It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Times LDEO collapse seismogram of WTC-7, compared to the by NIST time-stamped Cianca 9/11 photo

page: 23
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:44 AM

originally posted by: [post=20953402]Informer1958

I believe

And this right here is why there are 9/11 conspiracy believers in the first place.

It is a religion.

You believe what others write because you are not able to deduce what is true or not. There is no shame in this, I don't know what to believe when the refrigerator repair guy comes and says the mother board is fried and will cost $400 and take 3 weeks.

LaBTop put together a wonderful well researched presentation here, and none of you debunkers have attacked any of it with any "real science".

Nothing he uses to present his position is "real science" either.

It's all mumbo jumbo that he uses to convince himself and others that his religious belief in 9/11 is correct.

Therefore, since zero "real science" is presented, none needs to be used.

Ridicule will suffice.

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:49 AM
a reply to: MrBig2430

You also have not provided a motion tracking of any steel that exhibits the trait of being explosively hurled.

If steel were explosively ejected :
The sounds would have been heard all over NYC.
It would have visibly exited the building milli seconds before the collapse.
Done so on all four sides.

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:54 AM

originally posted by: [post=20953942]LaBTop

Collapse zones are instigated in fear of TOPPLING OVER.

The exterior column assemblies toppled over, just not the entire building.

I've seen you reference 9/11 free forms, so you therefore know of the video and photo analysis done by members there. If not, then you need to. They have shown pretty clearly that what I say has very strong evidence to support it, and have strongly debunked the notion that steel was explosively "blown" 600'.

If you DON'T know this, then you are a poor researcher. If you DO know this, then you are a poor liar.

SO which is it?

However, the Vierendeel facade plates that were launched from the explosive parts of the collapse initiation fronts ABOVE THEM, were clearly to see in the videos, expelled upwards

Until you produce this video/s, and an analysis of some steel showing this characteristics, then your claim can be rejected without comment.

You have FAR too many posts to try these types of lies, so why even do it?

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:11 AM

originally posted by: LaBTop
Desperately grabbing at excuses, while following your own Flapp's Law.
Show us the calculations to make it possible for the wall sections landing NATURALLY on the Wintergarden building and that piece of Vierendeel exterior that kept stuck in the southeastern corner of the WFC-3 building, without introducing extra energy.
Others have done that, and failed, see Major Tom's site :
Perimeter Wall Collapse Model - World Trade Center Evidence-Based Research.
There are many more links to such work there, I just grabbed one of them.

Quote from that page:

"The ROOSD paradox is that the height of the building does not matter. This is why 12 stories of WTC1 could "crush" the lower 98."


A lot of conspiracy believers should read that page...

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:25 AM

originally posted by: [post=20973429]LaBTop

Well, do us a favor, and tell us how YOU easily explain that free fall period of collapse of WTC-7,

The ext columns were laterally unbraced and buckled over an 8 story distance. Tony explains this quite clearly.

The difference between his fantasy and reality is that he believes explosives were used to remove the core columns, whereas realists look at the videos and see a lateral progressive collapse of the interior columns.

He has zero evidence for explosives, whereas realists have plenty of evidence for fire.

And yes, this FFA period, combined with the smooth descent of a seemingly intact outer shell, is one of the most important indicators that the collapse of WTC-7 was not a natural occurring one, and no ignorant JREF'er or ISF'er can change that.

But an ignorant Above Top Secret member CAN call a clearly buckling exterior face of 7 (remember the kink?) as being intact, as long as it shores up the fantasy, right?

Your above remark : ""I've proven that Szamboti has corrected Chandler about the free fall period and it's rather ordinary explanation"" must be meant as a joke, I assume?


You were unaware, due to extremely poor research, that Tony had corrected Chandler a year ago. You even demanded proof ( I can link to it if you are prepared to be embarrassed by highlighting your poor research skills ) of my statement.

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:32 AM

originally posted by: [post=20974923]LaBTop

Everyone with a tiny bit of logic left in his mind knows what that indicates.
FALSE FLAG operations.

I agree that only someone with only a tiny bit of logic left in their mind would believe that 9/11 was a false flag.

However, those of us with the full dose of logic left intact know otherwise....

posted on Jul, 27 2016 @ 09:09 AM
Thanks for your persistance with the Dry Lab criminals at NIST.
a reply to: LaBTop

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:08 PM
This is my post about the running camera man during the onset of WTC2S its collapse, while his camera was aiming back at the thundering down exterior wall parts :
There are three videos of the WTC2S collapse onset to be found in there.
Which show slightly outwards pushed huge intact chunks of broken-out Vierendeel exterior columns triplets, falling just ten to twenty meters aside the still intact lower facade, in a seemingly naturally caused manner.

