Seismic Data, explosives and 911 revisited., page 9

just a note to anyone coming in late to this thread. in my OP i linked to a graphic that represented what i was talking about but now, mysteriously, that page is a plug for a book and a list of "praises" for the website.

so, if you want to know exactly which graphs are being used to support the "spikes were bombs" theory, please watch the video in labops post here: here and its been called an excellent video.

i however feel its wrong and i think that the math supports me.

reply to post by MikeVet
LabTop's work on this is excellent and extensive and it indicates a definite 'something' but whatever it is doesn't stand out visually or audibly for the level of force it would take to produce that signal. Finding a way to deliver that sort of force relatively quietly without a visible blast effect is the problem. Damocles figure of about 12 tons of C4 or equivalent would be very difficult to cover up in the middle of downtown Manhattan with millions of witnesses.

Pilgrum, it was FAR from that figure by Damocles, and easy to muffle away.

This quote is in fact Damocles's conclusion from his Opening Post, and he repeated that same conclusion in his sixth post again :

Damocles : so, i guess what my point is is this: did anyone see 12.5 tons of explosives going off in the instant the towers started to collapse?

That's a very precise question, but is based on calculations for an already invalid conclusion.
You in fact calculated in your OP, the amount of explosives needed to arrive at a roughly ML=1 to 2 seismic event, and thus equal to the total global collapse of a tower, taking about 16 to 20 seconds in total.
You compared that collapse to a 80,000 lbs (40 tons) ANFO detonation in a quarry at about the same distance from the LDEO PAL seismic station as the 9/11 events which registered between 1 and 2 on the ML scale.

That's however by far not the amount used, the instant the towers started to globally collapse.
I told you already this, many posts back :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"Damocles : If large scale explosions 20 miles away from the station show magnitude 1-2 quakes ""

LaBTop : This subject can not be compared to where we talk about.
The Richter scale seismic readings were from the total collapse magnitude of each of the three buildings, not from the initiating events, be it explosives, or (in your opinion perhaps) gravity driven failures of main columns.

So why you direct me back to your OP, is beyond reason, in my humble opinion.
And no, I am not trying to discredit you, far from that, I try to educate you, and I hope we may succeed before it is too late for both of us.

I'll try to compact my thesis (which is not a theory btw, but a scenario based on a proved fact), again, for those who still don't get the chilling picture of treason by some powerful individuals inside or near the US government and military :

I have proved without doubt, and no one can refute my arguments, that 3 identical energy events precluded the moment of global collapse initiation, for all 3 WTC collapses during 9/11.
This is especially clear for WTC 7, I repeat.


Damocles has very roughly calculated that if you compare the seismic ML's for the two first tower's global collapses, being 2.1 and 2.3 (he took a value of 2.0) to roughly comparable quarry detonations which caused ML's around 1 to 2 (that's damn rough btw), he ends up with a value for the WHOLE collapse of 12.5 tons of High Explosives, in this case C4 plastic explosives.

It becomes obvious now, what explosive force was used in the initiating phase.
Just measure the height of the maximum seismic peaks in the two towers collapses, shown here :
www.studyof911.com...

Then measure the maximum heights of the two pre-running tiny peaks ( tiny, because they are depicted at a 100 nm/s value), and use your math skills to tell us how much explosives probably were used to initiate global collapse. In my opinion more than 12 to 15 times less than 12.5 tons C4.
And even considerable more less, if you take in account the different, non-comparable scenarios in the quarry and at the WTC.

It will be very useful to first look at my post #4 at StudyOf911 :

www.studyof911.com...

where I (with the helpful hand of bsbray11) show you how big the pre-running collapse initiating events really were, by re-scaling back the two tower collapse graphs to 10 nm/sec. And then comparing those two, to the one pre-running the WTC 7 collapse, which is in fact higher than its following global collapse peaks!

All three pre-initiating events were evidently duo-packs of seismic signals.
The first smaller pack were the combined blasts, and the second pack was the impact of the f.ex. 1 meter or more, falling down, 47 cut core columns in either the basements alone, or also combined, so synchronized at the mechanical floor under the plane impact floors.

