WTC 2 - South Tower Explosions Visible - Extreme Slow Motion

page: 2
56
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   
S & F.

If this is the nail in the coffin, what happens next?




posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   
There is no way possible, scientific or otherwise that it could be "collasping ahead of the main debris" because in the floors below there was no fire to weaken the metal. So how can the lower building floors collaspe ahead of the main above it? The floors below were for all intents & purposes, were in good condition up to the moment the top portion of the towers crashed down on them.

Unless of course the lower floors had demolitions attached to them.

[edit on 3/28/2010 by mikelee]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Theres no way they were bombs, if you wat at 3:40 second mark and on you'll see the those white flashes in the sky and in front of the 2nd building. Its just video glitches, or poor video editing to make it look like something else.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by rush969
 


I just have a question for you.

1. How many people in that building would know what a Termite charge would look like?

2. How many common people would on daily bases look around for termite charges within the buildings structures?

3. How can people observe charges if they are hidden behind walls?



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


How after watching that video can you argue against what any sane individual can see is multiple explosions. This is 100% proof of explosions to anyone with an open mind and no agenda. The sun doesnt penetrate dust clouds and what is clearly visible is hundreds of white flashes protruding from the building. Its over the proof is there for all to see, you only have to open your eyes and mind to see it.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


What you are seeing is the internal collapses ahead of the main debris
wave - as the section above collapses it slams in the floor below overloading it and causing it to collapse.


so...your saying that...the demolition wave was moving FASTER than the natural free fall of debris...


good...finally after all the shilly posting you do...it's finally sinking in

the vid also shows how, the impact floor and ALL below it, remained stationary while the section above disintegrated into it for about 5 -10 floors..with all the debris falling off the building...how is it possible for the "intense 'JOLT' ", that IS the reason for the towers being pushed down...according to the NIST *HYPOTHESIS* anyway



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


First off if the sun is on the other side of the tower how can it reflect off the window? I very much doubt that was a window! if that was the case all those flashes should have been windows because they are all identical.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
There is no way possible, scientific or otherwise that it could be "collasping ahead of the main debris" because in the floors below there was no fire to weaken the metal. So how can the lower building floors collaspe ahead of the main above it? The floors below were for all intents & purposes, were in good condition up to the moment the top portion of the towers crashed down on them.



Well the only way that the building could do that is if the Top Part had a much higher mass then the structure below.And the top part would have had to stay intact all the way to the bottom. If not the top part pushing on the bottom part would reduce speed and stop or fall to one side. The video clearly show that the top part of the building turns into dust rather quickly.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   
From the video, the top portion of the building above the crash zone, disintegrates before the bottom section begins to collapse.
By the time it reaches the bottom of the crash zone it's basically dust and debris.

I just have one question, at that point any wires to explosives would have been severed. What ever was used it didn't involved traditional wire and explosives.

The technology to do this must have used some type of remote receiving devices capable of traveling through concrete and heavy debris.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I don't think that video is proof of anything at all.

I don't believe in the OS but that video is definitely not 100% proof of anything. It shows flashes of light, that's all it shows. Flashes of light can come from anywhere. As one poster mentioned, it could have come from flying glass shards that just happened to make it out of the shadow.

If there were explosions, this video is just too unclear to prove them. This reminds me of light's in the night sky that are so obviously aliens, but the damn video is so blurry that you are just unable to believe it.

I'm sorry folks, I see flashes of light, but I don't see proof of explosions anywhere in that video.

Again, I don't believe the official story at all, but give me something I can believe in. This is definitely not it.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
You see the Flashes but they are all over the place not just on the building. some are in the sky and on the other building.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


My opinion is that the top part would need to be heavier to cause a collapse of the lower floors. Otherwise the lighter top section should have fell past the lower sections and left much of the lower section of the towers somewhat intact albeit damaged but still intact. I still have an issue with the inner steel core just vanishing the way it did. The inner structure of the towers by all accounts of those who designed it and built it should have remained intact in addition to providing support to those floors from falling.

I have watched every piece of building demolition I can find on the internet and at the 6 library's in my town and no where do they show the concrete turning to dust nor the manner of building collapse like we see in NYC. The WTC Towers collapse was suspicious in it's very nature as well as the total destruction of the towers also. Take care- Mike



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stickerr
Theres no way they were bombs, if you wat at 3:40 second mark and on you'll see the those white flashes in the sky and in front of the 2nd building. Its just video glitches, or poor video editing to make it look like something else.


lol...yup...that's it..and everyone is entitled to an opinion

and it is ...'opinion' that is the base for NO EVIDENCE of explosives or accelerants...NO actual testing was involved...if YOU disagree...just post the testing results that were performed

so...you opened a brand new account just to post...here...are you part of the 'obamma' crew that is going to these sites to LIE?

here is a little hint...any flashes you see are just a bonus on the hypothesis that this is a CD...for...all anyone has to do is to look, to see this is not a natural GRAVITATIONAL event

so...either your 14 and are just displaying ignorance from not knowing about life...or this is your job



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by rush969

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE NANO-THERMITE WAS USED

However, the size and type of charge used is what has become clear to me from this. There were numerous small explosive charges used. There was not huge massive piles of explosives as some have suggested.

Absolutely, nano-thermite explosives were used.


Excuse me but I thought nano-thermite was not in the form of an explosive charge carrying a detonator.
If I understand correctly, nano-thermite will ignite and go off if exposed to high temp. fire or an explosion. No need for a detonator.
Am I correct here??