What kind of force, other than explosions, could have caused those OTHER, just as big or bigger, immensely heavy exterior column chunks, including their teared-off aluminum claddings, to follow far too lengthy projectile trajectories for a naturally induced collapse scenario.?

Consider this too :

Ref.1 : T. Inman, PAPD (Port Authority Police Dept.)
“As a roll call was being taken of the responding Detectives, Tower #2 began to collapse.
This occurred after a secondary explosion on the west side of the tower that appeared to take place in the area of the high 60’s. The area above the secondary explosion actually leaned to the west and then the collapse took place.”

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:13 PM
References :

1. Beyond Misinformation, an excellent overview of the evidence for controlled demolition of the World Trade Center Towers 1, 2, and 7 :
© 2015 Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc. (52 pages)

Page 13/52 : FEMA’s investigators were not granted access to the site until the week of October 7. Thus, neither he nor anyone else had conducted forensic analysis of the debris, nor had they interviewed eyewitnesses.
(FEMA Investigators: Lead : Gene Corley ; Ronald Hamburger, American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE ; R. Shankar Nair, engineer ; William Baker)

All the time in the world to get rid of the incriminating evidence that all those columns from the collapse initiation floors definitely were for the Planners.
And they created even more time to get rid of all evidence for explosives :

Page 14/52 : ""The investigation was financed and given its authority by FEMA, with which lead investigator Gene Corley’s team had a shaky relationship from the start.

For months after September 11, the investigators were unable to persuade FEMA to obtain basic data like detailed blueprints of the buildings that collapsed. Bureaucratic restrictions often kept the engineers from interviewing witnesses to the disaster, making forensic inspections at Ground Zero, or getting crucial information like recorded distress calls from people trapped in the buildings. For reasons that would remain known only to FEMA, the agency refused to let the team appeal to the public for photographs and videos of the towers that could help with the investigation

Most detrimental to the team’s ability to conduct forensic analysis was the City’s recycling of the buildings’ steel, which continued despite requests from the investigators — and outcry among the victims’ families and the fire safety community — for the steel to be saved.(Ref.3)

Although investigators were eventually granted access to the scrap yards, nearly all of the steel, including most of the steel from the upper floors of WTC 1 and WTC 2, was destroyed before it could be inspected. (Ref. 4)

And still, there are LONGTIME posters here that keep acting all these years as if they do not know all deceitful can you be.?
I repeat it one more time for the less gifted researchers, gifted only with lots of poisonous insults:
There were only THREE pieces of vertical core column steel preserved by FEMA and much later, NIST......from both towers their collapse INITIATION regions.
The rest of the steel is not really interesting for a, to be feared by the 9/11 Planners, forensic investigation, since everything that happens after the initiation events, is mostly a result of solely gravity.
So, when all that incriminating top steel from the three towers was shipped away, in other words disappeared, those ASCE investigators couldn't do much harm anymore.

There can only be ONE explanation for the criminal hurry with which all the steel on top of the debris heaps was removed in those first weeks and some of the following months, without proper inspection for residues or obvious molecular-change signs in the steel's crystal grid of explosions effecting the steel :
FOREKNOWLEDGE of the false flag operation that 9/11 clearly was.
Somewhere at the very top of the clean up decision-making chain.

(Chapter 2, References :
2. Glanz, James and Lipton, Eric: City in the Sky: The Rise and Fall of the World Trade Center
(2003), p. 330.
3. Ibid., pp. 330–332.
4. U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science: Hearing: The Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse: Findings, Recommendations, and Next Steps (May 1, 2002), p. 27)

2. Ejection of Steel Beams and Aluminum Cladding :

3. : Physics Lab, by David Chandler, a work still in progress :

-- more --

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:16 PM
4. For those that have difficulties to believe their own eyes.

David Chandler's videos about those projectile trajectories :

David Chandler : ""South Tower Smoking Guns."" :
This video narrates a collection of diverse phenomena in the debris cloud of the South Tower that point to explosive demolition. Particularly notable is one projectile (which I have not seen discussed previously) that is shooting to the east, then stops, midair, then turns a sharp corner and shoots straight down trailing white smoke. White smoke is characteristic of aluminum oxide which is a byproduct of the thermite reaction.

White smoke is also a massive byproduct of most modern thermobaric weapons.
Concrete, blown to dust, from the composite floors, then loosely compacted on the inside of the Vierendeel column triplets formed into huge exterior chunks which are getting launched upwards and outwards, also gives an impression of white smoke, trailing behind all those parabolic expelled exterior area chunks.