You have to look carefully for the duo-packs in my post #4 at StudyOf911 for :


Collapse 1 at its 4s to 14s peaks-positions,


Collapse 2 at its 5s to 15s peaks-positions,

Collapse WTC 7 at its 11s to 21s peaks-positions.


It is easier to measure the height of the small peaks in there, and then divide that value by 10, to arrive at the exact heights of the pre-running tiny pictured peaks in the LDEO collapse graphs with the 100 nm/sec scale values, and compare that to the height of the global collapse peaks.
You must use conversions of all LDEO graphs to 673 x 517 pixels, to get a truly comparable result.

reply to post by LaBTop

---

Am I reading this right - you're claiming that HE was used to initiate the global collapses?

You disagree with Damocles and say maybe a ton of C4. Even that would have been heard though, don't you think?

Explain again WHY only a ton of C4 would give that kind of seismic event? How could such a low amount result in that kind of seismic activity?

i swear this thread is going to give me an aneurysm.

Labtop, if ALL you are talking about is the little events before the big bang, then why oh why did you post this video:

Google Video Link

Source : video.google.co.uk...


in this post: here

and say:

And then observe the overlaying of the two 3D seismic fingerprint graphs of the collapses of the South and North Towers by LCSN at Palisades LDEO seismic station in NY State, done by Rick Siegel or the Blue Media Group publishers of the 9/11Eyewitness video:

< snip >

They conclude that the identical sharp peaks placements in the two graphs indicate the use of HE, High Explosives, at the initiation of the collapses.

and then come back and say in the other thread you decided was part of this one: link

Damocles, I meant the audio segments of the 911 Eyewitness videos, not their erroneous conclusion that the main seismic spikes on their used LDEO charts indicated explosives.

when the video you linked and talked about THEIR findings doesnt discuss audio in any way in that short video clip?

do you see why some of us (well me at least) are confused about what it is youre trying to say?

the video i linked (from YOUR post) is the EXACT problem i have with most of the "911 truth movement" who use the seizmic record as proof of explosives and it is, and you seem to agree with me, that they are WRONG!!! the 2.1 and 2.3 spikes are NOT the result of explosives and for them to be the result of explosives it would take the equivilant of 12.5 tons of C4 to recreate that as a minimum.


so am i right or am i wrong? you say the video is erroneous but then still contend that I am wrong about the very same set of data that 911 eyewitness and others use as PROOF! could you please make up your mind?

now, as to what you finally seem to settle on talking about. great, you have a few theories but lets look at a couple then shall we? in 1993 the bomb used was ~1310lbs of a hopped up anfo. it had a significant increase in det velocity but still less than dynamite. so by comparison it was ROUGHLY equal to 600lbs of C4 (i rounded down). now, that blast did NOT register on ledo's seizmographs and the theory is that its cuz the bomb wasnt coupled to the ground. that bomb also did no significant damage to the core members (though in all fairness it didnt go off where they wanted it to) but, if an explosion that large not coupled to the ground didnt register, whats that do to your TBE theory?

also you said:

In my opinion more than 12 to 15 times less than 12.5 tons C4.

that is STILL 1633lbs of C4 equivilant. (24500lbs/15=1633) so, to quote john lear: no way, no way in hell.

sorry but the evidence just doesnt support this.

i have in other threads calculated that on the 66th floor it would take 172lbs of RDX based linear shaped charges. that number would go up as you went down the columns. this isnt enough to even register at ldeo and IMO is still enough to have been pretty obvious in at least the first blast. so, IMO either they used something big enough to show on the seizmic graphs which everyone would know about and we wouldnt be having this discussion or they used smaller more efficient charges that wouldnt show on the seizmographs and therefore your conclusions are wrong.

next question. did willie notice that his basements were full of water? did anyone? if we look at the dimensions of the building as 208'*208' and figure that it had around a 3m ceiling do you realize that we're talking about 39560 cubic meters? even if we subtract the space the columns etc would take up thats still a very large space to fill. that converts to 39560601 liters of water? (10450805 gallons for us yanks) that would take 400 firehoses at 400gpm 4 hours to fill. no one noticed? cmon, i was born at night, but brother it wasnt last night.

