Let’s Agree to Put an End to the Petty 9/11 Argument’s

reply to post by -PLB-


There is no need to get it in a peer reviewed scientific publication.

A basic school kid can understand it, so why on earth would such heavyweights have to delve into it?
Everyone with an IQ above 80 can get it.

A photo is taken in Manhattan, the event on that photo its resulting seismic effect, is traveling for 17 long seconds through New York State's upper crust, arrives in the seismograph room at Palisades seismic station, and its needles begin to write that seismic signal belonging to that event.

The utterly strange thing a kid can see in that seismogram is the huge writing on that same seismogram BEFORE that photo-event got written on that seismogram.....

And please try to explain to us, how such a huge energy event which was written before that photo-event arrived at those needles, could dwarf all the following seismic events?
And those were written by these needles AFTER that photo-event arrived.

We know exactly by atomic clocked time, when that photo event in Manhattan took place !
And we know also exactly, by means of the same atomic clocks using equipment in Palisades, N.Y. , WHEN that photo event arrived in Palisades. 17 SECONDS later. (with an error of + or - 1 second). Smack in the middle of the space between the first, HUGE energy event, and the next, a lot lower energy event, the WTC 7 global collapse.

Please do not play innocent, you know damn well what I am proving to you all, and that's what gets you so insecure that you have to fall back on insulting me. WITHOUT A SHIMMER OF A COUNTER-ARGUMENT.

Originally posted by LaBTop
Thermobaric explosions have ultra low freq. sound-prints. An immense belly feeling impression, ears are not really picking it up from 4 blocks away. At the periphery lines set around WTC 7 by FBI, NYPD and other agencies.

Labtop, this is something I'm having trouble understanding. Can you tell me how we know that thermobaric explosions will not be heard four blocks away? I googled for a while, and I'm not able to find any confirmation on that "Quiet Explosive" concept.

What am I missing?

I am looking at the whole Tower in distress system, 1 second before collapse initiation. Not at planes that smashed into it one hour earlier, not at fires that were raging for about 30 minutes and then were dying down already, so no, all forces ACTING on the system were already in place. Including gravity.

As I just posted a few very convincing pieces for your mind, you would understand that I see only one HIDDEN external force which acted suddenly on that system, and that's explosives of any kind.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer


Try the latest secret part of the DuPont Handbook of Explosives. I doubt you have access rights to it.

And take some time right now to READ and VIEW the material I just posted !
You two are posting without reading anything I offered to convince you that you gamble on the wrong horse, NIST.

reply to post by LaBTop


The idea that so many additional energy was somehow released unnoticed is just silly. And that the end of it.

OBJECT EJECTED by EXPLOSION BEFORE WTC COLLAPSE Uploaded on Sep 4, 2010

www.youtube.com...

At about the 0:59 mark, a high-pressure explosion occurs in one of the Twin Towers, just below the impact zone, while the building is still standing.

In the Final report on the collapse of the Twin Towers issued by NIST, it appears to attempt an explanation for this explosion by suggesting it is a smoke puff resulting from a pressure pulse inside the building, perhaps from a collapsing wall or ceiling, or sudden opening of a door. (See NCSTAR1-5A, p. 52) However, as can be seen from the screen captures in the video above, it isn't merely smoke and dust being ejected. There appears to be a massive object being ejected along with the explosion.

Lots of links more by the uploader when you click the "Show more" words.
When you study all the Tower collapse initiation videos I posted above as links in those posts videos, you will find more and more explosive puffs ejecting at too high speeds to be gravitational pressure and compression puffs.
Their cloud-front speed is far too high. Clock them with your stopwatch on your IPhone, IPad or watch.

But that clocked speed is not too high when it were bled-off TB gaseous front remnants. Exploded inside the main 44 columns packets. A small directional TB does bleed off quite fast. And the main goal of these was to shatter those huge main columns. At about 2 to three floors intervals.

reply to post by -PLB-


Bye man.
A petty that you can't bring any solid argument to my floor, while you act as if you possess some scientific background. For such a person it should be an interesting challenge to confront me with good argumentation.
Nevertheless, good riddance.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
We're not talking about the average Joe on the street reporting this. We're talking about the BBC reporters. It's the obligation of news organizations to double check the facts BEFORE THEY REPORT IT. Which they claim they did.

