How they rigged the towers.

Let He Who Is Without Sin...

Originally posted by xxvalheruxx
My mistake.

Thanks for clearing that up, and sorry I jumped down your throat about it, as volubly elaborated on in my previous post.

There are many quotes and statements that were made that morning before the towers came down, becasue no one knew exactly what was going on.

The rumbling came from the fact that the tower was collapsing. There were also reports of substations and gas lines that may have ruptured during the descent of hte building that may have caused some extra 'explosions' but they ahd nothing to do with the collapse.


Also, WTC was not demo'd, and there is no such evidence. The only evidence is that it was evacuated because it was on fire 'before' the towers came down.

Also, WTC was not demo'd, and there is no such evidence

Well, for the most part that's because all of the evidence was illegaly removed within days. And those explosions comming from gas pipes etc under the ground? Would you like to explain exactly how those pipes happened to explode in both towers? The fires from the jetfuel did not leak down (how many floors?) into the basement/underground where the main gas pipes were. If a main gas pipe had exploded underground, do you know how much devistation that would cause? It would NOT be a "subtle" perfect explosion to cause a building to collapse. And what about the pools of liquid iron reported in the basements of both buildings? You can combine jet fuel, and all the natural gas in the world, burn it for however long you want, place iron beams inside of that inferno, for however long you want, and they will not burn hot enough to melt. I don't understand how you can say there's no evidence. What about all of the eyewhitnesses, the firefighters etc, giving 1st hand experiences of some sort of devices exploding in the basements? Again, the molten iron and the fact that the fires from the top floors did not spread to the basement show us that it wasn't the gas pipes that exploded. Also, do you not think that the FDNY was at least smart enough to turn off the main gas supplies for the building?

You state that the rumbling/exploding sounds come from the buildings collapsing? Well maybe you should actually look at the tapes/evidence BEFORE you speak out against them. The rumblings/explosions came WAY before the buildings even began to collapse. Some people, including firefighters, were inside of the buildings when at least one of the blasts went off in the basement, and they made it out. If you watch the tapes, the rumblings/explosoins, once again, happen before the collapses begin. Once they do begin, there is addition noise creaed from the collapsing. Check out the link i posted to a video on the last post of page 3, where they analyze the explosion sounds, a series of 3, between 3-13? seconds before the buildings start to collapse. Oh that's right though, the evidence doesn't exist. That's a ghost link, the video doesn't really exist, so you don't want to waste the energy requried for the muslces in your finger to conract to click the link for a video that doesn't even exist. right...

You make a statement that explosives did not take down the building and there is no evidence as if you're miss Cleo and your word is the truth, and there's no need to question it. Even with all of the evidence supporting demolition, i'll still say i'm not 100 percent sure. You seem to explain away all of the evidence by stating that it was extremely chaotic, and nobody knew what was going on...therefore what? Just because it's chaotic, we can't take ANYONE's word? I guess chaotic/stressful situations cause EVERYONE to hallucinate...including inanimate objects such as video recorders.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by xxvalheruxx]

Originally posted by esdad71
Eduardo Kausel is the name of the man who came up with the calculation.

www.public-action.com...

He is a MIT engineer who along with a few others have researched this issue.

Kausel also reported that he had made estimates of the amount of energy generated during the collapse of each tower. "The gravitational energy of a building is like water backed up behind a dam," he explained. When released, the accumulated potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. With a mass of about 500,000 tons (5 x 108 kilograms), a height of about 1,350 ft. (411 meters), and the acceleration of gravity at 9.8 meters per second 2, he came up with a potential energy total of 1019 ergs (1012 Joules or 278 Megawatt-hours). "That's about 1 percent of the energy released by a small atomic bomb," he noted.

The M.I.T. professor added that about 30 percent of the collapse energy was expended rupturing the materials of the building, while the rest was converted into the kinetic energy of the falling mass. The huge gray dust clouds that covered lower Manhattan after the collapse were probably formed when the concrete floors were pulverized in the fall and then jetted into the surrounding neighborhood. "Of the kinetic energy impacting the ground, only 0.1 percent was converted to seismic energy," he stated. "Each event created a (modest-sized) magnitude 2 earthquake, as monitored at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Observatory, which is located about 30 kilometers away from New York City." Kausel concluded that the "the largest share of the kinetic energy was converted to heat, material rupture and deformation of the ground below."

This is his quote from the article.

As far as a collapse, there were 4 Police copters, who witnessed it shearing, or starting to collpase. This was no demolition.

Just because somebody comes from MIT does not mean that I have to trust them or believe they are telling the truth.

In regards shearing, there would likely have been some of that at higher levels but that also does not explain why the building fell so neatly into its own foundation as controlled demolition is expert at executing.

OK guys, thanks for all the info

The firefighters were calling to the rest of their crew, along with people who were on the phone with family, who are on tape stating " the towers are starting to collapse". There are survivors who tell of hearing the sound of the towers falling, seconds before they came down. This can all be found in either the FDNY/911 calls, or in the book 102 minutes about the collapse of the towers. There were reports of explosions that are bieng used in the incorrect context that were reported before many people knew what had occured.

The commentary from the reporters who state " it collapsed like a controlled demolition" were from that day, and that is what it looked like. (But just because a seagull looks like a UFO, that doesn't make ita UFO)

I cannot see one person honestly coming forward and stating that on 9/11/2001, your first thought was "my government did this"? Your first thought was where are my kids, or my wife, or my mom and dad.