so, you want to educate me? cool, i do like to learn and ill admit that your thread on TBE's was very informative though it really had no relavance to 911 or the destruction of the wtc's but it was still a great and informative thread.

so, if you really want to educate me then do this: take your little seizmic events and put them into ricther so that we all have a common frame of reference. THEN we'll take your finding and we'll apply known values for explosives to it. and we'll see if THAT brings us to a conclusion that is both enough to bring down the towers and show your seizmic events but still small enough to go unnoticed by a few 1000 people. maybe we can turn this whole thread from a confrontation to a collaboration and really find something worth while for the community. i mean id convert them myself but you seem to be more familiar with this stuff so id rather you did it so no one else can come along and say i was using erroneous data later on. plus using this data i found that i dont have the soil constants for the local area so that any conversions i made would be erroneous and lets not have that. as this is more your area than mine im sure you have or can find the local constants and make accurate conversions which we'll then put into perspective.

between your knowledge of the seizmic stuff and mine of explosives im sure we can figure out what happened and if its even plausible. that is of course if youre even open minded enough to consider that it MAY NOT HAVE BEEN explosives at this point. im willing to go where the evidence leads but right now, as someone trained in explosives, we're just not there yet.


[edit on 1-1-2008 by Damocles]

video.google.co.uk...
video.google.co.uk...

Damocles, did you really LOOK at those 3D seismic graphs? Or only glanced over them?
It seems you only heard his first lines about the huge peaks of short duration. And yes, in my opinion he made the wrong conclusion about those huge peaks.

Did you however listen what Rick explained in the last part? They compared both tower collapses, North and South tower, and overlaid their three motion diagrams, and concluded that both of them overlapped each other perfectly, indicating that their was a similar pattern of destruction, to demolish all 47 columns and all the floors downward in BOTH towers.

They are totally different than the ones I used from LDEO, which are specifically filtered for only ONE hertz region, 0.6535 Hz, and one component of motion, the East-West component.

The ones Rick Siegel and Blue Media Group showed, are totally different, first they are depicting THREE components of motion, Z axis, North/South axis and East/West axis. They also have another scale, not nanometer/sec, but instead micrometer/second.
He then overlaid all three, and came to his conclusion.

Since I don't have these graphs, and the original Blue Media DVD, I am in the dark what EXACTLY they see there, since the Google video resolution is very vague, to say the least.
Rick has released a BIG video footage on DVD, and that is the excellent part, the audio combined with the video from across the river, and the time of the radio playing in the background, with the atomic clock signals at the hours beeping, so we can time-line the whole thing, and a few more good explanations.
And in the Blue Media Google link, you can find a LOT of other links of 2 to 3 minutes length from Blue Media, where you can hear excerpts of Ricks DVD.

But at the time Rick Siegel was releasing his DVD via his website, you could download large chunks of that DVD. That is now past procedure, he got robbed by too many online video thiefs, I suppose.
And in those chunks, you could hear and analyse yourself, lots of audio signals indicating low frequency explosions, combined with visuals of white explosion clouds emanating from the base of the towers.

The audio was enhanced, but Wecomeinpeace and I both had the original audio signals from the Terrorize.dk site of both the tower collapses, and indeed you could hear there also very faint sounds of low frequency explosions.


""the 2.1 and 2.3 spikes are NOT the result of explosives and for them to be the result of explosives it would take the equivalent of 12.5 tons of C4 to recreate that as a minimum. ""

Yup, I agree wholeheartedly, however we have to add that part of those spikes were possibly caused by additional "small" explosives, to break the mechanical floors ahead of the collapse front, and extra explosives at every 3 floors f.ex.

""that is STILL 1633lbs of C4 equivalent.""

I think in kilos, that's about 800 kilo.
However, I have a few things to add. Your comparison to the quarry began with a very rough statement, namely "a ML of 1 to 2". That is a BIG difference, since the Richter scale is logarithmic.
So you build your whole argument on a very rough statement from LDEO about an ML which could differ a magnitude 1 on the Richter scale.
So, I could just as well say that your 12.5 tons, now subsequently 800 kilo, is at least 50% off. But since we have a logarithmic difference, its even more.

