Regardless of your opinions of 9/11 , you need to read this.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by patternfinder

 

....wrong, resistance is always manifested by event duration....

Really? Then don't try and heat your dinner on an electric range.

what do you think heat from electricity is????? it is friction you $#@#@!!!!

reply to post by patternfinder

it is friction you $#@#@!!!!

What do you think resistance is? Resistance caused by friction results in ??????

Heat.

Heat is also a manifestation of resistance.

Those towers stood 1300 feet high.

If you drop for example chunk of concrete or a bowling ball from 1300 feet up, these things will hit the ground 10-11 seconds later. In a vacuum it would take about 9 seconds. Now, even the official report admits that the south tower completely collapsed in ten seconds. As a result in this supposedly gravity driven event a structure that was designed to prevent or at the very least delay any collapse in a gravity driven event fell through itself meeting about as much resistance as that bowling ball. Obviously this is a physical impossibility. Why anyone would make a fool of themselves by claiming otherwise is totally beyond me.

At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds, killing all civilians and emergency personnel inside, as well a number of individuals-both first responders and civilians-in the concourse, in the Marriott, and on neighboring streets. The building collapsed into itself, causing a ferocious windstorm and creating a massive debris cloud. The Marriott hotel suffered significant damage as a result of the collapse of the South Tower.156

www.9-11commission.gov...

Note #156

156. NIST report,"Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the WTC," June 18, 2004, appendix H, p. 40.

govinfo.library.unt.edu...

Originally posted by galdur
At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds, killing all civilians and emergency personnel inside, as well a number of individuals-both first responders and civilians-in the concourse, in the Marriott, and on neighboring streets. The building collapsed into itself, causing a ferocious windstorm and creating a massive debris cloud. The Marriott hotel suffered significant damage as a result of the collapse of the South Tower.156

www.9-11commission.gov...

Sorry, that little tidbit was not published nor intended to be a technical review of the collapse period but an overview of the response by different organizations to the disaster. Nice try but no cigar.

Now find me something that technically states the duration of the collapse.

Hint: You won't. There are only estimates based on what was observable. And none of them says 10 seconds.

So, as you see - even the official report admits what is obvious from TV footage (it´s archived in full from major networks at archive.org) - that this tower collapsed at virtually free-fall speed.

This hooper guy has a purely faith-based opinion on this: They accept as gospel truth the official explanation, and set about in search of supportive evidence, discarding all contradictory (what a defense attorney would call exculpatory) evidence along the way.

Welcome to September 11 Television Archive

You can find a more complete version of this collection (3000 hours of television from 20 channels over 7 days) at Understanding 9/11: A Television News Archive.

This collection contains television news programs recorded live from around September 11, 2001 by the non-profit Television Archive to help patrons research this important part of United States history. These materials were available on the televisionarchive.org site from October 11, 2001 through 2003.

www.archive.org...

reply to post by galdur

.....discarding all contradictory (what a defense attorney would call exculpatory) evidence along the way.

Please, as soon as possible, post all this exculpatory evidence. Can't wait. Let me practise

"Objection your Honor the witness is speculating....."
"Objection your Honor the witness is not a expert in these matters...."

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by galdur

 

.....discarding all contradictory (what a defense attorney would call exculpatory) evidence along the way.

Please, as soon as possible, post all this exculpatory evidence. Can't wait. Let me practise

"Objection your Honor the witness is speculating....."
"Objection your Honor the witness is not a expert in these matters...."

I´m sure that your systematically and totally contenless posts here, whose only and obvious purpose is to disrupt the discussion, is in violation of the TOS here.

Originally posted by galdur
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by galdur

I´m sure that your systematically and totally contenless posts here, whose only and obvious purpose is to disrupt the discussion, is in violation of the TOS here.

Well, yes, I do intend to "disrupt' discussions from time to time if by "disrupt" you mean challenging the posters to prove their assumptions and make them clarify their statements and justify their semantics, word choice and rhetorical approach.

reply to post by hooper


I think the fact that about nobody at all here supports your faith-based views

speaks for itself.