There are plenty of threads regarding this subject, so I do not feel the need to go any further into this, unless specific questions are asked. I have answered enough on this subject in other posts. thanks.

Just curious, do the doubters just ignore the following footage? I've shown these 2 clips to many people over the past few weeks, and all of them had the same reaction (shocked)


www.whatreallyhappened.com...
(12 seconds before WTC1 collapse, the tripod shakes)

It corroborates with this:

video link: video.google.com...
(Time frame 52:50 - 55:10 , explosions can be heard roughly 12 seconds before WTC1 collapse + smoke rising from the streets)


[edit on 20-3-2006 by noto]

[edit on 20-3-2006 by noto]

Esdad. i think you are getting confused here. You say that you got the 1/10th of nuclear bomb from this quote? Sorry for not sourcing the material...I will try.

"That's about 1 percent of the energy released by a small atomic bomb," he noted.

Source: www.public-action.com...

1 Percent does not equal 1/10th. 1 Percent equals 1/100th. Just so we can keep our math straight.

Edit: to include source.



[edit on 21-3-2006 by asala]

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Griff]

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Griff]

Originally posted by xxvalheruxx

Also, WTC was not demo'd, and there is no such evidence

Well, for the most part that's because all of the evidence was illegaly removed within days. And those explosions comming from gas pipes etc under the ground? Would you like to explain exactly how those pipes happened to explode in both towers? The fires from the jetfuel did not leak down (how many floors?) into the basement/underground where the main gas pipes were. If a main gas pipe had exploded underground, do you know how much devistation that would cause? It would NOT be a "subtle" perfect explosion to cause a building to collapse. And what about the pools of liquid iron reported in the basements of both buildings? You can combine jet fuel, and all the natural gas in the world, burn it for however long you want, place iron beams inside of that inferno, for however long you want, and they will not burn hot enough to melt. I don't understand how you can say there's no evidence. What about all of the eyewhitnesses, the firefighters etc, giving 1st hand experiences of some sort of devices exploding in the basements? Again, the molten iron and the fact that the fires from the top floors did not spread to the basement show us that it wasn't the gas pipes that exploded. Also, do you not think that the FDNY was at least smart enough to turn off the main gas supplies for the building?

You state that the rumbling/exploding sounds come from the buildings collapsing? Well maybe you should actually look at the tapes/evidence BEFORE you speak out against them. The rumblings/explosions came WAY before the buildings even began to collapse. Some people, including firefighters, were inside of the buildings when at least one of the blasts went off in the basement, and they made it out. If you watch the tapes, the rumblings/explosoins, once again, happen before the collapses begin. Once they do begin, there is addition noise creaed from the collapsing. Check out the link i posted to a video on the last post of page 3, where they analyze the explosion sounds, a series of 3, between 3-13? seconds before the buildings start to collapse. Oh that's right though, the evidence doesn't exist. That's a ghost link, the video doesn't really exist, so you don't want to waste the energy requried for the muslces in your finger to conract to click the link for a video that doesn't even exist. right...

You make a statement that explosives did not take down the building and there is no evidence as if you're miss Cleo and your word is the truth, and there's no need to question it. Even with all of the evidence supporting demolition, i'll still say i'm not 100 percent sure. You seem to explain away all of the evidence by stating that it was extremely chaotic, and nobody knew what was going on...therefore what? Just because it's chaotic, we can't take ANYONE's word? I guess chaotic/stressful situations cause EVERYONE to hallucinate...including inanimate objects such as video recorders.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by xxvalheruxx]

Great post. I find myself getting frustrated trying to show what possibly happened to a few people, and its like talking to a bowl of salad.

They wont watch the videos, they discount the firemen who say bombs were going off all over, and they completely discount the molten metal in the subfloors that was still red hot WEEKS after 9/11.

I don't know how to handle people that completely disregard vital clues about what truly happened, sometimes I feel like grabbing them by the throat...any help in dealing with these types?

say, if you watch the close-up of the corner, you can see that the explosions of debris, the 'demolition wave', is OUTPACING the freefalling debris. it's as a short clip, but it is a measurable thing. you can see pieces of debris falling, and some just starting to fall, and the cloud of vertical ejections progresses down the side slighty faster than freefall.

faster than freefall.

checkmate, i believe that's called.

thanks, gordon. you may have saved the world.

-newton

Originally posted by billybob
say, if you watch the close-up of the corner, you can see that the explosions of debris, the 'demolition wave', is OUTPACING the freefalling debris. it's as a short clip, but it is a measurable thing. you can see pieces of debris falling, and some just starting to fall, and the cloud of vertical ejections progresses down the side slighty faster than freefall.

faster than freefall.

checkmate, i believe that's called.

Holy God, that's right.

I've seen that clip before and that thought never crossed my mind as I watched it.

Deserves a thread of its own, BillyBob.

Originally posted by billybob
say, if you watch the close-up of the corner, you can see that the explosions of debris, the 'demolition wave', is OUTPACING the freefalling debris. it's as a short clip, but it is a measurable thing. you can see pieces of debris falling, and some just starting to fall, and the cloud of vertical ejections progresses down the side slighty faster than freefall.

faster than freefall.

checkmate, i believe that's called.

thanks, gordon. you may have saved the world.

-newton

Exactly billybob, they are cutting charges. I believe C5 is good for that. Who uses C5 btw??

notice the charges start at the bottom and go up.. this leads to movement going downwards due to gravity. A strong downward force can be caused on the one floor below all the charges.