not fall straight down.
NIST knows this, and won't come out with a solid report on WTC 7 for a long time to come, they know we will fall all over them with a lot of scientific proof they know they will not be able to counter in any logical manner.

And that outburst is the explosive demolition of the highest SkyLobby floors, which were specially reinforced with thick CONCRETE floors which also had a lot of reinforcing steel beams to hold the elevator machinery and the AC machinery and a 5000 gallon NYFD water tank.
If it would have been a gravity collapse, the collapse would have stopped or slowed down there. And there is another set of reinforced concrete floors further down, the first SkyLobby, and that one also didn't stop or hinder the collapse.
It is clear, that that outburst came from the north face from those few highest SkyLobby floors, was a set of much heavier demolition charges, and was meant to demolish in one go, 2 buildings, WTC 6 and WTC 7. That went wrong, WTC 7 was only strifed, that's why they had to do such a sloppy job later on at it. You just see that spire sticking out above the center of that outburst, between those 2 huge pieces of debris trails going down on WTC 7. That spike turns up clearer in the next 2 pics, and perfectly clear in pic.4, just above the east penthouse roof. It is not the remnants of a piece of the center collumns, it is a very tall piece of north-west corner structure of WTC 1.

Do you see in pic. nr.3 that upside-down trapezium formed piece of dust cloud, on top of the mushroom cloud ?
That's the clear sign of the remnants of a very heavy demolition set, placed in the core elevator space far under the SkyLobby, to blow the backbone out of that SkyLobby. It was a shape charged set, so that the greatest explosive force was aimed upwards, under an angle of about 80 degrees. You see that angle in the leftover dust cloud form.

In pic. nr.1 you see the same shaped dustcloud remnants of the heavy charge which blew out the backbone of the toppling top. In nr. 2 you see it even better, in the center of the remaining building, rising up like a letter Y.

In pic. nr. 4 you see the dust cloud top of a second identical heavy shape charged demolition set, which just blew out the lowest SkyLobby floors.
Something went wrong at the north-west corner, the charges there didn't detonate in time. That's why that spire kept standing for a few more seconds.

You also can clearly see the parabolic upwards detonation cloud traces in pic.nr.1, clear sign of charges going off, which blew to whole top part of WTC 1 to smithereens, so it could not initiate a total topling of WTC 1 over a wide part of prime real estate of Manhattan.



The North Tower at about 8.5 seconds into its collapse.
This pic. was taken much more to the right, compared to the above other 4. Somewhere above West Broadway, 3 blocks to the north of WTC 7, which again is clearly to see in front of the collapsing WTC 1.
You clearly see the effect of that same heavy charge which took out the highest SkyLobby from above pic. nr.2, but now the blow originating from the west facade of WTC 1 (seen from the position of the photographer, ofcourse). You see the much longer reach of the accompanying dustcloud, than the dust cloud at the east facade. That debris took out a few of the front pillars of the WFC 2 and 3. Perhaps the plan was to also take out WFC 2 and 3. And all the stored files in those buildings.
They didn't dare to blow those 2 buildings up later in the afternoon, since they had observable minor damage.

Here is a very clear photo of mine from the remaining north-west corner spire with the remaining hot spots of the cutter charges clearly visible, and those are NOT compression heating points, as you can clearly see that the spire was not compressed, but in the process of being cut :



One falling piece of that spire is seen falling to the left, just above that dust cloud on the bottom left, with the thermite still burning on several spots, especially the ends.
Especially observe those smoke trails from the thermite.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by uknumpty
From 911research.wtc7.net
911research.wtc7.net...


This photo was taken sometime in the afternoon of September 11, before Building 7 collapsed. Building 7 is the skyscraper in the upper right of the photograph. The partially crushed and burned-out remains of Building 4 are in the middle of the photograph and Building 5 is the dark object to the right. The fact that fires are no longer visible in these buildings suggests it is the mid- to late afternoon.

The southwest facade and southeast-facing wall of Building 7 are visible but there are no signs of fire.