David Chandler : ""South Tower Smoking Guns (Follow-up)."" :
After finding the projectile that turns a sharp corner while trailing white smoke (which I have dubbed the “Angle Rocket”) I looked for it in other videos and found it in several. The clearest is from a camera with a very similar perspective to the first, but in this video the trail can be followed to the bottom of the collapse. Here I explore the significance of this find.

If a thermobaric explosion is taken in consideration, just imagine a part of the second or third wave of still not exploded chemical dust tunneled f.ex. through an air duct.
That still not ignited dust then ending up, somewhat compacted, on some loose piece of the exterior, which then ignited after the explosion front reached that whole exterior area, blowing it outwards in one piece. And then that loose piece started following its own projectile trajectory, leaving now its own trail of white dust from the ignited chemical dust.

David Chandler : ""South Tower: Exploding Projectile."" :
A close-up view of debris being ejected from the South Tower of the World Trade Center as the 30-floor top section falls to the east shows numerous smoking projectiles that look like comets. Several of them can be seen to explode. One such exploding projectile is followed here. It ejects two fragments, both of which undergo secondary explosions. (Note, the rising fragment to the left of the projectile under consideration appears to be a tumbling object that alternates from black to white to invisible. It passes behind one of the fragments described in the video.)

David Chandler : ""Cutter Charges in the North Tower of the World Trade Center."" :
Small explosive ejections focused on a corner column of WTC1 (The North Tower of the World Trade Center) are evidence of cutter charges used to cut the corner columns. One of these occurs at the 98th floor at the onset of the demolition of the building. The other occurs lower in the building at the instant the column enters free fall.

David Chandler : ""Acceleration + Serendipity."" :
This is a study of the overall downward acceleration of WTC1, the North Tower of the World Trade Center. During this investigation it was discovered that the one feature that kept pace with the original acceleration of the roof line was a wave of ejections on the west wall.

David Chandler : ""High Speed Massive Projectiles from the WTC on 9/11."" :
I have revisited and extended some of my early measurements of high speed massive projectiles from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The results for the three projectiles measured: 56 mi/hr, 45 mi/hr, and 78 mi/hr. I don’t claim this is smoking-gun evidence of explosive demolition all by itself, but it is part of the puzzle and it is more compatible with the explosive demolition hypothesis than simple gravitational collapse.
(On a technical note, if you are looking at the numbers in the three measurements, the third measurement is taken while the video was zoomed in, relative to the calibration frame. The numbers shown have to be scaled down by a factor of 1.701 to give the stated results.)

David Chandler : ""Rockets at the World Trade Center."" :
Some of the debris from the South Tower at the World Trade Center shot downward faster than gravity. This is literal, visible proof of explosive materials painted onto perimeter wall units.

David Chandler : ""What a Gravity-Driven Demolition Looks Like."" :
The official story is that the North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed due to gravity. This has been critiqued in an analysis by Graeme MacQueen and Tony Szamboti, and in a related analysis by David Chandler (both in the Journal of 9/11 Studies). The Balzac-Vitry demolition was a true gravity-driven collapse. The same analysis that was applied to the World Trade Center is here applied to this known demolition, with contrasting results. This analysis supports the conclusions of both papers referred to above: the North Tower of the World Trade Center was not a natural, gravity-driven collapse.

What amazes me constantly, is the LACK of heaps of YouTube videos made by genuinely, HONESTLY convinced followers of the official story lies.
For example made by architects, engineers or demolition experts.?
Where are these videos.?
The honest reader should expect them to be in the hundreds, trying to convince us that the three collapses on 9/11/2001 were pure gravitational.? Pointing us at the (cough) clear signs (cough) of it in those (however absent) videos.?

Because every debunker in every thread here comes up with the hundreds of thousands of experts that in their mind, do follow the official scenarios for 9/11.
So why, indeed, is there such a huge lack of video support at YouTube, made by ALL these supposedly OS-convinced experts.?

-- more --

edit on 31/7/16 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:24 PM
More References :

5. Momentum Transfer in WTC1, by Dr Gordon Ross, Mechanical/Manufacturing Engineer.

He's essentially saying the same as Charles M. Beck, while using the same engineering math as was followed by that very fast released (2 days after 9/11) simple collapse explanation by Bazant/Zhou in 2001, followed up to 2003 and to 2012 by Bazant. The current consensus about the work of Bazant on his collapse theory is that it lacks a lot of details and assumes the full effects instead of the live effects in his energy calcs, i.o.w. favors a lot of additional energy that wasn't there.
And Bazant introduced a NATURAL collapse of one floor, over its full floor area, through the full office space height below it, onto the lower floor, which certainly did not take place at all.
Even NIST declared his pancake theory as not applicable.