Originally posted by galdur
So, as you see - even the official report admits what is obvious from TV footage (it´s archived in full from major networks at archive.org) - that this tower collapsed at virtually free-fall speed.

This hooper guy has a purely faith-based opinion on this: They accept as gospel truth the official explanation, and set about in search of supportive evidence, discarding all contradictory (what a defense attorney would call exculpatory) evidence along the way.

He's obviously here only to take the counterpoint to anything anybody says. All of his responses are very technical in his explanations, but that doesn't make them true. When you apply logic and common sense to his responses, they don't hold up. Like the official story.

Originally posted by galdur
reply to post by hooper

 

I think the fact that about nobody at all here supports your faith-based views

speaks for itself.

I think the fact that this is conspiracy forum on a conspiracy website and the fact that the best that you can say is "about" nobody supports the "OS" speaks volumes.

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by galdur
reply to post by hooper

 

I think the fact that about nobody at all here supports your faith-based views

speaks for itself.

I think the fact that this is conspiracy forum on a conspiracy website and the fact that the best that you can say is "about" nobody supports the "OS" speaks volumes.

I think when the results of the 9/11 Survey come out here on 9/7 you faith-based believers in the official fables will perhaps amount to as much as 5-8%.

Originally posted by galdur

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by galdur
reply to post by hooper

 

I think the fact that about nobody at all here supports your faith-based views

speaks for itself.

I think the fact that this is conspiracy forum on a conspiracy website and the fact that the best that you can say is "about" nobody supports the "OS" speaks volumes.

I think when the results of the 9/11 Survey come out here on 9/7 you faith-based believers in the official fables will perhaps amount to as much as 5-8%.

edit on 31-8-2011 by galdur because: typo

That would be embarrassing if it were a national poll - however - this is a website dedicated to the pursuit of conspiracies and forum within that dedicated space so I think the fact that almost 10% don't believe in the conspiracy is quite significant and telling.

The behavior of this hooper character is such that I think they should be ignored.

A calculation of how long it should take an object to free-fall from the late towers' height.

Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time(squared)

or

2 x Distance = Gravity x Time(squared)

Time(squared) = (2 x Distance) / Gravity

Time(squared) = 2710 / 32 = 84.7

Time = 9.2 seconds

This assumes vacuum. Obviously it takes a little longer in earth´s atmosphere, due to atmospheric resistance.

So, you see that the towers´reinforcing structure offered about as much resistance as air in this supposedly gravity driven event which is a physical impossibility. This is absolutely irrefutable. Earth's gravity causes objects to fall. They fall according to precise, well-known equations. There is no way around this.

P.S. If your Physics 101 is rusty, gravity will produce a downward acceleration of 32 feet per second per second.

What this means is that an object, after falling one second, will be falling at 32 ft/sec.

After the 2nd second, it will be falling at 64 ft/sec.

After the 3rd second, it will be falling at 96 ft/sec. And so on.

As for terminal velocity it varies among objects. For example, the commonly-accepted terminal velocity of a free-falling human is around 120 mph. The terminal velocity of a free-falling cat is around 60 mph.

There was something about the towers falling in 6 seconds.
6 X 32 = 192 ft/sec velocity for the top pieces velocity when they hit the ground.
Well that would not happen if there were not explosions.

The event was two fold.
Airliners were hijacked and run into the towers by a well planned out and
enabled operation.
Second was the explosions that had to be part of the plan.
Some how in small or large degree the confusion at NORAD enables
the ultimate outcome of planes except for perhaps the one meant for
building 7 which had no plane crash but had the explosives. So what
were they going to do. Use the explosives and say nothing.

No one Talks against the Big Lie.
We all understand.
Thats the way it is.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


The times for the towers collapse was between 14 and 16 seconds. Explosives don't make a collapse faster than gravitational collapse. 911review.com...