Prof. Jones made at least one mistake, I assume he blindly copied a photo with subscript from that website :
www.physics.byu.edu...
and did not double check it.


Original subscript from prof. Jones :
"WTC 7 on afternoon of 9-11-01. WTC 7 is the tall sky-
scraper in the back-ground right. Seen from WTC 1 area."

What we however see here, is a picture taken late morning, presumably around 11:30 a.m.,
just check that with the shadow of that car. And we see the east side of WTC 7 in the sunlight.
Taken at the corner of Church St. and Cortland St. So not seen from the WTC 1 area,
but looking from a point to the right of the collapsed WTC 2, looking through the
gap between WTC 4 and WTC 5 towards WTC 7. You clearly see the small corner
in the roofline of the east side of WTC 5.

See also this picture from wecomeinpeace :
img398.imageshack.us...
The "Jones" photo was clearly taken from a place near the right top of his picture.

If we mirror Jones' picture in Paint on the horizontal level, then it seems afternoon, but then it
shows totally wrong positioning of all buildings.
I am only amazed that one hour after the last collapse the dust had already settled so fast.
That means that most of it must have been relatively heavier cement dust.

One other comment: where is that immense gap in the south center face of WTC 7.?
I don't see it from this viewpoint with that shadow and bit of smoke.
I'm quite sure that NYPD helicopter has taken quite a few more sharp pictures of the damage
of the South face of WTC 7. Why they don't release them remains a mystery.




I have to make one other comment :
I do understand why Bsbray confused that smoke collumn in this picture below, with the cement dust cloud
from the 2 other collapses. Can it be, that a thermite reaction on many floors was in process while this photo
was taken, and floors were collapsing in the center of the building already,and thus a lot of cement dust was
propelled into the air outside already?
img466.imageshack.us...


At least we see that the south east corner of WFC 3 also got hit by a substantial piece of debris
from the collapse of WTC 1.

See page 17 from the FEMA report, www.fema.gov... ,
fig 5-17, and the connected viewpoint arrow to the WTC 1 collapse starting at 10:28:31 a.m., the North Tower, the second collapse. That's the point from which the photographer took that picture, and according to that fig 5-17, it was taken when WTC 1 just collapsed.
Page 17 :





And now I need to urgently advice you, to go see that impressive website which someone guided us to :

911eyewitness.com...
911eyewitness.com...


:
BOMB Audio Signature


:
Numerous Explosions BEFORE COLLAPSE

Ofcourse the charges going off were propelling large pieces of debris in a wide arc away from the building, they did not "fell", and most of the time these were the heaviests parts, needing the biggest charges, thus causing so much collateral damage to the surrounding buildings.

For the demolition crew to be able to crash both towers as much as could be, into a convined space between other, no-Silverstein owned, buildings, there had to be pressure triggers and stretch triggers connected to the main core collumns.
Of course they were not sitting there with binoculars on OEM's floor 27 of WTC 7, fingers glued to radio controlled demolition triggers.
These people were pro's, and several levels higher as Controlled Demolition.

The moment the buildings were showing too many signs of material fatigue, f.ex. your much mentioned buckling effects, which means no other than combined stretching on one side of a main core collumn, and crimp on the opposite side, a certain amount of triggers send all their own signals to the main computerized demolition board, and when the preset treshhold of allowed activated triggers was reached, the computer board initiated the demolition sequence, and sent those signals to all the radiographic tuned thermite cutting charges attached to the main collumns on a few strategic floors.
Especially the 2 sets of floors of the Sky Lobbies, where the elevator motors and AC equipment was situated, which were heavily reinforced with much stronger cross beams and reinforced concrete floors, than the other floors by the architects of the WTC.
They cut in no more than a second through the collumns, and then a secondary set of signals were given to the shifting charges, which were all placed on the inner sides of the collumns, +/- 1 meter above the cutters, in the elevator shafts, facing the insides of the shafts and glued in halfmoon formed cut-outs in triangular shaped synthetic supermagnetic-rare-earth blocks, thus directing any light, sound and shockwaves under a 45 to 60 degrees angle downward into the shafts and thus to the inner part of the buildings, and nearly no squibs of high compressed air escaped to the office spaces, but spouted downwards in the shafts. Some did inadvertantly, and blew out a few windows while the shifting charges displaced the cut collumns a few feet away from the thermite cuts.
No more had to be done. Gravity did the rest.
And that was the demolition theory and then gravity let them collapse into a convined space, in the footprint and a relatively small space around it.