These are the essentials as calculated and laid out by Gordon Ross :

Summary :

This paper examines the elastic loading and plastic shortening phases of the columns of WTC 1 after impact of the upper 16 storeys of the building upon the lower storeys and its effect on the momentum transfer after the collision.
An energy balance is derived showing that there is an energy deficit before completion of the plastic shortening phase that would not allow the collapse to continue under the constraints of this paper.


The energy balance of the collapse moves into deficit during the plastic shortening phase of the first impacted columns showing that there would be insufficient energy available from the released potential energy of the upper section to satisfy all of the energy demands of the collision. The analysis shows that despite the assumptions made in favor of collapse continuation, vertical movement of the falling section would be arrested prior to completion of the 3% shortening phase of the impacted columns, and within 0.02 seconds after impact.

A collapse driven only by gravity would not continue to progress beyond that point.
-- snip --
The next immediate task for the falling mass to continue in its descent would be the plastic shortening within the remainder of the buckle length. As has already been stated, a buckling failure mode has a minimum length over which it can act and in the case of the towers would be several storey lengths. Each additional storey length involved in the buckle would add a further demand of about 450 MJ for a further downward movement of 0.111 meters. This also shows that collapse arrest is not dependent upon an expenditure of energy in concrete pulverization, since even if this expenditure were disregarded the input energy would be exhausted during plastic shortening of the second storeys affected.

The analysis can be extrapolated to show that the energy expended within the plastic shortening phase of a six storey buckle would ensure that a fall by the upper section through two storeys under full gravitational acceleration would also be resisted at an early stage. A similar response would be elicited from an opposed three or more storey drop delivering the same levels of energy at impact. It can be further envisaged that a collapse initiated by a fall through a greater number of storeys, would be either arrested or significantly and noticeably slowed when regard is taken for energy demands both in the fall by the upper section, and by inclusion of demands identified but not quantified in this article. It should also be noted that this analysis examines only the energy levels required up to a point in time during the plastic shortening phase. Energy demands which involve further phases of the collapse mechanism, such as buckling of beams and disassociation of end connections, spandrels plates and floor connections are further massive energy demands which must then be satisfied.
-- snip --
The analysis would be justified in using the greater energy demand characteristics of a compressive failure mode for the first instances of the collapse, but I have chosen a buckling failure mode as this mode has the lowest energy demand.
-- snip --
An initiation mechanism involving a total and instantaneous loss of all load bearing ability on one storey, sufficient to cause a 3.7 m drop under full gravitational acceleration followed by a neat impact is not credible. This is presented to show the relative sizes of the energies involved. This analysis underestimates the energy demands by using a constant value of velocity, equal to the velocity at impact, 8.5 m/sec. This is an assumption made in favor of collapse continuation.
This analysis also assumes that each storey had the same mass. The effect that this assumption has, is to underestimate the energy losses at collision. No account has been taken of the mass which falls outside the tower perimeter, and most notably neither of the expulsion of large amounts of dust early in the collapse, nor of the energy requirement to cause these masses to move outside the perimeter.

This analysis takes no regard of the energy consumed in damage caused to spandrels plates or other structural elements, nor disconnection of the floor to column connections, crushing of floor contents, nor of any other energies expended. No account is taken of any strain energy consumption during the initial fall through the height of one full storey, though this would be a substantial proportion of the initial energy input.

Gordon Ross did not include those further huge energy demands and STILL there's a deficit in energy for a naturally occurring collapse to be able to proceed.

Just as Charles M. Beck showed us, while he was taking 50 % of ALL resistance out of HIS equations, and still there was not enough energy to keep a natural collapse going.
Try to realize what it means, HALF of ALL steel and concrete resistance removed from a WTC Tower collapse calculation, and STILL it lacks a lot of energy to keep it going.

Only huge extra energy packs from detonating explosives could start an engineered global collapse in those 3 to 5 times over-engineered Twin Towers on 9/11/2001.
Which will after that man-made event proceed as a gravity driven, natural collapse, ev. aided by more explosives on the way down to be sure that the total destruction would proceed to ground level.

6. WTC 2 - CloseUp of Collapse Initiation-Full Tower Width :

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:27 PM
This following recent (July 2016) thread at starts with an interaction between Ozeco41 and SanderO ( "Jeffrey Sandor Orling, RA" ) and goes on as an interesting, nearly 3 page long dialogue between them about the collapse initiation stages of the 9/11 towers and the many misconceptions about them.
""The OP intent was to "Explain Initiation", NOT progression, NOT ROOSD.""

Post in that thread by ozeco41 : Notice that the visible perimeter of the left side is dropping well inside the perimeter of the lower tower. That is one of four sides and it is my "elephant in the room".