But, let's stay with your 800 kilo. As I said in my post above this one, that amount could have been placed inside the top part of the tower, and eventually in the basement. Your guess as good as mine how exactly.

You by now know that I think heavy thermobarics were used at emptied floors, and at other floors several smaller TBE's were placed to pulverize the above and below floors, every third floor, as we can see in the videos, the windows are blown out in patterns covering every 3 floors and every face of the buildings. In fact rings of detonations travelled down the faces, expelling rings of dust clouds.

But, I think that the story of the Egyptian former army major, who delivered the explosives given to him by his handlers from the FBI, to the sheik and his followers in the 1993 WTC bombing, is a red herring.
I think that was a thermobaric device, and the rehearsal for the main 9/11 events. They needed extensive data to calculate the thermobaric effects on the tower construction in the basements. They probably had a fairly good insight of the effects on cleared out, empty floors up high, but not in the much stronger and more complicated basements.

Well, about the water filled basements, I think you missed the part where I told you that Willie rescued 2 men from an elevator END. This is a confined space, which is easily flooded by water running over the floors of the basements.
And there could an underwater explosion by HE have taken place.
Yes, I expect they used a mix of all types of explosives, even thermite is not out of order, since Dr. Jones has now published his findings of an abundance of red/grey chunks of unreacted thermite in the dust of WTC.

If you count the amount of years they had, to plan this, it would go from the Oklahoma City bombing to 9/11. That's an awful long time to plan it so meticulously, that nearly nobody could ever proof anything. I think I did prove something very important however, which they never counted on.

""that is of course if you're even open minded enough to consider that it MAY NOT HAVE BEEN explosives at this point.""

That was of course the first thing I opted for, and I have really tried to come up with reasonable explanations, within the observed data packs. And the first thing was of course the INITIATION of a natural gravitational collapse.
But, how do YOU explain then the proved beyond any doubt, much bigger spikes running in front of the start of global collapse of WTC 7 ?

I can't explain to anyone, that an initiation event could be expressed in a BIGGER pack of spikes than the whole next following collapse of a 47 story massive building.

Perhaps you can ?

Quote from my last post's last lines :
""I can't explain to anyone, that an initiation event could be expressed in a BIGGER pack of spikes than the whole next following collapse of a 47 story massive building.

Perhaps you can ? ""

=========

And that initiation event happened 6 to 11 seconds before anybody could see or record any indication of movement outside and inside the building of any structural components of that building.
The difference is based on the latest 2006 adjusted NIST times for all video and photo events, they then added 5 seconds to all of them. See this graph of mine in post #7 in my thesis :
www.studyof911.com...
----------------

In the following graph from the Opening Post, we see a very dense compressed LDEO picture of the seismic events, in minutes timescale, compared to the expanded LDEO graphs with their seconds timescale, which I used in my thesis.
So, if you should ask yourself why you don't see these pre-collapse tiny peaks in there, that's the reason. The signals are too dense packed in this graph, to ever be able to see those pre-collapse peaks.

www.911review.com...




As you can see in the above linked graph, the ML values are given for these events :
1 Impact = 0.9 ML
2 Impact = 0.7 ML
1 Collapse = 2.1 ML
2 Collapse = 2.3 ML
If we compare these impact values to the WTC 7 graph values, we can deduct that the WTC 7 pre-collapse event = +/- 0.8 ML when we compare the max heights of all three pre-collapse peaks in my posted 3 seismic graphs (those with the same 10 nm/s scales), to the 2 plane impact graphs.

Another peculiar group of events are the five "further collapse" events, of which three are shown. The two others I know of, after 12:00 EDT are not included, and I don't know the magnitude of those, since LDEO does not show them to us anywhere.
Strange that LDEO did not include these other two events, especially when we look at the +/- 1.3 ML magnitude of the 11:15:04 EDT event, compared to the first plane impact. And observe the nearly identical 14 minutes distances between these 3 further events. As if a clockwork was ticking somewhere to regulate these events.

