reply to post by NIcon
Actually, there's a 4th choice.
The collapse events are too chatic to reliably time them. The plane strikes are a better time "hack" since it was a singular event, agreed?
And since the 2nd strike was recorded my mulitple cameras, I believe that one could be used as the most reliable. This was discussed in a prior
thread, and I believe Labtop agreed.
But the collapse - for the towers, how does one determine when the energy being delivered to the ground through the columns gets high enough to be
distinguishable from the background "noise"? 1 or 2 second makes all the difference, agreed? I could believe it there was an analysis done of when
a large exterior column hit the ground, provided of course that it can be accurately enough time checked. There's a few available to be timed, but
I'm not interested. At 1:15 in this video, when Rosie O'Donut says "it's physically impossible" there are probably the first ext columns of any
size to hit. Now if THESE could be somehow time hacked accurately, and then matched to 2's collapse chart...... then ok, he may have something.
Same for 7 - the east penthouse went 8.2 seconds before the global collapse. But where did it fail? At the ground level? Was there enough from this
low height to rise above background levels either? Did the spike occur when the equipment in the penthouse hit the ground? How long did that take, it
was hidden inside the building, right?
Too many variables to determine to the exactness required to verify his "thesis"
But the real Achilles heel is the lack of corroborating audio recordings. Recordings that are in time with when he says these explosives went off.
There just aren't any. The closest I remember in the past threads was an explosion just before one of the towers collapsed - which wasn't captured
on audio recordings. This turned out to be a diesel fuel deflagration - which wouldn't have the tell tale explosive characteristics needed to
validate the "thesis"- , since the towers also had generators/diesel fuel on site. And that still leaves the other 2. What about those? There's
absolutely nothing to even try to twist to the agenda. Here's a video that challenges Labtop's "explosion from across the river" video. In short,
the audio was faked.
THAT'S why I been asking about calcs regarding explosives needed to generate those seis spikes. They can be done. There is NO secret info needed to
do them. There's also the question of where they were placed - if they were on the base core columns, they would have been huge also. A member did a
calc and figured that it would take 17lbs(?) of LSC to cut each core column at the impact zone. The specs for the core columns can be found here:
Now, I'm not sure if he used this info or not, but just a cursory examination reveals that the
core columns were made from plate steel that was about 3x thicker, plus it had the inner "web" to deal with. So maybe 50 lbs per column. He said
that even 17 lbs COULDN'T go unnoticed.
So to counter this, Labtop then used reports of flooding in the basement to claim could have been planned to help "muffle" the explosions. But he
has no hard data about what flooding means. I asked in this thread is flooding a half inch? A half foot? A half meter? No reply. So then I asked how
much water would be necessary to adequately muffle the explosion to inaudible levels - a daubting task, to be sure. But I'd say just use a reasonable
Db reduction of say 30-40 Db and see where it leads you. No reply. Yet?
Do you see where I'm coming from now? It's not JUST the timing. It's the cummulative set of data behind it that leaves me totally unconvinced.