I'll include the video and his text just above that sentence, explaining his ""elephant"". Some excerpts :

Ozeco41 : So let's get the full scenario mapped out first.
Recall my targeted end point from the OP is:
Recall we are distinguishing an "initiation stage" which ends once the "Top Block" is "dropping bodily" and a "progression stage" which follows. And we will need to be clear as to the difference because that is one often repeated source of confusion. (POSC=points of some confusion)

Progression Stage Is Outside The Scope of This Explanation.
So let's be clear what I am not explaining.

I describe the "progression stage" mechanism as "Three Mechanisms".
Major_Tom and his colleague femr2 coined the acronym "ROOSD" ["Runaway Open Office Space Destruction"]. Whatever terminology you prefer the key features of that progression stage mechanism were:

A) Material fell down the OOS ["Open Office Space"] (1) shearing off the floors allowing the Perimeter to peel off and fall away (2) and material falling in the core area sheared off the horizontal beams (3) allowing the core columns to also fall over; AND
B) The columns which are the main vertical load support parts of the structure were effectively bypassed. Did not provide much resistance to the progression. Were not involved in buckling failure other than some minor exceptions. (POSC)
C) Hence my description of "Three Mechanisms" based on (1), (2) and (3).

Let's Define Our End Point - "How ROOSD Started"
The topic has not been discussed much, AFAIK (as far as I know), but one common explanation presumes that somehow separating floor mass accumulated in sufficient quantities to shear off the floors below.
There is an elephant in that room which seems to go unnoticed.
Let's see why - watch this clip to refresh what bit of collapse we are discussing. It is WTC2 but the WTC1 mechanism involved the same factors- different balance but same factors:

What do we see?
Step P - At 1 second -Settling - early motion - mostly vertical as columns failing in some sort of sequence;
Step Q - By 4 seconds - significant tilt of the Top Block - Base of Top Block moves horizontally to the right - ensures column ends are out of line;
Step R - At ~5 seconds rapid downwards dropping with no obvious extra tilt;
Step S - At 6 seconds - disappears into dust.

Notice that the visible perimeter of the left side is dropping well inside the perimeter of the lower tower. That is one of four sides and it is my "elephant in the room".

Here is why (Graphic borrowed from one of Achimspok's animations - my addition of the arrows etc):

See that nice graphic and his further explanation for yourself, in the above forum link.
His last remark about it :

And by that Step P - that point in the process - all the critical failing has occurred. Ongoing collapse is inevitable. We do not need to explain Steps Q R S to "prove" the cascade mechanism. BUT we use them for explanation of some of the common POSC. ( = points of some confusion)

The last post by Ozeco41 was on the 14th of July, it looks as if one, or both, took a vacation.

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:30 PM
My take on his ""elephant"", and Major Tom's ROOSD scenario point A (while I am still open to minor suggestions, which could need me to change my scenario for a viable Initiation stage, a tad bit) :

The tower collapse videos show indisputably that there were no floors failing, or disconnected from the perimeter and/or outer core columns DURING the Initiation phase, SINCE there was a straight level horizontal line of inwards pulled exterior column ends, bending inwards over about a minute time-span for about 1 meter deep inwards, just before any further signs of collapse-begin.
And no visible sides of broken-off composite floor areas were passing rows of vertical and/or horizontal Tower windows while supposedly falling behind them, all before ROOSD scenario A takes place.

That above mentioned ""one of four sides"" is also the side where the exterior panels were already bend inwards BEFORE Ozeco41 his Step P, on a level line along the periphery of the facade, indicating that a still intact immense floor space was pulling those exterior columns and window frames inwards, which can only occur when a whole row of CORE columns failed at once, dumped down rather slowly because of all the still attached horizontal and vertical composite steel areas above those column-cuts, pulling their attached COMPOSITE floor space with them, thus increasing their angle towards the periphery facade, and thus forcing that periphery line slightly downwards, and as a geometrical result, at least one meter inwards.

Such a huge composite floor area can NOT expand while it is sinking down under an angle to the exterior, still attached to the outer core columns row that was cut.
Thus one part of the triangular vectors force equation has to give way, and that is the weakest part, thus the exterior columns were bended inwards, following one straight horizontal FLOOR-line along the facade AND the floor line there.
See the photos or YouTube videos of that inwards bending facade. Or the above David Chandler videos.

And remember that those exterior columns were "stepping stoned" intertwined column triplets, connected by four bolts at both their ends (and sporadicly welds at the tower tops), and every Vierendeel triplet shifted position from every other triplet. And there were huge spandrels plates welded onto the insides of those triplets. On the seats welded to those spandrels plates rested the huge composite floor area trusses and were the reinforcement-rods also welded on.

