Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by Murgatroid

 

Many British police and politicians are now aware that the average particle size of the physical evidence at Fresh Kills indicates extraordinary demolition. You'll see them smiling and laughing when the subject is discussed.

Peace.

So can anyone tell us what's the average particle size in this hi-res picture



We keep hearing /seeing claims that the buildings were pulverised into tiny pieces claims made by people who dont know much about the construction of those buildings or buildings in general.

reply to post by scrounger


The truck wasn't in the location you think.

Originally posted by Kester
reply to post by Murgatroid

 

Sorry, I haven't looked at your profile to see where you stand on this. I'm too busy encouraging the police rebellion that is clearing out the cobwebs on this side of the pond.Peace.

Congrats on the police rebellion! (I think...)

My stance:

reply to post by Murgatroid


Are you making a claim that the average size of debris was small or not simple question.

If you say small explain the picture I posted.

reply to post by wmd_2008


The smallest particles I see in the excellent photograph you provide are the fumes rising off the pile. The largest particle is the enormous wall section towering above the excavators.

This is from SILive.com A Staten Island news source.
"NEW YORK -- A lawyer has asked a federal appeals court to let families of victims of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks remove the remains of their loved ones from a landfill on Staten Island.

Attorney Norman Siegel told the three judge panel in Manhattan today that 17 families he represents want fine particles of debris containing remains to be taken away from the former Fresh Kills site on the Island to a more respectful place.

A lower court judge had ruled that it was not an issue for the court to decide.

At one point today, city lawyer Jim Tyrrell referred to the debris as "undifferentiated dirt."

Siegel said it was as if relatives were left on top of garbage.

The court did not immediately rule."

The sorting process at Staten Island resulted in a large pile of fines. This was said to contain the missing human remains. Assurances were given that the fines, in two piles covering approximately one acre I believe, would be moved to a respectful place. Suddenly the mourning families found the fines had been bulldozed over the rest of the debris and buried.

That's one way of denying the families the opportunity to have samples independently forensically examined. It's all still there waiting to be treated as evidence which will blow the lid off the whole thing when it happens. Wouldn't want to be a paid troll then.

The dust cloud following the disintegration of the buildings was visible with the naked eye from the space station. A thorough look at the available evidence gives a rough idea of the nature of the debris. Cahill's statement about having never encountered such high concentrations of nano particles in any of his previous disaster experience around the world is certainly interesting.

Getting back to your original point. In the picture you provide the section of outer wall remaining standing is the largest particle. In order to calculate average particle size I first have to make sure I'm using the relevant data. Can you tell me if I should be using this one, huge particle in my calculation? I'm a bit confused as to how the enormous weight of the towers, which is after all the driving force behind the destruction, came crashing down in a gravitational collapse............. but missed the bottom?

reply to post by Murgatroid


Seems like a good stance to have. The thing with the police rebellion is they do have feelings. When they say "This is a terror stop!" And we all burst out laughing at the idea a professional investigator could still be going along with the terror fraud it deflates their ego a little. Morale is at an all time low and people like myself are working many hours every day to boost police morale. To be considered a valuable part of society they have to throw off the shackles of belief in a silly conspiracy theory about fairytale terrorists.

A blogger called inspectorgadget recently said about the spending cuts......
"We all understand that cuts have to be made. After all, oil-rich rogue states don’t bomb themselves and banker’s and MP’s children’s private school fees don’t pay themselves either."

It's worth looking at the comments on the policeoracle and PoliceFederation youtube channels. My channel www.youtube.com... has links and videos relating to the police rebellion. As I see it making progress depends on taking a proper look at the evidence relating to the well known 'terrorist' attacks.

reply to post by Kester


Well Kester my background is the construction industry on the technical side so lets see can you give a short list of what YOU think the towers were constructed with and what that dust cloud could have been.

Lets see what you come up with.

reply to post by wmd_2008


You seem to have slipped away from the average particle size of the debris in the photograph you provide. I understand why the standing remains are a major embarrassment to the gravitational collapse proponents. When you yourself provide the photographic evidence you must expect me to draw attention to this detail.

The only explanation I've been offered so far for the survival of this wall section was "The enormous churning mass of debris falling down supported the remaining section of wall and protected it from.... the enormous churning mass of debris falling down." There was an comparison with sugar and toothpicks. Not very convincing.

Perhaps your background on "the technical side" of the construction industry qualifies you to provide a relevant opinion. Are you sure you weren't just making the tea?

Once we've got the survival of this wall section thoroughly explained we can decide whether or not we use that one huge particle in the equation.

The question you've flitted onto now is what components were reduced to the debris we see and what the dust cloud was. The dust was analysed and found to be composed of many substances in very different concentrations in samples taken only a few yards apart. The fumes are a massive subject alone.

My thread www.abovetopsecret.com... explains my view on the probability of reinforced concrete infill panels being a notable part of the structure. Please don't link me to any words or diagrams on this subject. Almost anyone can produce explanations consisting of words and diagrams. Its the evidence that speaks the loudest. The photograph you provide is an excellent piece of evidence. Thank you.

reply to post by Kester


No its you that doesn't understand, people who claim the demo theory which have also been given various methods from energy beams,micro nuke and high tech explosives say that the buildings are reduced to very small particles.