You are simply arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. Either the BBC people really didn't know the building behind them was WTC 7 and they simply got their announcement wrong regardless of whatever fact checking capabilities they claimed they have...which they openly admitted and aren't trying to hide, OR, the conspirators decided to bring thousands of people in the BBC into the sinister plot to secretly blow up WTC 7 for no reason, and they decided to release the information that WTC 7 fell beforehand for no reason, even though according to you, everyone in the BBC was able to identify the building and see it was still standing by looking out the window. Seriously, which do you think is the more likely scenario?

The BBC admitted it was nothing more than a goof so as far as I'm concerned that should be the end of it. Anything more than that is nothing but your own invention...or I should say, the invention of those damned fool conspiracy web sites you're getting your information from. We both know they're the ones concocting this conspiracy within a conspiracy within a conspiracy.

Off topic and irrelevant. I am not a reporter on a live TV broadcast.

That is not an answer. It is ridiculous to assume people are super genuises and know the esoteric names of every building in the world simply because they are BBC reporters. The last I checked, reporters are required to pay taxes and go to the can just like you and I do. My point is that I am attempting to illustrate that noone is an expert on every building in the world and I'm doing it by asking you to identify that building. Either you can or cannot, and if you cannot, it is unrealistic for you to insist that others should be able to.

Tell me, in all seriousness, is this what you consider a proper way to put an end to the petty 9/11 arguments?

Now, go use the ATS Search,
ask.abovetopsecret.com...
and type in 1,3 Diphenylpropane, you get 47 results, one by me.
It was found at ground zero in such huge effect, it dwarfed all other finds.

Now contemplate a bit what chance this chemical could have to end up in a Thermobaric cloud.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


MagicWand67, do not reply to him. All answers were given already, no need for new ones.
He's now clearly trying to derail the momentary important flow of this thread.

Originally posted by LaBTop
Bye man.
A petty that you can't bring any solid argument to my floor, while you act as if you possess some scientific background. For such a person it should be an interesting challenge to confront me with good argumentation.
Nevertheless, good riddance.

I can't help that my argument that there is no video evidence of your huge explosion is not solid to you. To me it is rock solid. I think to the vast majority of people it is. And that is good enough for me. I don't need to convince the entire world.

Originally posted by -PLB-

No external force in a gravitational collapse? Hmm, from the top of my head, I can think of one. Can you?

Gravity is not an external force. Didn't they teach you that in electrical engineering school?

For our purposes, we will simply say that external forces include the applied force, normal force, tension force, friction force, and air resistance force. And for our purposes, the internal forces include the gravity forces, magnetic force, electrical force, and spring force. While this is a simplistic approach, it is an approach that will serve us well in our introduction to physics...

Internal vs. External Forces

And from another source, just so you're clear on this...

Internal forces

Internal forces are forces that can act on an object without physically
touching the object. Examples of internal forces include:

the force of gravity
electrical forces
magnetic forces
spring forces

You can thank me for the physics lesson later.

Originally posted by LaBTop

Try the latest secret part of the DuPont Handbook of Explosives. I doubt you have access rights to it.

You've given no indication that you have access to such a publication, either. I'll not hold my breath while you go make some scans and post them in this thread.

The evidence for your theory would seem to be just as silent as the explosives you postulate in it!

The point when people start pointing to 'secret evidence' is the point where I know I've had my fill. I'm calling "Hush-A-Boom" on this thread until we get some kind of confirmation or evidence.

Meanwhile, this thread is the third result for "dupont explosives handbook secret" on google and the first result on bing


I plan on attaching a plea for help on this issue to my signature in the near future, linking to this thread. Please PM me if you object to this, LabTop.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by -PLB-

No external force in a gravitational collapse? Hmm, from the top of my head, I can think of one. Can you?

Gravity is not an external force. Didn't they teach you that in electrical engineering school?

For our purposes, we will simply say that external forces include the applied force, normal force, tension force, friction force, and air resistance force. And for our purposes, the internal forces include the gravity forces, magnetic force, electrical force, and spring force. While this is a simplistic approach, it is an approach that will serve us well in our introduction to physics...

Internal vs. External Forces

And from another source, just so you're clear on this...

Internal forces

Internal forces are forces that can act on an object without physically
touching the object. Examples of internal forces include:

the force of gravity
electrical forces
magnetic forces
spring forces

You can thank me for the physics lesson later.

My oh my Anok, what a mess have you gotten yourself into. You are really in way over your head. Your text says:

"For our purposes"

I don't care about their purposes. We are talking about building collapses and in building collapses gravity is an external force. No matter how many situations you find where gravity is not an external force.