I can just as easily call them Initiating WTC 7 demolition blasts, based on that reporter saying around 14:00 hrs that ""the WTC 7 area was a very dangerous place to be, since every 20 minutes or so, explosions went off.""
----------------

If you would explain the explosions away with gas leaks :
No life gas lines at 9/11 shortly after the first plane impact :
9/11 news conference in which Rudolph Giuliani acknowledges explosions in the area of the World Trade Center and says he does not believe they were gas related - "...we've turned off the gas in the city buildings just to be certain, as a precaution."
To be sure you understand the NY City and their Port Authority building rules for high-rises, life gas lines are forbidden in them, cooking and heating must be done by electrical means, and emergency generators are fed by heavily protected diesel lines.
There is no gas supplied to high-rises. Only to much lower buildings in the WTC complex area.

WMV video download (607kB).
----------------

Video Evidence of an Explosion at the Base of WTC 1.
whatreallyhappened.com... :

This 2.6 MB wmv video shows the collapse of WTC 1 and it corroborates the above "seismic spikes". The camera was not hand held, it was directly connected to the ground via a tripod, and this allowed the camera to visually capture a ground shake which occurred ~13 seconds before the building collapsed. The video also shows an object fall from the right hand side of the building moments before the camera begins to shake. The close timing of these two events indicates they are linked.
Note that 6 seconds into the video the camera shakes for almost a second, too long to be a kick or a jostle.
Moments before the shake a large piece of debris is knocked from the right side of the building. etcetera.
--snip--
This video shows two perspectives of the collapse. The inset video shows the camera shake at roughly six seconds into that video. Five seconds later the main video shows smoke appearing at the building's base.

WMV video download (363kB).

The 9/11 WTC Collapses: An Audio-Video Analysis.
whatreallyhappened.com...

Video Evidence of a Ground Level Explosion Prior to WTC 1's Collapse.
Seismic recordings, eyewitness testimony, and two videos of WTC 1 indicate an explosive detonation occurred at the base of the building fourteen seconds before its collapse.

The Core of WTC 1 was Solid After the Aircraft Impact.
whatreallyhappened.com...

The FBI allowed the 1993 WTC bombing to happen.
whatreallyhappened.com...

Damage Caused by the 1993 WTC Bombing.
whatreallyhappened.com...

A few damage examples :

# reinforced floors almost 30 inches think blasted away on 3 levels below grade, plus a concourse level floor, leaving a crater about 150 feet in diameter at it's largest point.
# On the B2 level, various walls of elevator shafts and fresh air plenums severely damaged, allowing smoke to enter and rise through the cores of both towers.
# Numerous concrete walls destroyed or damaged.
# 200,000 cubic feet of water poured into the lowest grade from damaged refrigeration unit supplies (from the Hudson River), sewer lines, fresh domestic water lines, steam pipes, and condensate return. Water 1.5 feet deep across the B6 level.
# Water cooled emergency generators shut down due to overheating when their water supply was cut. This disabled the emergency lighting.
# Sprinklers & standpipes out of service.

Those are a few of my reasons to suspect the 1993 WTC bombing to have been a thermobaric device, and a dual purpose blast :
If the building was toppled onto the other tower, success for the planners.
If the building stood, another success for the planners, since now they could use all the investigation reports to plan for the next go for them.

BTW, you saw the 1993 flooding of the basements and what caused that, so please include this argument as one of my reasons to suspect water-muffled explosions in the basements on 9 11 2001.

There is a thread here, about a telephone call made during a meeting in a nearby building on 9/11, and in that recorded and saved call, you can clearly hear a low frequency explosion sound in the background, seconds before a collapse or an impact.

US Consulate Whistleblower Says 9/11 Hijackers Passports were issued by the CIA
  Posted 18 days ago with 21 member flags

9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 12 days ago with 14 member flags

Hollywood Stars Seek to Make Feature Film Focused on WTC Demolitions
  Posted 19 days ago with 12 member flags

An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
  Posted 15 days ago with 12 member flags

9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags

Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags

Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags

new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 7 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: