Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Proof of the Gash on WTC-7 ?

page: 6
6
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2007 @ 08:13 PM
link   
It's very simple.
Just take the time to read this page :
www.studyof911.com...

and look at the embedded pictures and diagrams.
The links are just there to show you that I don't invent my data.




posted on May, 21 2007 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by LaBTop
I assure you, you don't need any more intelligence than you possessed when in basic school, to follow my reasoning about the seismic anomalies.

So don't avoid it based on lack of seismic knowledge, because you don't need it !

It's all about GPS timestamps, and simple additions of available data from sources from 2 government institutes, LDEO and NIST.
Which both used the exact same GPS timestamps, but NIST can't fit theirs to cover the LDEO timestamps. Even after revamping, in quite a blatant manner, their original timestamps. They still are way off.

I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROOF ME WRONG.

EDIT: forgot the links,

www.abovetopsecret.com... and page 2,
and :
www.studyof911.com...

[edit on 20/5/07 by LaBTop]


Hi LabTop.. sorry... been busy....Instead of me reading the hundreds of pages... can you compress these endless links to one simple page... Id love to give your challenge a shot.... (not saying I can prove or disprove) it's just that you reference MANY different sites and thread.... what is it that you want disproven?


This is a WUSS tactic. If you want to debate READ THE FRICKING MATERIAL. Why does he owe you some sort of "Cliffs Notes"? Read, debate or BAIL.



posted on May, 22 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Potsie ~

Keep your playground name calling to yourself.

Have a nice day.

Thanks LaBtop...I'll get back to you as soon as I can.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   
LaBtop, in regards to the seismic activity, please see
wtc.nist.gov... section 3.5 pg22
Note that the building collapse times are defined to be when the entire building was first observed to start to collapse. In the case of WTC7 a penthouse on the roof sank before the main collapse started.
The Adjusted time was 5:20:52
The total visible collapse time is about 14/15 seconds. The outer wall collapse took about 6.5 seconds. So then minus roughly 8 seconds to the point of the kink, and you get roughly 5:20:44.

LEDO time is 5:20:42

youtube.com...
The total time of the seismic activity is 18 seconds. Note again the ADJUSTED time for television broadcast is 5:20:44. You should expect some seismic activity just before the kink. There is also a slight margin of error within in the times. Note (in the video) at about 51 seconds in, the kink starts, at 59 sec. the outer wall starts falling, at roughly 1:06 the collapse ends.

I hope this answers your questions.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
1) A montage of the damage photos os WTC7 south face and SW corner damage that I've seen w/color coded damage areas - model of the building accurate fo floor numbers - photo segments scaled on, skewed, etc to fit roughly - damage areas highlighten in their code colors. The lower shots (green and blue) were take from sharp west angles and are harder to read. The official gouge is only 20 stories, so I may be seeing this wrong to see the gouge continuing so low, in which case these are likely the east edges of the SW corner damage, which is quite wide in this spot.


Sorry all for the massive stretching!

2) WTC7 south face model with damage highlighted, no photo messiness.


3) How deep is this gouge? Did it weaken the structure significantly? Why did the collapse begin lower and on the east side?

edit to change west to east - that's what I meant oops

[edit on 23-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   
CL

Nice job. The collapse initiated on the east side. We appear to have no confirmed damage on that side.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   
EDIT :
CameronFox,
""I hope this answers your questions.""
END-EDIT.

No.

www.studyof911.com...
You should re-read my post #15 in there.
And all others too, to get a grip on the 17 sec delay problem too.
And understand what NIST them selfs, defined as Global Collapse.
Not the start of the sinking of the East Penthouse roof.

I have written my Feb 24 2007 post #15 in fact as an answer to nearly the exact same wording by a poster in another ATS thread, he made the same mistake, calling LDEO by mistake, LEDO.

[edit on 23/5/07 by LaBTop]



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by coughymachine
CL

Nice job. The collapse initiated on the east side. We appear to have no confirmed damage on that side.


Thanks! Oops on the east-west confusion, and on forgetting IIB's corner damage pics from the NIST and Cirone. But this one's more about the long gash anyway. I might also do a corner damage/west wall damage version including these. But that's not so much for this thread as for the photo fakery thread to help clarift what the damage there looked like.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Thanks for the drawings, CL! If oyu could reconstruct the whole picture of damage, that would be useful. There was posted around here somewhere (I think) a drawing showing where the hole was in the lower floors.

It would be good to show what damage was where, and relative to other buildings, in particular to WTC 1 and 2.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
CameronFox, my new fan.
Nice to know at last, why exactly you are posting here.

CameronFox, or shall I call you mr. Herbert instead, when you are mature enough to write your own defence lines, come back at me, LaBTop.

forums.randi.org...



Mr.Herbert
New Blood

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 8
.....I love debunking the chaps at ATS. Typically they are all loose change junkies, so they are easy. Some although claim they are engineers and have quite a bit of knowledge. .... I am reaching out for some assistance. ....
LaBtop is one of the prize pupils over at ATS and studyof911, so it would be incredible to shoot this guy down!

Thanks in advance for any help!

Mr. Herbert


So, Kent1 is also a member here. I saw that same reply before.
Shall I call your name?



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   
.........and the point of debunking you would be??

The fact NIST and LDEO can't agree speaks for itself. The science is such that the only answer is the one that neither of them have yet provided.

[edit on 23-5-2007 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 07:49 PM
link   
LaBTop

good one.

This has always been the frustrating part in all of this, people who proclaim the official line and argue not for a real desire for truth, but more to be right. At the end of the day your facts and analysis will stand up to whatever they can muster to try and debunk it. BTW I would think you should forward this to the loose change people so they can get it out on their 'Final Cut' edition.

