Originally posted by pteridine
Fortunately, none of the millions spent by NIST was your tax money but the citizens of this country appreciate your concern.

That's rather short sighted and naieve of you, pteridine.

I know plenty of Australian friends who have spent time in the USA and paid taxes there. Furthermore, how do you know if I have ever been to the USA or bought anything from there? Any direct or indirect purchase of USA goods, by me, means that I have contributed to the USA economy.

In today's one-world, NWO, criminal economy, the fact that you think money does not cross borders is extremely narrow-minded and out-dated.

NIST did not mention the freefall acceleration, until a high school physics teacher took them to school. Millions and millions of wasted dollars on NIST, while a $50K per year teacher does a better job identifying the freefall anomaly.

Originally posted by NIcon
(Posting disclaimer: All events, characters and institutions in this ATS post are fictitious. Any similarity to any person, living or dead, or to any dead terrorist, or to any actual events, or institutions is purely coincidental. This post should not be construed in whole or in part as some form of new emerging 911 conspiratorial theory.)

You know the funny thing is that NIST should have included a similar disclaimer about the conclusions in its report on WTC 7.

At least that way, we would have known that we weren't meant to take their results seriously. Unexplained freefall acceleration, indeed...

It's already too late for a truly independent re-investigation into 9/11.

Something else developed during the past years while slowly more and more evidence was unraveled.

Some very powerful other global players got convinced by this research that they had to work in concert to do something about the clear and present fascist danger developing in the USA, thus they gathered their own evidence collected from their own recordings from the day of 9/11, which strengthened their conclusions that 9/11 was an event constructed by internal forces, and not at all by external influences.

Since the USA has by far the most powerful military machine on earth, they opted for something totally different, they chose a new playing field where aggressive military force is useless.

An economic guerrilla was brought onto you, with devastating result.
And the end of that is not in sight yet. By far not.
These hidden opponents are far more dangerous than a CIA controlled entity like Al'Qaida.

The most dangerous next attack on the western infrastructure is on their food delivery structure.

This relies nowadays totally on electronically managed, order and delivery systems, and are so narrowly designed, that most food stores have stocks for two to three days only, based on statistically calculated sales.

So, what happens when a huge EMP (ElectroMagneticPulse) weapon is detonated in the central Europe or US airspace, high and powerful enough to fry most backbones, servers and mainframes in the EMP umbrella region?
And fry nearly all modern electronics too in cars and trucks build in the last ten years.

Within two weeks total chaos will engulf the whole western world, solely caused by food shortages, formerly unknown.

Do you understand why there is so much pressure on North Korea and Iran to stop those long range missile tests?

Because an "unknown" rogue submarine loaded with much better tested long range missiles could secretly launch in their coastal waters, and fire EMP weapons on targets anywhere in the world, thus implicating these two countries as the perpetrators, while they were not.

Fill in the enfolding scenarios yourself.


To get back to the free fall speed period in the WTC 7 collapse:
The implications of that are clear.

When perpetrators with the power to cover up their deeds for nearly eight years, were prepared to blow up their own infrastructure in one city to reach their objectives, why would they stop and not expand these forms of attack on a much grander scale?

Because they obviously are not satisfied with what they obtained up till now.

Originally posted by pteridine
OK, Tezza ... WTC#7 collapse is a dead issue for all but conspiracy theorists.

Wrong.

The 2.25 second freefall acceleration experienced by WTC 7 is not a dead issue. It has not been explained by NIST, you or anyone else, as far as I have read.

There is a conspiracy to cover the truth about why WTC 7 collapsed in the manner that it did.

Originally posted by pteridine
Right. It is not dead for you because you are a conspiracy theorist.

You can't qualify your assumption about me. I see a glaring anomaly with the way that WTC 7 fell. That doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist, that makes me a thinking individual who's prepared to question an inconsistent report.

Most of the world has moved on.
Most Americans have moved on.

Please prove these statements.

WTC7 is a dead issue in Congress and they would be the ones to put up the funding for a new study.

Some anthrax powder in the mail does wonderful things, doesn't it?

Systemic, generational corruption in all levels of the USA government, Congress, Senate, Executive branch, finance sector and the MIC will not hide the fact that WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds at freefall acceleration.

People who believe that 'justice' exists and that the USA (indeed the world) has any sense of freedom, liberty, truth or honour are only fooling themselves and perpetuating the lies. We live in a sick, dying world, fuelled by greed, power and hatred.

WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds at freefall rate, pteridine. You have FAILED to explain why. NIST failed to explain why. The corrupt system brushed it aside and ignored it. For now, the arseholes win, despite some of us knowing that they've cheated.

Originally posted by pteridine
I don't see any "2.5 Seconds of Pure Gravitational Plotting" headlines that demand answers.

That's because it's a 2.25 second freefall acceleration.

Then you told me that I had FAILED because I didn't have a better explanation for the collapse than NIST.

That's right. Despite all of your interjections and off topic points in this thread, you have not been able to explain why WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds with freefall acceleration.

The rest of your banter has mostly been to detract from this anomaly, smoke and mirrors to convince people that there's nothing worth questioning.

Originally posted by tezzajw
That's because it's a 2.25 second freefall acceleration.

Ok, I don't see any "2.25 Seconds of Pure Gravitational Plotting" headlines that demand answers. Most of the world no longer cares how many seconds of freefall it was or if it was freefall at all. The building was struck by pieces of the towers, burned for hours, and fell down. The world has moved on, like it or not.

Despite all of your interjections and off topic points in this thread, you have not been able to explain why WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds with freefall acceleration.
The rest of your banter has mostly been to detract from this anomaly, smoke and mirrors to convince people that there's nothing worth questioning.

I guess that since you deem it to be so, I must be in charge of explaining things to your satisfaction. My banter has been to say that given the lack of evidence for anything else, the damage and fires must have caused the collapse. Gravity had a hand in it, too. You are not satisfied with this and want names and numbers of failed joints and why things did what they did. This certainty does not often happen in the real world and it won't happen here. You will eventually discover this at your own pace.

For someone who claims to be a thinker and is worried about the freefall, you might consider postulating a hypothesis of your own. You could prove NIST wrong with a little work.

Originally posted by pteridine
For someone who claims to be a thinker and is worried about the freefall, you might consider postulating a hypothesis of your own. You could prove NIST wrong with a little work.

It appears, that you fundamentally don't understand the point of this thread, pteridine.

I don't need to post an alternate hypothesis.

This thread is discussing the anomaly presented in NIST's hypothesis.

This thread has proven how NIST has not substantiated its own hypothesis by neglecting to explain the 2.25 seconds of freefall acceleration in WTC 7, while it was collapsing.

Originally posted by tezzajw
It appears, that you fundamentally don't understand the point of this thread, pteridine.

I don't need to post an alternate hypothesis.

This thread is discussing the anomaly presented in NIST's hypothesis.

This thread has proven how NIST has not substantiated its own hypothesis by neglecting to explain the 2.25 seconds of freefall acceleration in WTC 7, while it was collapsing.

The explanation was catastrophic failure. Most of the world doesn't care about the freefall segment and nothing more will be done about it.