WTC 2 Collapse showing outward blasts from Machinery & Equipment rooms

This is a short clip of the South tower collapsing filmed from behind Trinity church. Note the dark horizontal band around the building, this is the 41/42nd floor which housed no office space only machinery room & equipment levels, there were 6 such floors on N & S buildings (7/8, 41/42 & 75/76). If you watch the clip over and over again you will see the outward blast debris and hear the delayed explosion (delay is due to distance from the tower) as the building collapses at Floors 41/42. IMO this is one of the most important video clips which point towards a controlled demolition using explosives.

It is only 4 seconds long so run it in a loop and watch it a dozen times or so, I think you will agree it is quite compelling evidence.

media.abovetopsecret.com...

if the link doesnt work, try this one:

www.youtube.com...

PEACE,
RK



[edit on 14-2-2010 by Rigel Kent]

Originally posted by Rigel Kent
If you watch the clip over and over again you will see the outward blast debris

Yes, and where are all the air conditioning ducts connected to?

All you are seeing is debris blown out by air pressure caused by the collapsing building

9.11 conspiracy is how I got into conspiracy stuff.

reply to post by Rigel Kent


You put a period at the end of the link which is why it did not work.



Yes both towers were most definitely exploded from the massive cores (a building within a building) outward in all directions in a top-down explosive demolition.

This 9-11 WTC victim's family member would agree.

C.S.I. 9/11

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/870606a20bd4.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/12aad2082430.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Rigel Kent
If you watch the clip over and over again you will see the outward blast debris

Yes, and where are all the air conditioning ducts connected to?

All you are seeing is debris blown out by air pressure caused by the collapsing building

Dereks,
What on earth do HVAC ducts have to do with this? Are you suggesting that all of this concrete dust is being blown through HVAC ducting by air pressure?

I know what I am seeing.... it is 100's of Tonnes of PULVERIZED concrete on each floor being blown 100 feet horizontally by explosive charges.

If you study the grey horizontal band around the building at floors 41/42 you will see much bigger outward blasts on these floors, care to explain why that may be?

Air pressure and collapsing steel framed buildings do not PULVERIZE concrete, HIGH EXPLOSIVES do

PEACE,
RK

Originally posted by Rigel Kent
it is 100's of Tonnes of PULVERIZED concrete on each floor being blown 100 feet horizontally by explosive charges.

Wrong, you are not seeing that at all. There is zero evidence any explosives were used.

Air pressure and collapsing steel framed buildings do not PULVERIZE concrete, HIGH EXPLOSIVES do

Except that it would require hundreds of tonnes of explosives to do that.... however the KE of the building is enough to do it. Just where do you think the energy of the collapsing building goes?

reply to post by SPreston


Thanks for pointing that out, my original you tube link should work now. Thanks for embedding it for me also

This short clip needs to be watched a few times in quick succession for the audio visual info to really sink in.

PEACE,
RK

reply to post by dereks


Consider the meaning of the word PULVERIZED. I am seeing 100's of tonnes of concrete per floor being pulverized.

Please can you post your calculations to show:

1 Why hundreds of tonnes of explosives would be required to do this.
2 That the KE of the falling building is sufficient to do this.

PEACE,
RK

reply to post by Rigel Kent

Please can you post your calculations to show:

1 That the KE of the falling building is sufficient to do this.

Link to paper

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Whyhi]

reply to post by Rigel Kent


You are also forgetting that there were tons of drywall there too. Much easier to crush.

To have explosives to be able to completely pulverize the concrete, you would need MEGA tons of explosives spread out over every single floor. Acres of the floors would need tons and tons of explosives packed everywhere to do that. And THAT would have been impossible. Also the resulting blasts would have deafened people MILES away with hat kind of explosive force and shattered windows ALL OVER Lower Manhattan.

reply to post by Whyhi


Whyhi,
Good try,
That paper was presented by the NIST Charlatan "Greening" and he obviously tried to make it over technical so that your general MOP and most of the Govt would not understand it. He did a good job too, but he has since been found out by his peers.

He was soon brought to task over that and many other of the reports findings. He has been proven to be a liar.

Professor David Chandler tore holes in Greenings physics behind the collapse, during a discussion (albeit about WTC 1) between the two, here is what YOUR MAN GREENING had to say....

FG:
The collapse of WTC 1 is best studied by considering how potential energy was converted to kinetic energy and dissipated at the crush front and subsequently within the steadily growing debris/rubble layer. This debris layer was not only a sink for potential energy, but a source of
random fluctuations in the motions of the individual debris particles. These fluctuations cannot exert a net resultant force against the downward motion of the upper block but rather serve to control the gravitational work rate. In fact, if this type of collapse should attain a state of dynamic equilibrium, there will be a balance between the production of fluctuation energy
at the crush front and the conversion of this energy to heat within the debris layer through the dissipating effects of many random collisions of debris particles. It is considerations such as these that help to quantify the complexities of the WTC 1 collapse, not naïve applications of
Newton’s 3rd Law of motion.

I understand fully what he is saying here and I suggest he is talking utter CRAP.

Here is Professor Chandlers reply:

You are engaging in pseudo academic obfuscation. In my video I have made the argument that the constant acceleration of the top section of the building implies that the resistive force is much less than the weight of the falling block. If I’m wrong, show me how. You seem to be hoping non-technical readers will assume what you have said is profound. It is not profound. It is incoherent.

Unsuspecting readers may not understand the significance of your last line. They should be informed that the reason you view the application of Newton’s 3rd Law of motion as naïve, is because, as you have clearly and repeatedly stated in both private correspondence and public
forums, that you believe Newton’s 3rd Law does not apply to falling buildings. That, of course, is utter nonsense. Your entire letter needs to be read and understood in the light of this concluding statement. Your argument is not with me; it is with Isaac Newton.

I agree totally.

PEACE,
RK

I found these videos interesting.

reply to post by Kratos1220


Good thing the 9-11 perps included destroy as much evidence as possible in their planning.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/edf353238801.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ce6879eec4a1.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/86ec96582d5b.jpg[/atsimg]