What really happened ....11 september
- Thread starter NickBarings
- Start date
the classic ten characteristic elements of a demolition:
1. sudden onset
2. symmetrical collapse
3. near free fall speed
4. total collapse [not partial or localized]
5. sliced steel
6. pulverization of concrete
7. pyrotechnic dust cloud-debris ejection
8. demolition rings
9. molten steel
10. eyewitnesses hearing explosions.
food for thought.
1. sudden onset
2. symmetrical collapse
3. near free fall speed
4. total collapse [not partial or localized]
5. sliced steel
6. pulverization of concrete
7. pyrotechnic dust cloud-debris ejection
8. demolition rings
9. molten steel
10. eyewitnesses hearing explosions.
food for thought.
Oh My Gosh...
People, take a look at the 'squibs' (explosions to demolition experts) that are highlighted in the video at around 36:25 or so....
That seems like very strong evidence for bomb explosions on the lower floors PRIOR to the upper collapse catching up.
Anyone like to comment on that??!!
from Paul Craig Robert's on Aug 14th:
Scientists and engineers, such as Clemson University Professor of Engineering Dr. Judy Woods and BYU Professor of Physics Dr. Steven Jones, have raised compelling questions about the official account of the collapse of the three WTC buildings. The basic problem for the government's account is that the buildings are known to have fallen at free fall speed, a fact that is inconsistent with the government's "pancaking" theory in which debris from above collapsed the floors below. If the buildings actually "pancaked," then each floor below would have offered resistance to the floors above, and the elapsed time would have been much longer. These experts have also calculated that the buildings did not have sufficient gravitational energy to accommodate the government's theory of the collapse. It is certainly a known and non-controversial fact among physicists and engineers that the only way buildings can collapse at free fall speed into their own footprints is by engineered demolition. Explosives are used to remove the support of floors below before the debris from above arrives. Otherwise, resistance is encountered and the time required for fall increases. Engineered demolition also explains the symmetrical collapse of the buildings into their own foot prints. As it is otherwise improbable for every point in floors below to weaken uniformly, "pancaking" would result in asymmetrical collapse as some elements of the floor would give sooner than others.
does that answer your question? and as far as i'm aware, it did have an internal steel beam structure, 47 beams i think
you have this approach in common with a lot of other people. rings hollow to me, but maybe there are people out there who find this convincing or feel it reinforces their certainty. i'm not sure
I'm so tired of this "free fall" myth. It's as if something gets repeated on the internet enough times and it then becomes "fact".
A year and a half ago I attempted to engage one of the usuals on this issue -- I found a simple lipsynched video on the net and laid the stopwatch to it (find your own...do the test).
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=764995&highlight=lipsynch#post764995
(halfway down the post addresses the free fall issue)
No one would even respond with any evidence refuting my simple test.
On and freakin' on ---- "free fall", "free fall", "free fall".
WTC DIDN'T FREE FALL and saying it again ain't gonna make is so. Picture after picture, video after video show debris external of the building structure significanly ahead of the core.
I repeat the question/challenge presented in my above post from ~18 months ago.
JB
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
A year and a half ago I attempted to engage one of the usuals on this issue -- I found a simple lipsynched video on the net and laid the stopwatch to it (find your own...do the test).
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=764995&highlight=lipsynch#post764995
(halfway down the post addresses the free fall issue)
No one would even respond with any evidence refuting my simple test.
On and freakin' on ---- "free fall", "free fall", "free fall".
WTC DIDN'T FREE FALL and saying it again ain't gonna make is so. Picture after picture, video after video show debris external of the building structure significanly ahead of the core.
I repeat the question/challenge presented in my above post from ~18 months ago.
JB
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
Knowing the BS that comes out of Washington I wouldn't be at all surprised if this whole 9/11 stuff was engineered by the neocons..
They do have extensive experience in BS...I'm still waiting for those WMD's to surface from Iraq
They do have extensive experience in BS...I'm still waiting for those WMD's to surface from Iraq