Technically speaking, thermite (or thermate if enhanced with sulphur) doesn't really explode. It burns like crazy (>1500C) which is, as opposed to jet fuel, hot enough to turn steel molten. It takes heat, and quite a lot of it, to initiate the chemical reaction. A detonator would work, as would a thermic fuse, a ribbon of magnesium or a seperate exothermic chemical reaction. I use potassium permanganate and glycerin for my demos to students. It generates quite enough heat to ignite the rust Fe2O3 and aluninum powder. Now, if the molten metal were to fall onto or come into contact with water, a steam explosion would probably ensue.
The energy released from a thermite reaction is impressive - on the order of 850 KJ/mole. Methane gas, for comparison is about 30 KJ/mole less. The energy needed to cause a phase change from solid to liquid(heat of fusion) in steel is about 272,000 joules per kilogram. The formula used to determine the mass of steel cut away or melted per gram of thermite is y = 7E-07x2 - 0.004x + 6.5597. See www.journalof911studies.com...
As a result of all this, I would be more confident is saying that thermate was used, rather than thermite.





[edit on 28-3-2010 by 4nsicphd]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Semus
I don't think that video is proof of anything at all.

I don't believe in the OS but that video is definitely not 100% proof of anything. It shows flashes of light, that's all it shows. Flashes of light can come from anywhere. As one poster mentioned, it could have come from flying glass shards that just happened to make it out of the shadow.

If there were explosions, this video is just too unclear to prove them. This reminds me of light's in the night sky that are so obviously aliens, but the damn video is so blurry that you are just unable to believe it.

I'm sorry folks, I see flashes of light, but I don't see proof of explosions anywhere in that video.

Again, I don't believe the official story at all, but give me something I can believe in. This is definitely not it.


Using the NIST "worst scenario", as to how many columns were affected on the impact floors...there are still 260+ vertical steel support on the impact floors...260 with only 2 with evidence of near 600C..the rest averaged at 450F...just like your oven on Thanksgiving day...

and all NIST did, was to ACKNOWLEDGE the video of the collapse itself, to EXPLAIN the collapse itself...as if it's expected

[NCSTAR 1-6, pp. 416, 238, 196] “Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos.”...“The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that through energy of deformation.”

Bazant said, "when the top part fell and struck the stories beneath it, there had to be a powerful jolt."

Bazant was off by a factor of ten in his calculation of the stiffness of the columns, with his 71 GN/m estimate, This error overestimate the potential amplifying effect of the jolt he claims occurred...
the actual column cross sections, is approximately 7.1 GN/m.

Source



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by spy66
 


My opinion is that the top part would need to be heavier to cause a collapse of the lower floors. Otherwise the lighter top section should have fell past the lower sections and left much of the lower section of the towers somewhat intact albeit damaged but still intact. I still have an issue with the inner steel core just vanishing the way it did. The inner structure of the towers by all accounts of those who designed it and built it should have remained intact in addition to providing support to those floors from falling.

I have watched every piece of building demolition I can find on the internet and at the 6 library's in my town and no where do they show the concrete turning to dust nor the manner of building collapse like we see in NYC. The WTC Towers collapse was suspicious in it's very nature as well as the total destruction of the towers also. Take care- Mike



Well i have seen concrete being pulverized by explosives. In the Army we practiced how to breach different types of bunkers, But still after clearing the concrete with a shaped charge, We had to cut away the steal bars (steal netting) used for binding the concrete. The steal bars were always intact. They were hardly ever bent by the shaped charge.

I dont think the tween towers were brought down with explosives alone. It must have been done with a combination of shaped explosives and shaped termite. Much in the same way we use the combination of shaped explosives and termite to breach hatches on a U-Boat. On a U-Boat a shaped charge alone does not give enough force to fracture the steal bars that locks the hatch in place.
We never use charges to blow the the hatch in wards, We use a combination of explosives and termite to cut away the steal bars that keep the hatch locked.

On the tween towers they must have used shaped explosives to clear the steal callum's of concrete so that the shaped termite charge could weakened the steal structures. Because small shaped explosives around these large structures would never have had the energy to weakened them. If so it would have taken tons of it to do the job. I dont think they used that much, only enough to clear the beams isolation so that the termite could do its work. These small shaped charges would not make that much noise. Even less recognisable noise if done in sequence. It would sound like a loud cracking noise.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Well you certainly have more experience with explosives than I do for sure. Mine is limited to blasting caps & dynamite on my farm. Good insight you provide also.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


This debate will never be resolved. 9 /11 events strange as they seem can never be executed by human hand or intelligence alone.
Why has no one questioned about an alien hand.
Planes made of aluminium alloy slice the buildings asif they were made of butter.
Folks you are all barking up the wrong tree. Trust me Im both a Pilot and an engineer.

Cheers



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by savvys84
 


Your opinion is most welcomed here but please refrain from coming into these threads and stating that people are wrong only because they do not believe as you do.

This begs me to ask for your hypothesis regarding the alien connection.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


In the Army, you most likely used thermite and not nano-thermite. Nano-thermite is explosive as nanoenergetic materials can store larger amounts of energy than conventional energetic materials and can be used in innovative ways to apply the release of this energy.

I too used thermite in the army, usually to breach armor pieces and tanks for intel among other things. This thermite is very different from nano-thermite. Thermite and Nano-thermite have far different reactive properties. For instance, thermite releases it's smaller amount of energy slowly while the nano-thermite can be applied to release greater amounts of energy, much quicker.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by airspoon]





top topics
 
56
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join