The picture was posted to show that is not true, the towers had large concrete pads the main columns were attached to, the only major areas of concrete after that was the floorslabs, the floorslabs had a 4" layer of concrete on metal decking.

Concrete on the floorslabs was lighter and lower strength than structural areas.

The walls were obviously steel columns,glass,the panels below the glass were an infill panel the outside was the aluminum cladding insulation and sheetrock on the inside.

Now for you particles smoke and soot,thousands of sq mtrs of sheetrock,the sprayed on fire protection,and obviously some of the concrete from floorslabs you would also have dust in internal areas of the building that built up over the years.

So you have some very easily crushed building materials falling hundreds of feet being impacted by structural steel.

As for the columns still standing luck,choas whatever you want to blame both towers attacked by same method at different locations and didn't collapse exactly the same but the final result was the same

Having the floorslabs supported on angle cleats on the inside of the walls didn't help matters.

So the comments of people claiming that the buildings were turned into nano particles is a BS exaggeration what could be crushed was crushed nothing more

Originally posted by wmd_2008


As for the columns still standing luck,choas whatever you want to blame....

Than you for explaining that so thoroughly. Luck and chaos prevented the enormous, crushing weight of the debris falling in a gravitational collapse from following the direction dictated by gravity. Does Isaac Newton know about this?

Originally posted by Kester

Originally posted by wmd_2008


As for the columns still standing luck,choas whatever you want to blame....

Than you for explaining that so thoroughly. Luck and chaos prevented the enormous, crushing weight of the debris falling in a gravitational collapse from following the direction dictated by gravity. Does Isaac Newton know about this?

Well mr sm4rt a55 did BOTH towers fall EXACTLY the same way both driven by a gravitational collapse also directed to the person who gave you a star

Originally posted by SavedOne

Originally posted by TupacShakur
OK then start by watching these interviews:

Again, my point is that many if not all of these may indeed be in the field just like I am, but that does not make them experts just like I am not. I am an architect with nearly 30 years experience and several high-rise projects as I said above (and as I've repeated in many other threads not related to 9-11, feel free to look in case you think I'm making it up just for this occasion). This does not make me an expert on the WTC collapses. Nor does it make my peers experts. The only "experts" would fall under two categories:

1. Those intimately involved in the design and construction of the projects (and they have been completely silent, probably for legal reasons).

2. Those who are experts in the field and have engaged in a full study of the drawings, specifications, field reports, test reports, submittals, etc. etc. etc. for the projects. These wouldn't start out as experts, but could become experts if allowed full access to all the documentation. They should also interview the construction personnel involved to get the full picture- IE, were connections made per the drawings or were field modifications made, etc.

Again, not saying the conspiracy is true or not, just pointing out that these people are expressing personal and not professional expert opinions unless they fall under one of the two above categories.

You have a really broken concept of what an industry expert is. The bottom line is, few people we're involved in building the towers in relation to the amount of experts that could have been involved in building the towers.

Scientific constants are constant. You don't need to be an expert on the specific building to know if it broke the laws of physics in it's decent, you merely need to observe the collapse.

Symmetry is another constant. An asymmetrical fire cannot symmetrically decimate a building. Symmetrical damage is the only way to symmetrically decimate a building. Asymmetrical damage is the only way to bring down a building asymmetrically.

In this case, you had symmetric buildings collapsing symmetrically from asymmetrical damage. This is impossible and it doesn't take an expert to know this, it takes but a single game of jenga. In order for a symmetrical square tower to fall in it's footprint you need synced symmetrical damage in all 4 regions of the building at all the same heights at the exact same moment.

Don't believe me, try to remove an entire floor from a jenga tower and see how it collapses catastrophically in a chaotically random fashion. If one region were to fail first, it would fall in the direction of the region that first failed, if a second perpendicular region failed before a complete collapse, you will see the building twist in the direction of the second failed region, and so on.

The only way a square building can fall in itself is if the failure is mirrored in all 4 quadrants at the exact same heights, which would require blasting every floor sequentially. This is how controlled demolitions are done. From the bottom up, not from the top down, like what the OS says about the towers.

A five year old could comprehend this really, it saddens me that anybody could get away with a blatant lie of this magnitude... It really shows that people lack any education. It's not the dumb peoples fault, they are dumb by design.

Who made that design? Our government, the same people spouting the lie.

Well mr sm4rt a55 did BOTH towers fall EXACTLY the same way both driven by a gravitational collapse also directed to the person who gave you a star

Do you have eyes? I mean seriously, two different buildings that took damage in different locations and regions fell in the exact same pattern. A smooth steady stream straight down at free fall speed.

The third building that wasn't even a tower, wasn't even hit by a plane, fell in the same exact fashion as well. This third building was not even the same shape or style of the other two....

This is completely impossible.

reply to post by Laokin

Who made that design? Our government, the same people spouting the lie.


The third building that wasn't even a tower, wasn't even hit by a plane, fell in the same exact fashion as well. This third building was not even the same shape or style of the other two....

This is completely impossible.

You are wrong in so many ways.

The gov did not make the design. A private contractor did.

The third building did not fall in the same fashion as the first two. Look at the tape.

And it is possible as evidenced by the lack of howling from our physics and engineering community.