It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How to Collapse Without Explosives

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by BAZ752
 




I'm not questioning your credentials here, but if you were a professional, you wouldn't be here fervently defending a point that you cannot yet prove yourself. Anyone professional in our industry would know that it is prudent that one accepts all possibilities in the likelihood that unknowns can occur at any given time.

It is very possible that the spurs (exloded debris) were caused by purposefully placed explosive devices. It is also perfectly plausible that the spurs were generated by compressed air. Let us not forget that the draw of air within the building would also have reached enormous pressure prior to the floors above collapsing too, just by the heat build up alone, so you must not rule out that the force (mass) of the above floor levels collapsing did not cause displacement of said pressure via huge spurs and 'blow outs' at certain (albeit erractic) locations on the building.

As someone very correctly suggested earlier (apologies for not quoting you) the pressure would 'release' via the path of least resistance. This is also very plausible, and you must at the very least try to recognise that.


I am not an engineer, professional or otherwise. I do have a question; which I hope the professional engineers on this board won't find inane.

If it were pressure generated by compressed air, caused by the enormous pressure of the above floors collapsing; wouldn't the pressure take time to build?

What I'm saying is: Wouldn't the building have taken more time to fall?

If I can reword my question one more time, it would be: Wouldn't the explosions from the separate floors (given that there were charges detonated) actually lower the pressure between floors, thereby speeding up the fall of the floors, explaining the "free fall" speed of The Towers collapse?




posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by BAZ752
 




I'm not questioning your credentials here, but if you were a professional, you wouldn't be here fervently defending a point that you cannot yet prove yourself. Anyone professional in our industry would know that it is prudent that one accepts all possibilities in the likelihood that unknowns can occur at any given time.

It is very possible that the spurs (exloded debris) were caused by purposefully placed explosive devices. It is also perfectly plausible that the spurs were generated by compressed air. Let us not forget that the draw of air within the building would also have reached enormous pressure prior to the floors above collapsing too, just by the heat build up alone, so you must not rule out that the force (mass) of the above floor levels collapsing did not cause displacement of said pressure via huge spurs and 'blow outs' at certain (albeit erractic) locations on the building.

As someone very correctly suggested earlier (apologies for not quoting you) the pressure would 'release' via the path of least resistance. This is also very plausible, and you must at the very least try to recognise that.


I am not an engineer, professional or otherwise. I do have a question; which I hope the professional engineers on this board won't find inane.

If it were pressure generated by compressed air, caused by the enormous pressure of the above floors collapsing; wouldn't the pressure take time to build?

What I'm saying is: Wouldn't the building have taken more time to fall?

If I can reword my question one more time, it would be: Wouldn't the explosions from the separate floors (given that there were charges detonated) actually lower the pressure between floors, thereby speeding up the fall of the floors, explaining the "free fall" speed of The Towers collapse?


You would literally have to have a vacuum big enough and wide enough to envelop the entire serfice area of the towers. This would have been VERY noticable, as all the debris on the OUTSIDE would have been sucked INSIDE. If it were to be done with explosives, the boom that it would create would have been heard in Florida. (slight exaggeration, but you get the point)



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 


I don't think so; as an explosion originating at the support structure would necessarily push (blast) outward, causing a resistance to the inrush of air or anything else.
Then as the air would be "eaten" by the explosion/fire, the vacuum would be created, and then filled by the collapsing floors above, as well as any air which could re-fill the area of the explosion.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by FDNY343
 


I don't think so; as an explosion originating at the support structure would necessarily push (blast) outward, causing a resistance to the inrush of air or anything else.
Then as the air would be "eaten" by the explosion/fire, the vacuum would be created, and then filled by the collapsing floors above, as well as any air which could re-fill the area of the explosion.



Alright, I see what you're getting at. Gotcha. I don't see why this would be needed though. To make the building fall FASTER? I am slightly confused.

Also, would you mind also explaining how this would be done without someone noticing beforehand?

Thanks.

Cheers!!



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 


I think the speed was necessary for a believable collapse. No one would have believed it if it fell one floor at a time, allowing time for the mass of the building to break every support, especially those not weakened by heat. Consider that there would also be a sound each time a floor collapsed; and the explosions needed to happen as a cohesive whole of a sound, and not a series of explosions, masked by the noise of the falling building.

Then you need to remember "Shock and Awe", or "the Doctrine of rapid dominance".


Rapid dominance is defined by its authors, Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade, as attempting "to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fit or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe."
Further, rapid dominance will impose this overwhelming level of Shock and Awe against an adversary on an immediate or sufficiently timely basis to paralyze its will to carry on . . . [to] seize control of the environment and paralyze or so overload an adversary's perceptions and understanding of events that the enemy would be incapable of resistance at the tactical and strategic levels


Your second question, as to how the explosives were brought in and planted:
In my own experience in security for a large casino for a time, I was chosen for a few different construction projects within the building.
The security detail is only concerned with what is being removed from the building, not what is brought in.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by FDNY343
 


Your second question, as to how the explosives were brought in and planted:
In my own experience in security for a large casino for a time, I was chosen for a few different construction projects within the building.
The security detail is only concerned with what is being removed from the building, not what is brought in.


Is that why there were sniffer dogs at the WTC ?



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Dogdish
 


I think it's safe to point out that even though it was somewhat of a pancake collapse, it was not quite so uniform as to create a vacuum on every floor. Debris is not very courteous, and therefor, it won't stop and wait for the other debris to finish piling before busting holes and finding ways to overcome its next collision. There would have been air pockets trapped by the collective debris that could have easily built up pressure, and then all it takes is one cracked window to allow a release. In fact, the fact that spurs occurred shooting debris below the visible collapse indicates that the tower was destroying itself more internally before the forces pushed apart the exterior. Most of this is based on my attempts to visualize what was happening in the tower during collapse (for whatever reason, I can develop very detailed three-dimensional scenarios in my mind. I'm told this is rare, so it's good to point out for people who might think I'm doing something else).
edit on 13-2-2011 by Varemia because: typo



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by FDNY343
 


I think the speed was necessary for a believable collapse. No one would have believed it if it fell one floor at a time, allowing time for the mass of the building to break every support, especially those not weakened by heat. Consider that there would also be a sound each time a floor collapsed; and the explosions needed to happen as a cohesive whole of a sound, and not a series of explosions, masked by the noise of the falling building.


The sound of a collapsing building would have been in the range of 90-110 db. Explosions capable of creating a big enough vacuum would have been MUCH louder than that. I am guessing somewhere in the 140+ db range.

110 db is NOT going to cover up any sound at 140 db. Ever.


Originally posted by Dogdish
Then you need to remember "Shock and Awe", or "the Doctrine of rapid dominance".


Rapid dominance is defined by its authors, Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade, as attempting "to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fit or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe."
Further, rapid dominance will impose this overwhelming level of Shock and Awe against an adversary on an immediate or sufficiently timely basis to paralyze its will to carry on . . . [to] seize control of the environment and paralyze or so overload an adversary's perceptions and understanding of events that the enemy would be incapable of resistance at the tactical and strategic levels



What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?


Originally posted by Dogdish
Your second question, as to how the explosives were brought in and planted:
In my own experience in security for a large casino for a time, I was chosen for a few different construction projects within the building.
The security detail is only concerned with what is being removed from the building, not what is brought in.


Maybe to a casino, but not in a place that was the target of a terrorist attack in 1993. They had full time bomb sniffing dogs in and around the WTC before and after 9/11.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Exactly. Why then was the collapse so uniform?
Instead of the debris collecting (and collapsing) in what should become one side or the other of the "falling" building and creating a more 'lopsided' fall, we see a straight fall, floor by floor, except for the few large pieces which tip and fall to the side, as would be expected as the falling debris encountered resistance.

In this video posted by NewAgeMan we see an example of the two extremes; steel girders being shot out the side of the collapse, and the building falling in a straight down in an unimpeded collapse. In my mind, the building falling on itself cannot create the uniform collapse, all the way to the ground. The only explanation I can conceive is explosives clearing the support structure in a uniform, and planned, IMplosion.


Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Precisely, it's self evident, plus these were steel structured buildings, and, the impact floors were not in the center.



Nothing absent the use of explosives can explain the actual phenomenon of destruction, which occured to within a mere few seconds of the time of absolute free fall for any freely dropped object, from the height of the TT's.


The dogs, I think, were only there to find people, not explosives.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Dogdish
 


The dog who died at the WTC on 9/11, Sirius, was described as a "bomb sniffer" :-

thedailybugblog.com...

Why would you need dogs to find people at the WTC ?



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

The sound of a collapsing building would have been in the range of 90-110 db. Explosions capable of creating a big enough vacuum would have been MUCH louder than that. I am guessing somewhere in the 140+ db range.

110 db is NOT going to cover up any sound at 140 db. Ever.


People heard the explosions.


What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?


"to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fit or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe."

- the 'adversary' being us, therefore molding our response.


Maybe to a casino, but not in a place that was the target of a terrorist attack in 1993. They had full time bomb sniffing dogs in and around the WTC before and after 9/11.


I have doubts as to the efficacy of dogs after eight years of routine 'sniffing', if in fact there were bomb sniffing dogs.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I guessed you meant the dogs probing the wreckage, not the one dog killed in it.


A police dog, Port Authority bomb sniffer and faithful partner of Officer David Lim. Sirius had no way of sniffing out the fact that the bombs would actually be planes filled with innocent passengers, carrying the deadly bacteria of Jihad. Lim managed to get out of the World Trade Center in time. Sirius did not.


There were many victims of the explosions. I can't explain why any of them were there. For all I know, "Sirius" already found the bombs.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish

The dogs, I think, were only there to find people, not explosives.


Some, yes. Some were trained to detect both. FEMA and USR (Urban Search and Rescue) brought their own dogs to the site to search for remains. NYPD, FBI, etc, had dogs there that were tained to detect explosives.

See here.
docs.google.com...

Dogs name is Lono Kai.

This guy (McGee) has trained dogs that have been employed worldwide. Including working for FEMA and the BATF. (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms)



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
People heard the explosions.


During the collapses? Where? Citation needed.


Originally posted by Dogdish
"to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fit or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe."

- the 'adversary' being us, therefore molding our response.


Ok.


Originally posted by Dogdish
I have doubts as to the efficacy of dogs after eight years of routine 'sniffing', if in fact there were bomb sniffing dogs.


See here.
docs.google.com...

Some of those dogs that he talks about were in service for many years.

Do you think that after 9 years, or however long, that the dogs' sniffers stop working? Does yours?

That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by Varemia
 


Exactly. Why then was the collapse so uniform?
Instead of the debris collecting (and collapsing) in what should become one side or the other of the "falling" building and creating a more 'lopsided' fall, we see a straight fall, floor by floor, except for the few large pieces which tip and fall to the side, as would be expected as the falling debris encountered resistance.


I imagine that the exterior appearance of a uniform collapse is because of the design of the exterior of the towers. They had large steel panels pieced together, which would naturally fall away once the interior becomes destroyed, because there is no longer support holding them up. They would fall away only as the supports are completely destroyed by the interior collapse, and as such they make it seem as if the collapse is uniform, when on the inside it could be anything but.



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
So, you're still talking about dogs that were brought in after the fact.
Were these dogs looking for unexploded ordinance? What would be the purpose of that?


Originally posted by Dogdish
People heard the explosions.



Originally posted by FDNY343
During the collapses? Where? Citation needed.


911 Firefighters WTC - Confirm Bombs

"When I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, ... I saw low-level flashes ... I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down ... You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw."
- NYFD Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory
“It was like a professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."
- NYC Paramedic Daniel Rivera
"It was as if as if they had detonated ... as if they had planned to take down a building, boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom "
- NYFD Captain Dennis Tardio


Many more at the link., but this stands out:

"Somewhere around the middle . . . there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode ... With each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building"
- NYFD Captain Karin Deshore


and Police and Firemen Report What Really Happened...

"[T]here was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions." --Firefighter Richard Banaciski


I Googled "firemen heard explosions during collapse".



Some of those dogs that he talks about were in service for many years.

Do you think that after 9 years, or however long, that the dogs' sniffers stop working? Does yours?

That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.


What was their schedule? How often did they do a complete sweep? Did they actually sniff every entrant of the complex? When and how did the dogs change shifts? How many dogs patrolled the complex?

Yeah, I think that after 9 years there is a lax attitude that creeps into a daily routine. I also think that if 'someone' didn't want to let their people be sniffed, they wouldn't be.


reply to post by Varemia
 




I imagine that the exterior appearance of a uniform collapse is because of the design of the exterior of the towers. They had large steel panels pieced together, which would naturally fall away once the interior becomes destroyed, because there is no longer support holding them up. They would fall away only as the supports are completely destroyed by the interior collapse, and as such they make it seem as if the collapse is uniform, when on the inside it could be anything but.


Well, as I said, I'm no engineer...



posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish

So, you're still talking about dogs that were brought in after the fact.
Were these dogs looking for unexploded ordinance? What would be the purpose of that?


Originally posted by Dogdish
People heard the explosions.



Originally posted by FDNY343
During the collapses? Where? Citation needed.


911 Firefighters WTC - Confirm Bombs

"When I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, ... I saw low-level flashes ... I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down ... You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw."
- NYFD Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory
“It was like a professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."
- NYC Paramedic Daniel Rivera
"It was as if as if they had detonated ... as if they had planned to take down a building, boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom "
- NYFD Captain Dennis Tardio



You might want to read some of the original testimony. It doesn't say what the quotemined crap you posted says.

Here is FDNY Asst. Commissioner Stephen Gregory's testimony.
graphics8.nytimes.com...

The rest can be found here.

graphics8.nytimes.com...



Originally posted by Dogdish
Many more at the link., but this stands out:

"Somewhere around the middle . . . there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode ... With each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building"
- NYFD Captain Karin Deshore



You need to read her testimony too.



Originally posted by Dogdish
and Police and Firemen Report What Really Happened...

