reply to post by LaBTop
wow, lol somewhere in here theres a disconnect in communication and i think im responsible. so, ill attempt to be more articulate, if i fail, ill try
again tomorrow when i feel better. but to be clear, this dissertation like post (and it will be, i apologize now) is simply to try to clear up my lack
of articulation and to see if i can make it clear just what the hell im trying to say.
when i said i stand by my calculations to sever the core. i was referring back to the
i had on this topic in which i calculated 172lbs/floor for all 47
columns. now the problem is that when i made the statement in THIS thread, i didnt specify WHICH calculations i was standing by.
in honesty i stand by the ones in this thread as well but those are not the ones to which i was referring with that quote.
my apologies to all for this oversight.
so to clarify further, if i can lol:
the 80,000lbs causing a 1-2magnitude quake was NOT my assertation but that of the guy i quoted in the OP. what i did was take that 80k number and
convert to tnt and c4 becuase 80k would be the capacity of a standard semi trailer and i dont think anyone is giong to argue that they drove a semi
trailer into the parking garages of the WTC towers and set them off.
further more, i calculated that the C4 equivilant to 80,000lbs of anfo would be 25,075lbs of ordinance. or, 12.5tons. and i did this more as a matter
of practicallity. its a lot more plausible that they moved in 12tons of ordinance than that they rolled in 40tons of ordinance. its just a smaller
(relativly speaking) package.
but, can we agree on those numbers so far?
OK, so, the contention with most CT's (using ct's in a general sense as a way to identify them vs OCTs and mean it in no way to be demeaning or
offensive) is that the seizmic data clearly shows an explosive going off at the moment of initiation of the collapse.
the collapse registered as just over 2 for each of the collapses.
to generate a shockwave of that magnitude there would have had to have been a blast equivilant to 12.5 tons of C4 going off if it was not in fact
caused by the collapse itself.
the planes are claimed to have registered as just under 1 which, following with basic math means around 6.25 tons (im just shotgunning that as i dont
know if shockwaves would increase or decrease in direct proportion or exponentially so this part is just speculative)
now, MY contention based on actual seizmic data, NOT considering the time discrepencies, but just basing off the shockwaves is that there is no way
possible that the seizmic shockwaves were generatec by any type of explosive device conventional or otherwise.
im going to do something uncharacteristic for me and im going to say something absolute. AND if someone is willing to pay to rebuild even the parking
structure and the first few floors of the wtc out in the desert and test this theory, if im wrong, ill cut off my left pinky finger and present it to
them. (though id appreciate it if they gave it back so i could get it reattatched lol) so what im going to say is this: there is no way that
6.25-12.5 tons of c4 (or equivilant) went off in the basement of the wtc towers on 911-01. because im betting my pinky finger on this, if that size
bomb HAD gone off? there is not one single person anywhere in manhattan that would doubt it was anything BUT a bomb. off the top of my head i think
taht the okc bomb was around 4 tons of anfo which is just a smidge over 1.25 tons of C4 equivilant
ive said many times that with the 172lbs i calculated it would take to cut the core columns its unlikely it would have been able to remain covert,
but, i cant say that one with enough certainty to bet parts of my anatomy on it. while i find it unlikly, professionalism demands that i concede i
could be wrong about that.
but any bombs big enough to create the seizmic shocks witnessed in the data would have been, if you dont mind me saying, pretty bleedin obvious.
Now, labtop...YOUR take on the seizmic data is somewhat different than the average CT'r. it is much more educated and articulate. (even though im
too fried to really follow all of it...it is still a very impressive body of work) to be honest, im not sure where your theory of explosives ties in
with the seizmic data, but i do plan to go over everything again tomorrow with a clearer head i hope. though, honestly, if you'd care to explain it
again in detail for me, this time using small words in deference to my current mental situation (if there were 11 commandments the 11th woudl be " tj
shalt not post on ats while on pain meds") i would appreciate the opportunity to continue this discussion.
so, as it stands, i pretty much think i still disagree with you about the causes of the seizmic data, becuase i dont think its any secret ive yet to
see any evidence of HE in the wtc's that is compelling enough to overcome my personal objections to such theories.
i just ask that you labtop keep one thing in mind. just becuase i dont think the wtc's were a CD doesnt mean i buy the govts story 100% either.
lastly, as to the shanksville bit, i admire CIT's determination but ive yet to see any of their evidence that supports their theories, but thats just
me. the exception to that is that i find it totally within reason that UA93 could have been shot down and that the story about the passengers
fighting back was a spin the govt put out cuz lets face it, it is a very good story if its true. and if its false it is much more compelling and
inspiring to the rest of us than telling us of a shootdown. this way they die hero's and the fighter pilot doesnt have to live with the GP knowing
he had to pull the trigger on an airliner.
but thats just me
hmm...just for fun should i piss people in the no plane at the pentagon crowd by doing a bomb damage assessment and point out the flaws in the missile
theories based on observed damage? lol maybe not tonight