:
Close-up analysis and timecode counters let you, the viewer, see for yourself what the mainstream media failed to show you and what the "evil doers" didn't want you to see.


:
This program illustrates for the viewer, how original raw footage was analyzed to clearly show that indeed massive explosions occurred before each tower fell.


:
The distance to Rick's camera was 1.8 miles across the Hudson River creating a 9.2 second sound delay. The sound of massive explosions could be clearly heard across the water.


:
A light colored dust detonation zone progresses down the side of the tower while the corner section remains intact, indicating that the floors are not "pancaking" but being blow-out in a downward cascade. The freefall speed of the explosive cascade is far too fast for a genuine collapse and can only be generated by a computer controlled demolition sequence.


:
Sections of the North Tower's outer steel framework, weighing as much as a jetliner when joined together, were shot like missiles roughly 600 feet through the air into the top of the Winter Garden. This feat was accomplished by massive explosions that brought down the north tower at freefall speed and completed the illusion of terrorism to traumatize the unsuspecting public.


:
The top section of the south tower began to lean at a sharp angle early in its implosion. In the seconds that followed, this intact top section turned to dust instead of falling into the street in one large piece. Critics charge implosions always start at the bottom, but this style of mid-level detonation sequence is not uncommon, as seen in Philadelphia in 1999, courtesy of Controlled Demolition Inc.


:
This Law of Projectile Motion experiment illustrates that heavy steel debris was ejected upward and outward in a parabolic arc by the massive explosions in the middle section of the North Tower. A genuine collapse would have occurred much more slowly due to the resistance of supporting floors and all debris would move downward, falling close to the side of the tower.


:
The magnitude of the North tower was 2.3, which corresponds to almost double the amount of seismic energy measured for the South tower at 2.1. Amazingly, the blue ribbon team of experts overlooked this major discrepancy in the seismic data. Given that this is junior high school science, it appears the oversight was intentional, leaving viewers to assume that 2.1 and 2.3 are almost the same. This technique was necessary to maintain the cover story.


:
The Law of Conservation of Energy requires that the standing Potential Energy and the falling Kinetic Energy must be equal. Since both towers were virtually identical, a seismic energy measurement for the North Tower of 2.7 tons of TNT explosives, almost double that of the South Tower, at 1.4 tons, indicates some additional energy source. This additional energy cannot be explained by the official collapse theory, however, it is consistent with explosives used in controlled demolition.


:
The calliflower shape of the dust clouds is characteristic of pyroclastic flows as seen in the eruption of Mount St. Augustine and also at the WTC in NYC. Massive amounts of explosive energy are required to generate these clouds of rising debris. The heat generated by high-power explosives used in controlled demolitions can approximate the heat of a small eruption. The cold tower steel and concrete simply falling to the ground cannot generate the necessary heat or pulverized concrete dust and debris.


:
A computer generated model illustrates the internal mechanism of controlled demolition in sequence with Seven World Trade. Large explosions were recorded by Rick's camera before and during the collapse, confirming that indeed the building was brought down in a typical style of controlled demolition.


:
"We heard this... this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder. Turned around, we were shocked to see that the building was ah... well it looked like there was ah... a shockwave ah... ripping through the building and the windows all ah... busted out and, you know, it was horrifying. Then ah... you know, about a second later the bottom floor caved out..."


You should also listen to and view especially part 2 of this series :
www.novakeo.com... Change - A Documentary on 911 Part 2.wmv
www.novakeo.com... Change - A Documentary on 911 Part 1.wmv
novakeo.com...
novakeo.com...



