WTC 7's compartmented demolition collapse sequence reveals human intervention.

reply to post by Varemia

So, in conclusion to this post, I would like to request that the OP respond with elaboration on the seismic graphs and activity, carefully explaining how exactly they reflect the demolitions he says they do.

Aha, another one who does not read links. Or has a disabled or limp mouse. Or does not understand the info offered. Or got just out of bed, pick your fit.

Search this site using the terms "LaBTop" "seismic" and thou shall be served with hundreds of my posts regarding this subject.
Or just go back and read my seismic links, which you seem to have all skipped.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
LaBTop : I challenge NIST Answers to FAQ - Supplement (December 14, 2007), page 1.

And in there, you will find another thread about explosives, where the seismic link was extensively covered, with numerous other links to again other seismic posts threads. And lots of debunking efforts, and plain old personal attacks, but up till now, not one succeeded to undermine my WTC 7 seismic thesis.
They never could effectively address my WTC 7 diagram with my remarks in it.

Remember, I told you already where to find all the lost diagrams and pictures from the defunct links in that thread, due to a contemporary defunct web site : In my media profile.

Do your own research also, meanwhile I will proceed with posting much more info, when these Trusters stop derailing my attention.
I have no problem with constructive criticism, though, readers should do this first : reading and absorbing.
And then address the crux of the matter.

And not as Wheedwacker does, nitpicking on indicated by myself, off-topic topics. Which costs me time I can better use to proceed with this threads positive development.

Here is an explanation as to why we are left with the anomaly of WTC 7 falling down even without being hit by a plane. It's 'must ' reading to understand what happened that horrible day.

9/11 Shock Opera… Act 4 – Building 7 and Flight 93: The Grand Finale that Wasn’t
willyloman.wordpress.com...

"Al-Qaida is in fact a CIA front"
--OP

You just tipped your hand. Since your postings are so intellectually above my head, please point out the link that explains how Al-Qaida is in fact a CIA front. Is that why Al-Qaida blew up 8 CIA agents back in December?

Far too many times we claim that organizations are CIA fronts. Could it just be greedy businessmen trying to make a buck? Or extremist trying to send a message? Don't get me wrong, the CIA is a pretty sketchy organization. However, I absolutely doubt the CIA blows up American buildings. I do believe the government is capable of doing a cost benefit analysis on American lives.

reply to post by EndtheFed


"" Scott Creighton (reposted from May 25th 2009)""

Is that the same guy as our local Egypt expert poster, Scott Creighton?

That's the first link I did not ever found and read, which I am doing now.
Will return when finished. Now at 10 % perhaps, and a damn good post already.
Will keep my end conclusion for my next post.

reply to post by LaBTop


Unfortunately, the link to your thesis on the 911 forum is broken, so I can't get the information you posted long ago.

I am earnestly interested in seeing if your evidence holds water, so-to-say. As it is, however, the NIST report remains sound in my eyes. They don't try to bullcrap you, telling you that there are things even "they" couldn't figure out due to the impossibility of determining from the available evidence, and since they had access to highly confidential material (as attested to in the intro to the WTC 7 report), but signed a non-disclosure agreement, the fact that they couldn't draw concrete conclusions just adds credence to their report. If they couldn't, then someone drawing conclusions that are different has the same or less evidence to work off of and is "blowing it all out their arse," so-to-speak.

reply to post by Come Clean


Since when was that an Al-Qaida agent?
He was a genuine Afghan Muslim, acting for a long time already as a trusted interpreter, and gained so much trust, that he could enter that CIA conference room and blew himself and 8 of his enemies up.
That's the thought process of that man, he had nothing to do with the in-stream of foreigners entering Afghanistan acting as Al-Qaida members.
Most Afghans do not want to be associated with Al-Qaida, they know by now that sudden air-strikes are the accompanying risk of contacting these foreigners.
The Taliban are composed of the genuine population of that country. Be it they are somewhat fanatic regarding womens rights and a bunch of other things most of us westerners disagree with.

Btw, why is it that under the Taliban the poppies were eradicated, and now the Afghan poppies are full back again, and delivering to most of the world markets their precious heroin? Has that anything to do with US troops guarding and allowing the northern and eastern warlords poppy fields? And who do you think smuggle that heroin from North Afghanistan through the Silk Route to Turkey, that old friend of the US and since years now, also from the Israelis? And from there the CIA and Mossad as usual will truck it and fly it all over the world, as they were used to do before the Taliban took over. A secure black income source, to pay for both their black-operations worldwide.

Whistle-blower blows the lid on Turkish FBI interpreter colleague.
Sibil Edmond rings a bell perhaps?

You really should read up some older threads here, and all over the Net, my good man.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by LaBTop

 

Unfortunately, the link to your thesis on the 911 forum is broken, so I can't get the information you posted long ago.

LT : you're right, I forgot that. I promise you to repost that whole originally at the StudyOf911 website posted thread in this forum, as soon as I can do that. And find out first how to keep the original formats.Then you have all the text available, and are able to get a grip on it all.

I am earnestly interested in seeing if your evidence holds water, so-to-say. As it is, however, the NIST report remains sound in my eyes. They don't try to bullcrap you, telling you that there are things even "they" couldn't figure out due to the impossibility of determining from the available evidence, and since they had access to highly confidential material (as attested to in the intro to the WTC 7 report), but signed a non-disclosure agreement, the fact that they couldn't draw concrete conclusions just adds credence to their report. If they couldn't, then someone drawing conclusions that are different has the same or less evidence to work off of and is "blowing it all out their arse," so-to-speak.

Well, I posted already in this thread, that all I did, was using THEIR evidence, then linked the NIST provided Cianca photo to the LDEO seismic charts, and proved the whole thing to be a farce at the bare minimum.
Because these US government institutions excluded each other' evidence.

It can only mean that the LDEO seismogram of WTC 7 was false.
And don't you find it absurd that NIST removed all later than 2004 seismic appendixes completely from their site, while all other, not anymore used by them, appendixes, are still stored there.

And their computation of the WTC 7 collapse sequence is a big fat farce, it does not at all resemble all the videos of the real collapse. But they still won't give their calculations for that ridiculous collapse sequence, which data they stretched so far out, until it came somewhat near a global collapse.
But every lay man here can see it's a pile of hogwash.
See bsbray11's post on top of page 5 with that DNA-spiraling-down WTC 7 simulation diagram :



Did the WTC 7 global collapse really looked like this ?
One must be stark delusional to even consider it.

And how are you going to explain those NIST Final Omissions Report its reluctantly admitted 2.25 seconds of true free fall acceleration, found and proved to them by David Chandler, to us?

reply to post by LaBTop


I have seen those diagrams before and they are one of a number of possible simulations for the WTC 7 collapse. If you saw all of them you would find one that does in fact follow the collapse of the actual building.

Please show it to us then.
Thanks in advance.
I hope it's not that ridiculously far fetched diagram, where they upped the temperatures to such a crazy value, that nobody took them serious when used for a natural collapse.

EDIT : This just came to mind :
But in a demolition, those ridiculous high temperatures in case of a natural collapse, will be easily reached at the points where they cut and displaced columns, beams and trusses.

This is the second time, long ago, that I posted extensively about the seismic evidence for WTC 7.
One year earlier also, but I am still searching for that earliest thread.


NIST WTC7 status report, by HowardRoark
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I miss him dearly, just as I dearly miss Wecomeinpeace and Griff.
And a lot of other oldsters.

Read its 7 pages carefully, and then at page 4, Varemia, you will find the first of many of my posts in there, and at least the first few posts are the verbatim text from the first post numbers as posted in that defunct StudyOf911 forum-thread by me. It had 16 very long winded posts by solely myself in it, I have it saved on hard-disk, but I can't quote it to this forum, since I do not have their original BB-code software to simply copy the formatted text and pictures.

-----------------------------------------

Brian, can you send me my original formatted texts in that thread perhaps, via U2U, the diagrams I already have in my ATS media folders. I can't use the Quote button in my saved copy, and thus I must reformat all that text and diagrams for this forum. That will cost me precious amounts of time, which I do not have.

reply to post by Son of Will


When the news reports on areas of our expertise do we see all the flaws in the reporting. So it stands to reason that when they report on issues that aren't in our areas of expertise as readers/listeners, that they are making equally, if not greater, mistakes in those reports as well.

Since when did a journalist know anything about demolitions?

A great post again LaBTop! Star and Flag!!

Originally posted by Come Clean
"Al-Qaida is in fact a CIA front"

--OP

You just tipped your hand. Since your postings are so intellectually above my head, please point out the link that explains how Al-Qaida is in fact a CIA front.

No offense Come Clean, but based your excessive and annoying posts to this thread, I'd say just about everyone is intellectually superior.

I guess you've never heard of The Power of Nightmares, the excellent 3-part BBC documentary where former CIA agents admit that "al-Qaida" is little more than a mythical global bogeyman created by the U.S. government (aka al-CIAduh.) Ever wonder why Osama bin Laden can never be captured or killed? Just another 1984-type Emmanual Goldstein fabrication by Big Brother to fool gullible people and justify perpetual war.

Sorry, but you've been had:

The Power of Nightmares: Baby It's Cold Outside
BBC News
14 January, 2005

In the past our politicians offered us dreams of a better world. Now they promise to protect us from nightmares.

The most frightening of these is the threat of an international terror network. But just as the dreams were not true, neither are these nightmares.

In a new series, the Power of Nightmares explores how the idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organised terrorist network is an illusion.

It is a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media...

news.bbc.co.uk...

The Power of Nightmares Part 1: Baby it's Cold Outside:

Google Video Link

The Power of Nightmares Part 2: The Phantom Victory:

Google Video Link

The Power of Nightmares Part 3: The Shadows in the Cave:

Google Video Link

GoldenFleece, thank you so much for posting those three videos!
They much better tell the story of these runaway agencies, spoiling our good old mother Gea, then we can.

Especially this remark touched me deeply :

""In the past our politicians offered us dreams of a better world. Now they promise to protect us from nightmares.""

I still vividly remembered that period in the nineteen sixties, where we really dreamed of a better world.
Guess who ruined them for us.
Our "beloved liberators" from Amerika. Yes, the K is intentionally.

And you, all my American friends, know why I think like that.
The dreams ended with the murders of JFKennedy, MLKing, Bobby Kennedy and Allende.
And the killing went on, and expanded over the years.
MONSTERS they are, brutal murderers and scatterers of our precious dreams.

You should really read the debates in this interesting 2008 thread, about the seismic evidence.

Well, Seymour Butz, which new member name you are using now?
You did not understand at all what my WTC 7 seismogram, annotated by me, meant.
Do you now, at last? Who's lying? NIST, LDEO, the US government? Or all of them?

Title : Need Unequivocal Evidence of WTC7 Demolition :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

A few excerpts from this 18 page long debate :
LaBTop : www.abovetopsecret.com...
LaBTop : www.abovetopsecret.com...
NIcon : www.abovetopsecret.com...

This one did his own research, and said this :

NIcon : Okay, so you don't agree with the timing problem, sorry for assuming. I looked at LaBTop's work for months and I never did find where he went wrong. You could look at the seismographs alone, but when you factor in the times that NIST came up with from independent sources there seems to be a problem. When I look at the four preceding graphs of the towers there seems to be a delay factored in the times of the spikes on the graphs. For example if we take the graph for the first plane colliding and mark the time NIST came up with on that graph (8:46:30) I see a thirteen second delay until the spike shows up. For the second collision, I see about a 12 second delay. First tower collapse: about 18 second delay. Second tower collapse: about an 18 second delay.

So I don't think it unreasonable to assume the delay would show up in the graph for WTC 7's collapse. So when I mark the time NIST confirmed through independent sources on that graph and add the shortest delay I found in the other graphs (12 seconds) it does put the collapse time after the first big spike. (At the 24 second mark in the graph)

Is there an error in this that I'm missing?

Seymour Butz : www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seymour made one mistake, he never asked Blanchard, the editor of Explosion World, to come up with the seismograms of 911 of the construction sites in New York from his firm Protec.
I however did. Blanchard vanished from the online 911 stage....immediately.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz

Originally posted by Griff

Why hasn't Protec's seismograms been released so we can see for ourselves? How do you know that they don't show anything? Because someone who claims buildings are always erased from the bottom up (which is wrong) has told you so? Real investigation there.

You're saying that Blanchard is lying? That he's "in on it"?

Oh, that's right, the inflationary fallacy rears its head again.......

Seymour, he's not lying, he's hiding. He got told to shut up or die. Those seismograms from handhold Protec devices are crucial since they unfold and prove the pertinent lies of the official story. I doubt we will ever see them online, they will have destroyed them. But I have some tiny hope up, that a real patriot will have kept some original ones...


Now, since I miss all the intelligent Trusters of the official lies in this thread, this old 18 pages long thread has been offered by me, so you can have a field day to try to use Seymour Butz' opinions, or those from other opponents in there, to try to counter my arguments.

I'll have a field day too, I will assure you.
I'm gonna read all 18 pages again, to be prepared for the flood of debunkers streaming in....


Now comes the crucial information :
Note that the real Dr Greening, femr2, Major_Tom, achimspok and a few other highly intelligent former posters at the JREF forum (a breeding ground for fresh, wannabe debunkers and OfficialStory Trusters) have left JREF, since they were disgruntled by the seemingly aggressive and fanatic atmosphere there in regards to any doubt of the OS, OfficialStory, and started their own, highly interesting forum (see the member list) :

The 9/11 Forum, Intelligent and evidence-based discussion of 9/11 issues :
the911forum.freeforums.org...

WTC 7 South Side Views :
the911forum.freeforums.org...

And in their above thread's last post by achimspok, you will find an earth shocking, superb, masterclass worthy video comparison of all known WTC 7's south facade facts.

It is THE MOST SUPERB and reality-based video, regarding WTC 7 you will ever see.

Achimspok his YouTube media profile.

www.youtube.com...



Achimspok and Arie are without doubt the best singlehanded 911 researchers I have ever encountered.
Period. (I think they also have some very good too, assisting friends, btw)

I advice you all to take some time and view all his videos, which you see listed in his YouTube profile. After viewing them all, you will smile brightly, when you ever encounter that stupid phrase again : "all these lousy wannabe YouTube producers who post all those grainy garbage".
Yep, for sure.... NOT.

www.youtube.com...

He has the same style of presenting his evidence as our old friend Wecomeinpeace, do you see that too, Brian?
Could he be the same character? That would be even greater.

Off topic.

After re-reading some posts, what follows are my notes on an important ATS-ISSUE :

If you agree with my solution to all topic derailing efforts I offered to ATS' staff,
would you ALL be so kind to use the [ALERT] button under THIS post of mine, or better, under this post ALSO,
and [COPY/PASTE] into the upcoming alert window, popping up next to it, in a new browser tab, this text :

-- I too, strongly support this PROPOSAL !
We all hate to see important threads wrecked by derailment tactics. --

If all of you who read this thread are doing so, perhaps it will have the impact needed, to convince the board software coders to find a proper solution.

Like I saw a similar effort already, as a new feature suddenly pop up under my EDIT windows.
A white text window rolls out under it, where you can choose from former edit reasons, typed in former posts, by yourself. When you type a character which is the first one of former edit texts typed by you, that whole text comes up in that little window. Which you can click then.

It seems to be a minor coding effort to me, so let's do it,
to convince those that want to leave because of this subject, and p r o t e c t ATS!
Just use the [ALERT] function, no comments in this thread, that will only derail it.


I have seen similar things implemented on other BBoards, where the original poster, or the staff, had minimized annoying posts, while there was a tiny icon left, that said : [SHOW]

In the OP, two tiny icons can be clicked : [ALL POSTS] and [COMPACT]
So everyone can choose to speed-read first, or to go back and read all posts.

Simple solution to a board-wrecking ATS development like :
trolls, derailors, distractors, nasty kids, obsessive posters, ego trippers, imposers, special agents, army efforts, agency efforts, political efforts, government institutional efforts and fundamentalist-wackos,
their efforts to INFLUENCE many important ATS threads and posts, with the clear intention to change the real, historically correct, value or/and truth.

NOTE: of course you can better [ALERT] this post, and copy/paste the same bolded text in the alert window. Then sent it.
I will be the first one, [CLICK].

[EDIT] : I found out that there is something wrong with the ATS post-[ALERT] button in Mozilla FireFox.
The alert window does not open in the same window, nor in another close-by window, but opens in the last visited window, now many tabs away from my present tab window. This can be a 'settings' problem, of course.
SOLUTION : when I right-click on the [ALERT] button, and click [OPEN in new TAB], the alert window opens neatly in the tab aside from my present tab. And I can paste away.

reply to post by wirefly

I'm taking this to my Dad. If you knew him. that would speak volumes as to what I think of this.

You make me a tad bit curious.
Care to elaborate some more on it, without giving away too private details?

EDIT : Like : ""As you can see at the 51 posts I posted in threads here, my main interest lays in the Florida region, and I told my father Jeb, to really change his tune, and for the first time try to tell me the damn truth.""

or, like : ""I'm living lately in a big white house, and my dad is really worried about his life. He's trying to get even with his buddies, who are shouting all the time to him, to keep his big mouth shut. I don't know why, but he seems to get more and more upset.""

or, like : ""My dad has been quite ill for the last year, but since a few weeks he holds his radio shows again, and speaks in public again. But he looks still fragile to us. His brother who took over from him, is asking him all the time how he can withhold our neighbors from invading us. So I'm gonna bring this info to both of them, and that will stop them threatening us for ever.""

reply to post by EndtheFed

9/11 Shock Opera… Act 4 – Building 7 and Flight 93: The Grand Finale that Wasn’t
willyloman.wordpress.com...

reply to post by LaBTop


I promised to come back on that first post by EndtheFed.
This is a highly viable Flight 93 thesis of Scott Creighton, reasons why they waited so long to hijack that flight :

Why would they risk all that time in the air, coming back from Ohio? They must have known they would be shot down… if they were terrorists with box cutters that is.

However, if “the terrorists” knew that multiple national security drills would be taking place that day and that NORAD rules had been changed in June of 2001 that kept NORAD commanders from giving the “intercept and engage” order, perhaps they would have known they had more time.

Perhaps, in that case, they would have known they had just enough time to circle around on a long exposed “hijacked” flight just long enough for both towers to “collapse” just as they made it back to downtown Manhattan.

And that is exactly why they waited so long. They were waiting for a clear path to Building 7.

There are many discrepancies in the story of Flight 93 -- etcetera --

He gives many more logical reasons why UAL93 acted so strange, and they are reasonable and viable too.
Should it really be so, that one stubborn pilot and real patriot, backed up perhaps by an evenly stubborn patriotic commander, saved the day, and thus gave us that precious WTC 7 event, to bite our teeth in?

I start believing him !
Thanks so much for that short but eyeopening post, EndtheFed.

Originally posted by EndtheFed
Here is an explanation as to why we are left with the anomaly of WTC 7 falling down even without being hit by a plane. It's 'must ' reading to understand what happened that horrible day.

9/11 Shock Opera… Act 4 – Building 7 and Flight 93: The Grand Finale that Wasn’t
willyloman.wordpress.com...

The obvious flaw in any idea that Flight 93 was destined for WTC 7 is that , having started in New York , it was in fact on a bee-line for Washington when it went down.

There is also anecdotal evidence that its target was the Capitol.

reply to post by Alfie1


You can't comprehend the data given by the author, or you did not read it all or at all.
Look out for my next post, for more revelations on it.