Which photos and videos of a straight horizontal indentation line is the HARD evidence that not the floor connections to the exterior panels broke, since then we would have seen NO indention at all.
And we would have seen in those HD videos, that whole outer floor lines broken away from their seats on the spandrels plates inside those exterior columns were passing whole horizontal rows of windows on multiple floors, which we did NOT see at all, there was no movement behind those glass windows to observe in those HD-videos.
The only thing I have hinted at before, was that outside frame of a lowered ceiling that bended down a bit, along some 6 windows, probably caused by the heat of a fire, or something giving way inside that ceiling. That was definitely NOT a bending composite floor side.

That straight horizontal indentation line, combined with no evidence at all of falling floors behind those rows of windows, is the HARD evidence that the floor areas were still INTACT, firmly connected to the spandrels plates on the Vierendeel triplets and to the row of outer-core columns, and thus pulled those exterior columns at those positions, inwards.
Which proves that something very heavy must have pulled at those floors, from the other connected side, where those floor areas were also welded and bolted to the core columns and the beams between the outer row of core columns.

In case something very heavy would have fallen for example in the middle of that floor area at the side where the exterior indentation showed up in videos, it could have been the only other form of collapse initiation.
However, such immense loads were not present in that region, only parts of the above floors could have fallen down there, which would have acted as sheared off floor parts that hinged around their still connected "hinge" positions. Far too minor loads to dent the lower floor area to such depths, that the exterior columns would dent inwards along one straight horizontal line.

The only possible huge resulting force present, was the static load (weight) of a huge part of the whole upper top, on a row of instantly failing (f.ex. diagonally cut by linear shaped + kicker charges) and thus dislocated core columns over a whole outer core-side length, all at the same vertical height, which row did not loose their connections to that huge composite floor area connected to those outer core columns, and thus that static load still pressing on their top ends would force that row of outer core columns down a few meters, against all the pushing-up forces of the still intact vertical columns, their connected horizontal beams, vertical crossbeams and the composite horizontal floor areas, in that specific outer core area.
All the core and exterior steel columns and beams were over-engineered, 3 to 5 times the calculated static (weight) plus life (wind) loads.

This result can only be reached by diagonally cutting that outer core column row to facilitate slipping down and thus dislocation of these cut columns.
In other words, the whole row was diagonally cut at least in two spots on the columns, the first one just under one floor deck. The other diagonally cuts were situated a few meters lower, to facilitate the sinking of these outer core-columns over a few meters downwards.
Probably counter-diagonally cut, so that the upper cut&dislocated core columns area would push the lower core columns outwards, like a slightly conical "piston", just not really fitting in that lower "cylinder" of columns. Starting a progressive core collapse, aided by some other explosive linear cutter charges on the way down, especially at the reinforced mechanical floors.

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:33 PM
The upper (outwards? ) layers of the three debris heaps were shipped off the FIRST night already by 200 dumpster trucks, as Mayor Giuliani proudly told the press. See him telling that in the above video.
If, as assumed, those collapses were demolitions, those cut core columns could have laid at the outskirts of the debris heaps, on top of them, since they were the last parts to reach the ground.
Of course they could not have reached the center of those heaps in that first night, so there must have been other measures later on, to conceal all that MISSING core columns evidence.
Only three core column parts from the collapse initiation floors from WTC 1 and 2, were saved later on, and two of them were parts of one same length of column. See my former posts a few pages back, about them.

From WTC-7 was NOTHING of its internal steel nor core columns preserved.
While we would have been UTTERLY interested in its bottom core columns from floor 3 up to floor 13.
And the eastern top columns, nr 79 and 44 f.ex., from under the eastern penthouse, that visually sunk into the roof first, followed by sunlight beginning to shine through the windows in the floors below that E. Penthouse, while it, and those floors, dropped several floors down.

A FEMA researcher showed us in the first year, two small pieces of corroded steel flanges, thin as a razor blade, presumably corroded in a by sulfur and heat aided process (Sulfidated steel), which sulfidation could have of course occurred in the hot debris heap, so is not conclusive as pre-collapse evidence.
If those two sole WTC-7 steel leftovers are still in a cupboard somewhere, then those are the only artifacts left over from the former WTC-7.
That fact alone should raise your official stories BS-meter readings immediately to their 100% limit.

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:35 PM
Project Truth (WTC) - Sip 3.1 Physical Evidence A (Demolition Components) :

Virtually any type of electrical wiring can be utilized to initiate electronic detonators as shown at 4:47 in this clip. What you need to consider are the differences between a commercial demolition and a sabotage operation. Do you really think they are going to use readily identifiable demolition products?