I can easily prove it:

Before collapse initiation, velocity of the top section v = 0 so momentum of the top section p1 = m1 * v1 = m * 0 = 0.

After collapse initiation, so when the top section start moving, or in other words v > 0, momentum of the top section p2 = m2 * v2 != 0.

p1 != p2 Oh my god. Newtons laws of motion are broken.


Your demonstration of complete lack of understanding of basic physics is now forever saved on the web. Thanks for your cooperation.

Ps. I found you some basic explanations from the guys who put rockets in space: www.grc.nasa.gov...
Take advantage of it.

reply to post by LaBTop

Whoa, hang on, I just remembered I had a top secret copy of DuPont's Handbook in the spare bedroom. Bad news, LabTop.

Barometric explosions, like all explosions, save those developed by the silent explosive, Hush-a-Boom, are very loud 100% of the time and can be heard at least 5 blocks away at sea level on a clear day.

It's right there on page 637!

Now why have you been pulling my leg?

Oh my god, can't you guys not for one time stop the endless bickering, and go READ and VIEW the links, videos and texts I offered on page 6 and 7?

Do you understand that all those people in most videos are talking about WTC 7, where they heard all these explosion sounds in an very familiar fast sequence of "boom, boom, booms".
Exactly the same as in that video by David Chandler, where you can hear with your own ears that same sequence of loud "boom,boom, booms", but now in the North and South Tower collapses.

And again, why do you keep repeating your questions, when I just answered them?
Because they are not really questions, but desperate clutching to rusted believe systems?
And psychologists in the fifties proved already that when a believe system is attacked, the more the believers defend it. Even when all logic rules tell them that that belief was just shattered to little pieces.

TB's second and third stages suck all surrounding air back in, it's one of the telling signs of the use of thermobaric bombs. And that causes to muffle the sound waves already on their way out of the concrete or steel shattering gaseous clouds. Sound goes at 330 meter per second, a TB gas front goes at 20,000 meter per second. It out-paces sound waves sixty fold. Since its explosion front consumes all internal and external 20% oxygen in the surrounding air mass. It "bounces" back, then out again, but slower then earlier on, that's why the footprint of a TB is much slower and longer lasting than a HE made up from one chemical compound.
Understood? Or still not?

You hear a small "pop", the tiny RDX charge going off, then a few milliseconds or seconds, depending on the models, a sound pause, and then a very deep rumbling sound, felt mostly in your belly and a bit through your shoes.

DrEugene, try Russian websites (fill in their search engines "Chechnya"), and use Babelfish to try to find the term in Cyrillic for Thermobaric bomb. And Chechnya....
Flattening of their capital by the Russians, after their terrorists murdered all those schoolchildren just over the Chechnyan border in Russia was done with their TB's.

Or try Indian ones and use Hindi to English. Or Iranian ones and try Farsi to English. Or go to your local University its Chemistry Department Library and ask assistance in your quest for knowledge, they will help you if asked politely, and after you explained to them, the Why.
I doubt you will find more than I told you already, but, who knows, ain't it so? It's still a very top secret subject, but leaks get out, god knows you'll get lucky and find a true patriot somewhere on the way in.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer


Well, how was the sentence again::: First the truth is ridiculed and met with laughter, then some side with it, and then....?

I have no death wish, but let me tell you one thing, in the not so near future you will remember this thread.

reply to post by LaBTop


Its first ridiculed, then opposed, then taken for granted. You are still in phase 1.

reply to post by LaBTop

DrEugene, try Russian websites (fill in their search engines "Chechnya"), and use Babelfish to try to find the term in Cyrillic for Thermobaric bomb. And Chechnya.... Flattening of their capital by the Russians, after their terrorists murdered all those schoolchildren just over the Chechnyan border in Russia was done with their TB's. Or try Indian ones and use Hindi to English. Or Iranian ones and try Farsi to English. Or go to your local University its Chemistry Department Library and ask assistance in your quest for knowledge, they will help you if asked politely, and after you explained to them, the Why. I doubt you will find more than I told you already, but, who knows, ain't it so? It's still a very top secret subject, but leaks get out, god knows you'll get lucky and find a true patriot somewhere on the way in.

Bull#. You can post the evidence to support your own theory, If you even have so much as a scrap of it.

reply to post by LaBTop

I have no death wish, but let me tell you one thing, in the not so near future you will remember this thread.

I hope you're not threatening self-harm.

if you are, you should call 1-800-SUICIDE and talk to a councillor. Seriously.