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:09 PM
link   
This site has some very interesting coments and audio files of what happened that day on 911.
Worth a look I think. Below is just a couple of links from 911 PROOF
911 PROOF




Mike Taylor of the National Association of Demolition Contractors in Doylestown, Pennsylvania. The collapse of the WTC towers looked like a classic controlled demolition.

www.newscientist.com...




In addition, there are many eyewitness accounts of phenomena consistent with the use of explosives in the world trade center buildings:

Paramedic captain stated "somewhere around the middle of the world trade center there was this orange and red flash coming out initially it was just one flash then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode the popping sound and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building" (pdf file; Google's web version is here). Compare this authenticated tape of a controlled demolition by a leading demolition company -- can you see the orange and red flashes on the near side of the building? How about at the base of this building, the Kingdome? Both of these tapes are posted at the "World Records" section of Controlled Demolition, Inc.'s website)


sfgate.com... , go to page 15




Source 911 PROOF www.911proof.com...






[edit on 24/11/2005 by Sauron]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I have found one reporter explaining that every fifteen or twenty minutes smaller secondary explosions were going off at WTC 7 and WTC 5. An extremely dangerous place to be, he said at the end.

terrorize.dk...
(... The firemen were concerned that WTC 7 was going to collapse, building nr 5 was in danger of collapse... You hear smaller secondary explosions going off every fifteen or twenty minutes...)

www.grandtheftcountry.com...

Firefighters and press in the area were told to "get back" because they were going to "pull-it". "Pulling" a building means taking it down with strategically placed demolition charges at the inner support columns so that the building falls in on its own "footprint" as to not damage the other structures in the vicinity. It was a classic bottom-up implosion. You can actually see the demolition charges running up the top 6 floors.(click the same underlined _javascript link on the site)
Building 7 played host to then Mayor Rudy Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management command center, with the 23rd floor built in 1998 as a "bunker" with bullet and bomb-resistant windows, its own water and air supply, the ability to withstand 160mph winds, and a full commanding view of the entire WTC complex. Interestingly, on 9/11 Giuliani didn't bother to put the center to use (even though that's what it was built for) and decided to instead set up a makeshift command center down the street. Seven also served as the command center for the security of the entire WTC complex, which was headed by the President's brother, Marvin Bush, whose contract ended "coincidentally" on 9/11. WTC7's other tentants included the IRS, CIA, Secret Service, FBI, Department of Defense, and the SEC. It has been reported that several banks involved in sending money to the 9/11 hijackers had their offices there, and important files pertaining to the Enron investigation were stored there as well.


The IRS is the Internal Revenue Service, the tax people. How many damning tax files from how many corporations were destroyed?
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The collapse of Building 7 destroyed thousands of SEC case files, on companies such as WorldCom.

After a quick search on that above site, I have however found that they offer many -explosions- ear-and-eyewitness reports, people who got interviewed right after they say explosions at WTC 1 and 2 occured, just after they barely escaped the WTC 1 and 2 collapses, and it are very convincing videos with good audio :

01. - www.grandtheftcountry.com... All the talk about explosions in the WTC towers.
02. - www.911blimp.net...
...secondary explosions and then the subsequent collapses....
03. - terrorize.dk...
...The explosion blew me right over... And then he goes on telling about many explosions in both towers.
04. - terrorize.dk...
...At ten thirty I tried to get out of the building, but as soon as I get out, I heard a second explosion, and another rumble, and more smoke, and more dust, and then a firemarshall came in and said if there was a third explosion, this building might not last...
05. - terrorize.dk...
...there was a secondary device going of, and another explosion, and the chief, he thinks there were actually other devices that were planted in the building...
06. - terrorize.dk...
...It just went Booom, like a bomb went off [...] and we made it to the mezzanine, and another explosion...WHOOOM..right in front of me,whoooom...
07. - terrorize.dk...
...I was standing beside 1 World Trade Center and then I heard rumbling and we all started running, the glass that blew out and threw me on to the sidewalk, I couldn't see for 20 seconds, and then...
08. - terrorize.dk...
...as we made our way to the stairway,..there was a heavy duty explosion...
09. - terrorize.dk...
...When I was 5 blocks away, I heard explosions, 3 thuds, and turned around to see the building we just got out of...it kind of tipped over and folded in itself...
10. - terrorize.dk...
...We finally get to the lobby, ...and when we got to the lobby, there was this big explosion.
11. - terrorize.dk...
... I saw one of the towers blow ... and I saw from street level, I saw it exploded up, a giant rolling ball, a flame ...
12. - terrorize.dk...
...45 minutes into the taping that we were doing, there was, an explosion, it was way up where the fire was..and the whole building at that point bellied out, in flames, and everybody ran...
13. - terrorize.dk...
...All the sudden, it started like, it sounded like gunfire, you know, pangpangpang.pangpangpang, and then it was, it was sudden,,,three BIG explosions!...
14. - terrorize.dk...
... We went down from the 23rd floor...We made it to the eighth...BIG explosion...flew us back into the eigth floor..
15. - terrorize.dk...
...The explosion blew and knocked everybody over...
16. - terrorize.dk...
We just heard another explosion [...] it's to unsafe to go in there...