"[T]here was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions." --Firefighter Richard Banaciski


I Googled "firemen heard explosions during collapse".


Wonderful. Go read the ENTIRE testimonies that I have linked to. Resist the urge to quotemine them.



Originally posted by Dogdish

What was their schedule?


24/7/365


Originally posted by Dogdish
How often did they do a complete sweep?


Of what? The entire structure? It wouldn't be needed. They inspect all incoming persons. ALL.


Originally posted by Dogdish
Did they actually sniff every entrant of the complex?


Yes.


Originally posted by Dogdish
When and how did the dogs change shifts?


I would imagine after 4 hours, or 8 hours. I don't know honestly.


Originally posted by Dogdish
How many dogs patrolled the complex?


IIRC, there were 8 that worked the complex. Again, I am not certain on that though.


Originally posted by Dogdish
Yeah, I think that after 9 years there is a lax attitude that creeps into a daily routine.

Not for dogs. It's a game for them. It's like playing. They arededicated to their "work" more so than most humans. But, it's a game for them.



Originally posted by Dogdish
I also think that if 'someone' didn't want to let their people be sniffed, they wouldn't be.


They wouldn't be allowed entrance into the building. That is just the way it worked.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


We all know how real demolitions are done months of work an usually first expolsives detonated are near the base and work up not like YOUR claimed puffs ahead of the floors as they collapse!!!!!!!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


New Eyewitness to WTC Basement Level Explosions


Saltalamacia describes "grenade" like bombs, backs up William Rodriguez' story, numerous others that were ignored by 9/11 Commission




We all know how real demolitions are done months of work an usually first expolsives detonated are near the base and work up not like YOUR claimed puffs ahead of the floors as they collapse!!!!!!!



Saltalamacchia was in sub-basement B1 of the North Tower, approximately 1,100 feet below the airplane's impact point at floors 93 to 98.

In the the following You Tube video, Saltalamacia discusses what he witnessed on 9/11. The account backs up the events previously described by William Rodriguez.



"The explosion....at first we believe it came from the mechanical room and then we heard a series of other explosions that sounded up on the above levels of the building," said Saltalamacia.


"at least 10 explosions."


The 9/11 Commission completely ignored the hundreds of survivors, professionals, first responders, firefighters and police who reported numerous secondary explosions at all levels of the twin towers.

In his video interview, Saltalamacia concluded by dismissing the official story of 9/11 as a "cover-up" and urged a proper investigation to find out the truth behind what he and others witnessed that day.



Here's an ATS thread on the man in the above video, Kenny Johannemann.

Key Eyewitness "Commits Suicide"

Nice. You just keep protecting them.
edit on 15-2-2011 by Dogdish because: Kenny Johannemann



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Dogdish
 


What I don't really get is why were there basement level explosions?

I mean if the whole thing was wired already from top to bottom and predetermined to be blown from top to bottom why have explosions in the basements at all? (I'm not discounting the basement witnesses just asking a simple question - why?)

If the trusses "sagged" and pulled the exterior in how come it ALL appears to be blowing out?

And no material 'entering' the interior at all?

Have a look again at the half built tower steel image. How much of each floor was even floor? Half? There's a pretty sizeable central square of vertical steel, around that to the edge are 'floors' etc. Those floors were not whole sheets but square-donut shaped. But when all was said and done there was no central core left in either tower. How is this even possible if the 'floors' were not whole floors and trusses out of weight would necessarily shear away before making the cental core completely disappear!

I am not an engineer but still I am wondering how sagging trusses could have the strength to pull anything IN. And if that's the case and they collapsed then why didn't they shear away from all around the cental core on the way down, leaving way more vertical steel standing, indeed even most of it etc.

I'm confused because there is talk of bolts shearing etc. So like why didn't they (the trusses) shear from both the exterior wall mesh and interior central columns if everything was "pancaking" or even the newer, "collapsing"?

I looked at the videos and didn't see any pancaking or collapsing really, and I wonder about the sagging and lack of shearing.

I did see plenty of disintegrating and destruction in the videos though.

Can someone, anyone, show me a video, from all the many vids of one 'floor' "collapsing" on another floor, anyone? I mean one where this is clearly seen through all that apparent exploding.

Or like because you can't see one floor collapse on another anywhere are you just assuming (perhaps due to gravity) that this is indeed what is happening?

Did anyone see one floor 'collapse' on to another floor in the twin towers? Really?

And where is all that core? Vertical core is going to "collapse" straight down? Why didn't the core punch through the roof?

Let's say I go to the woods with an ax, and begin to chop a tree down from one side, I go right to the middle more or less hacking away, and then much to my surprise the tree falls completely down - vertically!


I'm not a lumberjack but I can't really see that.

Cheers



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join