I have noted skeptics staying away from the implications, rather then trying to de-bunk it they should just face the facts.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop

LaBtop is one of the prize pupils over at ATS and studyof911, so it would be incredible to shoot this guy down!

Thanks in advance for any help!


Rofl, it's just the latest fad, you know? It's just so incredible, you get such a rush.

Mr. Fox might as well go on my ignore list about now, as he was becoming more of an example of my signature than anything else. Ie, it all comes back to him not knowing enough to comment, yet others disagree so therefore we're wrong. Why even bother with somebody like that? rofl.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 10:51 PM
link   

LaBtop is one of the prize pupils over at ATS and studyof911, so it would be incredible to shoot this guy down!


oh, one liner, where art thou?

'incredible'?

'shoot'?

i guess there was a lot of celebrating over there when michael zebhur got shot down. or hunter s. thompson.
or martin luther king, JFK, and john lennon.



posted on May, 23 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   
You know that should be a wake-up call for some of the skeptics here, to face up to the fact that a lot of people de-bunking here are really doing it for other reasons. They are doing it more for *EGO* gratification and to *WIN* at all costs, or just to have something to say.

The bottom line here is that the de-bunkers have lost. I would appeal to them, to re-consider their views and to take a good look in the mirror and remember what this is really about.

LapTop has uncovered some smoking gun evidence that is impossible to refute. That should if anything wake people up.





[edit on 23-5-2007 by talisman]



posted on May, 24 2007 @ 01:35 AM
link   
The saddest part is that these seismic smoking guns have been completely dismissed by experts.

No real seismologist has commented on the signifigance because clearly they are all paid shills.

Like this so-called expert.


So Called experts at LDEO

"There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."


HOW MUCH DID THEY PAY YOU FOR YOUR LIES!!



posted on May, 24 2007 @ 02:13 AM
link   
LeftBehind

I suggest reading LapTop's thread on this found here;
LINK



posted on May, 24 2007 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Interesting catch, LabTop.

Originally posted by LaBTop
CameronFox, my new fan.
Nice to know at last, why exactly you are posting here.


To shoot you down? Where's the surprise in that? However well he's doing that's what he's trying to do. I feel like I'm missing something, like who mr Herbert is or why that matters. Maybe if he gets assistance he won't have to keep dodging and asking for summaries and I'll have my secretary get back to ya, etc.


And as for ego, well I'm here for that too, muddled in with my other nobler reasons. I only wish I could be as pure as all you guys.

So re: the OP, whaddyou guys think of that bldg damage? I don't know if it matters in the big picture but isn't odd we've all ignored it looking at that shiny north face with a couple of fires, yakking about how no plane hit it (ie no structural damage) so it HAS to be a demo? I'm not saying it's not a demo, just why frame it like that?
[edit on 24-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]
[edit on 24-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]

[edit on 24-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on May, 24 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
LaBtop, in regards to the seismic activity, please see
wtc.nist.gov... section 3.5 pg22
Note that the building collapse times are defined to be when the entire building was first observed to start to collapse. In the case of WTC7 a penthouse on the roof sank before the main collapse started.
The Adjusted time was 5:20:52
The total visible collapse time is about 14/15 seconds. The outer wall collapse took about 6.5 seconds. So then minus roughly 8 seconds to the point of the kink, and you get roughly 5:20:44.

LEDO time is 5:20:42

youtube.com...
The total time of the seismic activity is 18 seconds. Note again the ADJUSTED time for television broadcast is 5:20:44. You should expect some seismic activity just before the kink. There is also a slight margin of error within in the times. Note (in the video) at about 51 seconds in, the kink starts, at 59 sec. the outer wall starts falling, at roughly 1:06 the collapse ends.

I hope this answers your questions.



See
wtc.nist.gov... section 3.5 pg22
Note that the building collapse times are defined to be when the entire building was first observed to start to collapse. In the case of WTC7 a penthouse on the roof sank before the main collapse started.
The Adjusted time was 5:20:52
The total visible collapse time is about 14/15 seconds. The outer wall collapse took about 6.5 seconds. So then minus roughly 8 seconds to the point of the kink, and you get roughly 5:20:44.

LEDO time is 5:20:42

youtube.com...
The total time of the seismic activity is 18 seconds. Note again the ADJUSTED time for television broadcast is 5:20:44. I would expect some seismic activity just before the kink. There is also a slight margin of error within in the times. Note (in the video) at about 51 seconds in, the kink starts, at 59 sec. the outer wall starts falling, at roughly 1:06 the collapse ends.

The other paper by Gordon and quickandthedead is toast. The Pavel-Hlava video ended that with time stamps of both impacts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Kent1 : 22nd May 2007 at 03:34 PM.


Are you Kent1 or are you Mr. Herbert? Either way, you copied and pasted this guys remarks to your thread over there. Not sure if that's against ATS rules but it sure doesn't help your reputation.


But I do know, their rules say this:


Copyright

Any post or article published on the JREF forum by a Member is the copyright of the Member and may not be reproduced, copied or otherwise re-published without the express permission of the Member.




[edit on 5/24/2007 by Griff]



posted on May, 24 2007 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
LeftBehind

I suggest reading LapTop's thread on this found here;


I have, and I don't really see the signifigance.

Nor is it evidence that explosives were used.

Perhaps someone can explain how a percieved time discrepency somehow means that explosives were used, when the seismoligists at the lab say otherwise.

Why should we believe laptop over the proffesionals at the lab that took the readings?

They would be be able to tell that explosives were used, and they concluded that they were not.

So either a) they know what they are talking about, or b) they are paid government shills, and are complicit in covering up mass murder.

I know which one makes sense to me.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join