17. - terrorize.dk... (CNN censored the word explosion out!)
... there was just a huge ... [censored] and enormous pieces of debris is falling - one right after the other...
18. - terrorize.dk... (The uncensored real-time part!)
[...] and every few minutes you'll hear it like a small sort of a a rumbling sound, almost like an explosion sound and another chunk of it will come flying down into the street...
19. - terrorize.dk...
Full interview with Rose Arce; CNN Producer on 911, broadcasted about 4 hours after the demolition af WTC-1. Again the word explosion censored out. CNN obviously got ordered to get those damning remarks out asap, the same day already.
The Administration was really rallying at topspeed to surpress all, unsafe for them, evidence.

20. - terrorize.dk...
... And the bottom of that building was going out...
21. - terrorize.dk...
...It was just this incredible force of wind and debris that came actually UP the stairs, knocked my helmet off, knocked me to the ground...



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 10:32 PM
link   
www.911blogger.com...

www.911blogger.com...



You're seeing what has been kept from the world for four years....BECAUSE THE SOUND WAS TURNED OFF.



NOW YOU KNOW WHY THIS WAS NOT SHOWN LIVE, BUT WAS DELAYED FOR 45 SECONDS
WHILE THEY GOT THE EXPLOSIONS MUTED.

ARMY PSY-OPS OFFICERS HAD BEEN WORKING IN THE CNN NEWSROOMS SINCE JULY OF 2000.

izzy


This comes from this site :
letsroll911.org...

Just read a few of the very SHOCKED reactions of listeners to this soundtrack, one of them :

""O. M. G. !!! This is the most damning piece of evidence I have seen to date. It made me break right down and cry. I am crying now.""



[edit on 24/11/05 by LaBTop]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
www.911blogger.com...

www.911blogger.com...


LabTop that link isn't working. It says the url doesn't exist, and a google for the file turns up only the same url. Do you have an alternative link?

[edit on 2005-11-24 by wecomeinpeace]


XL5

posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Those URLs are as bias as PETA's sites and I don't think disucssing the facts will work. The only people you will ever trust on these issuses are people who argee with you, its like a cult or at least the "me too" crowd.

To deny ignorance is to look at it from both angles and try to find facts that support both sides and not just what you and the "me too's" believe.

Honestly, go look at the way PETA members argue and the evidence they provide.

Drop a brick on another brick that has dust on it and see that the dust goes upward from the holes in the upper brick and it shoots out from the sides.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
At the nr.2, 13.3 sec picture, you see an immense outburst of debris originating from the north face of WTC 1 hitting WTC 7's south front. So that's cleared, that probably caused that huge center hole reported by a few firefighters later on.
We still have not located any picture of that hole yet, however. But let's guess it was there for now.


We do have a picture at an angle of the hole created by the debris that fell on wtc7....it has been posted several times....if you are interested go back a few pages and find it....