As you can see at 4:47 minutes in this video, an electronically induced detonation device is TOTALLY obliterated when ignited by an electrical current, leaving behind ONLY two thin electrical wires.
How on earth could someone inspecting fine debris on a conveyor belt at Freshkill Island EVER discriminate between normal building wiring and those wires.?
While at the same time being told by all superiors that there was no need to search for explosives, since they were "sure" those were not involved in the collapses.

Further to consider is the fact that an electronically triggered thermobaric device leaves behind no traces at all, all that is left after its detonation are gases and very finely dispersed oxidation products that will drift away as ultra-fine chemical dusts in the superheated up-going air streams.

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 06:38 PM
Let's review this video maker his 36 videos, they are worth your time, if you are still in doubt about 9/11 :

Project Truth (WTC) - Sip 2.0 Evidence of Shaped Charges :

Read the Description.!

Project Truth (WTC) - Sip 1.9 Shaped Charges :

Read its highly interesting 103 Comments.!
The sophisticated argumentation between "Project Truth WTC" and "Albury Smith". Mr Smith becomes a tad bit vitriolic as soon as he realizes that he's not arguing with an idiot, as he first thought, but with an explosives expert.

I'll give you one extra argument to consider, before you start reading these 103 arguments :

All exterior column ends were accessible through square access holes at the top and bottom ends of the exterior columns, to manually fasten the 4 bolts that kept every 2 exterior column ends together.

It thus could be that all these bolts were manually removed in the collapse-progression regions of importance, shortly before 9/11/2001, by the 9/11 planners. It's quite difficult to provide conclusive evidence for this scenario, but one thing jumps out on you, when you review lots of debris heap videos : as good as all exterior column ends in those videos are not bended at all, while they were stuck inside each-other's ends, bolted together by 4 bolts and 4 nuts when erected in the 60-70ties.

I once posted about dusty window boxes, which was information offered by a former WTC tenant worker who also explained that lots of night time work was done in the weeks before 9/11. And every morning when he came to his workplace, the window boxes were covered with dust.

Comments excerpts :

Project Truth WTC : Anyone planning to destroy the towers with explosives would also know that the signatures of their usage would be indelibly etched into the very fabric of the steel and could be identified via micro-structure testing. Therefore any plan to demolish the towers would also involve operations to remove and destroy this evidence without such examination. That this is exactly what then occurred is down to simple incompetence or was it by deliberate design?
-- snip --
Rod Martin : But national safety regulations mandate the testing for explosives in such a collapse. They didn't follow regs. And because explosives had been used in 93, it seems obvious that explosives might have been used again. Not to check for explosives was wrong on so many levels. Throwing "pixie dust" into the argument is just plain dumb -- a nonsense tactic to distract from real issues.
Nano-thermite is not a secret explosive. One of the WTC tenants had a patent on demolition use.
-- snip --
At 9:51 'in this clip' you can also see the military version of shaped charges that are designed to be used in a very compressed time frame without any requirement for pre-cutting or other preparations.
-- snip --
Albury Smith : Your links only go to this page, but I'm quite familiar with the tower framing & office layout, and no honest video would alter the fact that there was no access to the perimeter columns except right through continuous 3/8" X 52" spandrels. It's also obvious that even if someone secretly accessed the ceiling voids on every floor at every column, explosive cutting there would have been impossible to miss in the debris. It's also fact that the joints were all at eye level behind plaster on steel.

He's wrong, that someone only had to remove the nuts on the 4 bolts on every exterior column end. Thus, no cutting charges needed :

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 07:16 PM
I'll refrain from posting all the 36 links and videos, you can find them by title in the above link.

Project Truth (WTC) - Sip 1.2 WTC Construction

See at 2:41 / 3:45 minutes for a clear view on those column-ends their access holes, and how DEEP those 3 exterior columns their bottom ends were stuck over the lower 3 top ends from the triplet below. At least 30 cm in.
Then the clean disconnects of nearly all exterior columns as seen in videos and photos after the collapses, no bending of those column ends, is amazing. Just quadruple broken/sheared-off bolts per column end.
Or were the column ends just bolted by those 4 bolts and 4 nuts, end to end only, no capping-over .? Why are the bottom-end access holes then higher situated (further away from the column end) than the top end holes.?

See 3:11 min. for welded floor seats on spandrels plates.

Outer steelwork of WTC directly accessible from ceiling void but obscured from view of office occupants.
Simply through those square cut-out access holes you see in this above video, in the bottom and top of each exterior column.

LT : Now it's getting VERY interesting :
Albury Smith is SPECIFICALLY offering the Ashley Banfield WTC-7 interview video clip as his evidence for BANG-FREE WTC hi-rise collapses.

Ashley Banfield was interviewing a woman with her baby on her arm on West Broadway, some hundreds meters north of WTC-7.

I provided EXACTLY that video in my OpeningPost as evidence provided by David Chandler and Ewing Smith that in the 8.3 seconds period between the first sign of collapse initiation of WTC-7 and the start of its global collapse, you can hear nine distinct explosions, while you also can see the reactions of Ashley, the woman and the crowd around them on these explosions and the following start of WTC-7 its global collapse.
And to top that off, you can ALSO see the explosions clouds form in the distance, at the northeastern base-corner of WTC-7.

Read these two video-commenter their interactions, here are some of them :

Project Truth WTC : I have repeatedly offered to make an audio comparison clip but as yet you have yet to reference even one WTC clip with which to make a comparison...

Again you make this claim that the destruction of the WTC towers was "bang-free"... Where is the audio evidence that validates this claim?

If your going to keep repeating these same sort of statements then its about time you put some substance to your claim. All I ask is for you to reference just one WTC destruction audio clip. Just one!!! Please.

Albury Smith : Your video is about shaped charges. They're used in the controlled demolition of steel-framed buildings, so any video with audio would give viewers more information on them, and you could use that as your own reference point to make a comparison to the bang-free WTC hi-rise collapses.

Albury Smith : Google "ashley banfield wtc 7."
-- snip --
Albury Smith : Why didn't this video include audio of the explosions if you're so interested in the truth?

LT : Because it DID....! NINE of them...! And THAT's the TRUTH..! See the Ashley Banfield video analysis, in my OP in this thread, titled :
WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

This is the Ashley Banfield video analysis, watch those audio footprints of the 9 explosions at the end of this video :

Project Truth WTC : If you watch the Detonators Season 1 Episode 7 (Fort William) it includes a number of different scenarios that demonstrate the use of kicker charges and the techniques used to apply them in demolitions. You can see that kicker charges don’t actually cut through the steelwork; they are normally used in conjunction with either pre cutting or shaped charges to assist with the displacement of cut sections of steelwork.
At best such charges may be used to shatter a steel column rather that cut it!

MrKoenig1985 (4 years ago) : But there's an alternative to cutting charges: kicker charges. Those charges do not cut steel but kick column sections out of the vertical alignment, so the structure above loses the support and crashes down to the ground.
I think the placement of an explosives pack just above the bolted connection of a wide-flange column would bend the lower end out the alignment and the column section falls down. 

At 10:42 min. of this video of 25:22 min. you see an example of how the end of a column could look if displaced by a kicker charge :

This link will start the video at that picture :

Of course this could also have been caused by something heavy impacting both sides of that column end, but that is a tad bit far reaching, i.m.n.h.op. That is a HUGE column.
And no real skid marks on it, only those two small marks. By claws of a mechanical excavator, perhaps.? It looks however clearly as if those two short marks are welds on top of the steel flange, they are not indents.! They are welded on that flange, a bit sticking out.

edit on 31/7/16 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 07:25 PM
I'll refrain from posting all the 36 links and videos, you can find them by title in the above link.

These two are for samkent.! Who can lend him some hearing aids, or a top class headphone.? :

Project Truth (WTC) - Sip 2.8 (Part1) No Sound Claim (Eyewitnesses)

Project Truth (WTC) - Sip 2.8 (Part2) No Sound Claim (Audio Comparisons)

Sip 1.1 - WTC Blast Comparison.
Project Truth WTC : See 1:53-3:19 min.

Again, in the clip I presented, the progression of blast ejections are clearly visible as they progress well in advance of the main debris cloud. That you continue to claim they are obscured when obviously they are not, is yet another indication of your inability to openly consider the evidence.

Sip 1.1 (See 4:44-4:48 min. )

Notice also the blast ejections inside the structure can be observed keeping pace with debris canopy falling externally from the structure.

Sip 3.3 Physical Evidence C (Extreme Heat Exposure). See 5:45 min. :

Project Truth WTC : I have already provided a video reference whereby the horizontal and diagonal progression of the blast ejections and the cap scatter pattern are CLEARLY visible, no x-ray vision needed. That your unable to see these is perhaps indicative of the same scotoma that keeps you from identifying explosions. Perhaps you should get that checked out.

Sip 4.0 (See 1:02-1:38 min. )

The tower does not begin to move before or after the detonations, ejections and smoke displacement. It all happens simultaneously.

posted on Aug, 1 2016 @ 07:05 PM
a reply to: LaBTop

There can only be ONE explanation for the criminal hurry with which all the steel on top of the debris heaps was removed in those first weeks and some of the following months

Or they were trying to clean up the mess.
You are reading too much into the events of 911.

(post by MrBig2430 removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

top topics

<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in