Originally posted by LaBTop
That still doesn't give a reason for WTC 7 to collapse in the manner it did in the late afternoon. Such a heavy damage at the south front center would in fact logically cause WTC 7 to topple over to the south, and not fall straight down.


According to whom?.... and btw....wtc7 did not collapse only because of the hole created by the falling mass of debris....the fire weakened the already weakened redundant structure which precipitated the collapse....


Originally posted by LaBTop
NIST knows this, and won't come out with a solid report on WTC 7 for a long time to come, they know we will fall all over them with a lot of scientific proof they know they will not be able to counter in any logical manner.


Wrong....several independent structural engineers have explained how the towers, including wtc7 collapsed, and why..... I have given several links to the reports by these structurals engineers none of which work for the government....

Want to see some of their reports?....

www.icivilengineer.com...

www.engr.psu.edu...

www.pubs.asce.org...

mceer.buffalo.edu...

www.istructe.org.uk...

www.stanford.edu...

www.newyorker.com...

www.pbs.org...

www.ncsea.com...

Here is a link that talks about the seismic observations...

www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

I did not include any of the links that had government documents, but here is the main link if you are interested.

mceer.buffalo.edu...




Originally posted by LaBTop
And that outburst is the explosive demolition of the highest SkyLobby floors, which were specially reinforced with thick CONCRETE floors which also had a lot of reinforcing steel beams to hold the elevator machinery and the AC machinery and a 5000 gallon NYFD water tank.


Why is it that people can't understand that you can't desguise the "loud" explosions needed when bringing down such large buildings by controlled demolition?.....

The "small" explosions heard by firefighters were probably produced by chemicals in the buildings exploding, not the loud explosions that accompany the charges needed that would collapse the buildings.... For example, janitors closets do have many flammable chemicals and other flammable materials, but for some reason some people keep ignoring these facts because they do not corroborate their theory.....

There is also something else that some people do not "want" to consider, as if it was something new. When the top floors started collapsing and the pressure moved air towards the floors below, this air would feed the fires, and what do you think happens when more air is fed into a large fire?

WCIP, you obviously decided to ignore this fact when you claimed that "before the towers collapsed there was a mysterious increase in the smoke", but you forgot to mention for anyone to see what happened to the fire in those same pictures you gave...



Look at what happened to the fires when the smoke "suddenly and mysteriously increased".... There is no mystery on why there was more smoke, you can see the fires increased, of course the smoke would increase also.... and that's only the fires that we can see from outside, the fires inside the tower, the ones we can't see in those pictures, would have also increased, which explains why there was more smoke. No "mysterious conspiracy" there....



Originally posted by LaBTop
It is clear, that that outburst came from the north face from those few highest SkyLobby floors, was a set of much heavier demolition charges, and was meant to demolish in one go, 2 buildings, WTC 6 and WTC 7.


and the loud explosions somehow dissapeared again right?.... You keep talking about "heavier demolition charges" yet you fail to mention that the "heavier demolition charges" would mean "louder explosions".... i wonder why and how for some mysterious reason any explosions were only heard...again, by a few people...and only a few of those that were the closest to the towers...


Originally posted by LaBTop
...............
Do you see in pic. nr.3 that upside-down trapezium formed piece of dust cloud, on top of the mushroom cloud ?
That's the clear sign of the remnants of a very heavy demolition set, placed in the core elevator space far under the SkyLobby, to blow the backbone out of that SkyLobby. It was a shape charged set, so that the greatest explosive force was aimed upwards, under an angle of about 80 degrees. You see that angle in the leftover dust cloud form.


.... Riiight....and those clouds have nothing to do with the intense fires that were raging inside the tower.... somehow the fires dissapeared and were relaced by "demolition charges".......



[edit on 25-11-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
................
terrorize.dk...
(... The firemen were concerned that WTC 7 was going to collapse, building nr 5 was in danger of collapse... You hear smaller secondary explosions going off every fifteen or twenty minutes...)
.........


So do tell us LaBTop.....what do you think happened to all those chemicals in the janitor closets....they did they also "mysteriously dissapeared" with the loud explosions?.... Now that would be a "real conspiracy theory".....



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join