• Advertisement

Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Post general discussions here
Wayne
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 9:24 pm
x 28
x 34
Canada

Re: Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Postby Wayne » Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:12 am

Peppercorn,

For me the problem isn't complicated. Freefall is what it is. If you drop an object from 1,368 feet (417 m), the previous height of Tower 1; and at 1,362 feet (415.1 m), the previous height of Tower 2, it will take approximately 11 seconds for an object at this height to hit the ground anywhere on the planet (32 fps/ps). That's not opinion, but basic physics. No letters after your name are required, just an understanding of high school mathematics. If the object takes longer than this to fall, it is being slowed by a solid structure below it providing resistance.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a measurement standards laboratory, and a non-regulatory agency of the United States Department of Commerce. In their report on 911, they note that the three buildings (tower 1, 2 and building 7) experienced a freefall state when they collapsed (there is lots of video, you can time it yourself),

Using common sense, what do you think caused the total support structure of two 110 story buildings to completely disappear? Magic, controlled demolitions, or is there another explanation?

To-date, 2,895 Architects and Engineers of the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth have signed a petition for an independent investigation into this disaster. They find the explanations provided by the 911 Commission either improbable or scientifically impossible, Although I'm not an engineer, I'm of a mind that the laws of physics did apply on September 11th. Moreover, the tons of glass and concrete that were spontaneously disintegrated (clearly seen in the videos) could not occur without an external expenditure of energy (explosive). Concrete does not disintegrate because it falls (it waits to hit something solid first)...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-z6Qa6zgUf8g/T ... apse1B.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ib2gFigkTV0/T ... 2gkm4x.jpg
0 x

helicopilot
Topic Leader
Posts: 1076
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 1:59 pm
Location: Back in AB, Yeah!!!
x 16
x 57
Canada

Re: Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Postby helicopilot » Wed Sep 20, 2017 4:58 am

Ok, I'll play along as well. Assuming the cause of the destruction is indeed explosive related and someone pocketed $5bn in the process and - lets push this a bit further - the government managed to get it's agenda of fighting a couple of middle-eastern countries AND say people profited from the sale of military gear...

How can so many people be involved in the charade:

1) Acquiring a likely HUGE amount of explosive
2) Bringing in demolition experts to rig said explosive
3) Doing so in a very populated area without raising suspicions
4) Hijack 4 airliners
5) Find suicidal maniacs to fly said planes into targets
6) Ensure all explosives are in place and ready to detonate them at a convenient time while the planes are hitting the building or after a short period of time to ensure realism

Then, find a way to silence all those involved.

I suspect anyone approached by some sketchy person saying "I'll pay you bizilion dollars and move you on a private island in exchange for your explosives knowledge on a super-top secret mission" would also read that they may end up with cement shoes in the Hudson river... So unlikely people played along.

But anyway...

I've since finished my pilot training and other than having to remove my shoes at the airport, life goes on.
0 x

User avatar
peppercorn
Posts: 979
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 6:06 am
Location: Alberta
x 7
x 43
Contact:

Re: Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Postby peppercorn » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:29 am

Wayne wrote:Peppercorn,

For me the problem isn't complicated. Freefall is what it is. If you drop an object from 1,368 feet (417 m), the previous height of Tower 1; and at 1,362 feet (415.1 m), the previous height of Tower 2, it will take approximately 11 seconds for an object at this height to hit the ground anywhere on the planet (32 fps/ps). That's not opinion, but basic physics. No letters after your name are required, just an understanding of high school mathematics. If the object takes longer than this to fall, it is being slowed by a solid structure below it providing resistance.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a measurement standards laboratory, and a non-regulatory agency of the United States Department of Commerce. In their report on 911, they note that the three buildings (tower 1, 2 and building 7) experienced a freefall state when they collapsed (there is lots of video, you can time it yourself),

Using common sense, what do you think caused the total support structure of two 110 story buildings to completely disappear? Magic, controlled demolitions, or is there another explanation?




For me the problem isn't complicated. Freefall is what it is. If you drop an object from 1,368 feet (417 m), the previous height of Tower 1; and at 1,362 feet (415.1 m), the previous height of Tower 2, it will take approximately 11 seconds for an object at this height to hit the ground anywhere on the planet (32 fps/ps). That's not opinion, but basic physics. No letters after your name are required, just an understanding of high school mathematics. If the object takes longer than this to fall, it is being slowed by a solid structure below it providing resistance.

I was with you until the last sentence....by a solid structure below it...Now I am glad you mentioned the NIST and used data from them, though I have no idea how you have reached different conclusions than they did....So just in case you missed their conclusions and how they came to them ..here is the links First a explanation of tower 7....https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-7-investigation. nothing ambiguous here, its pretty straight forward.
Now here is a synopsis of questions/answers asked about towers 1 and two. https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-t ... estigation, they explain freefall and why that's not relevant.
I can give you more links to their investigation but we are talking about over 10,000 detailed pages.
I like the idea that you are suspicious of the government, So am I, I am not trying to change that, more people should be so....but I value being accurate as well....

I can only think of this analogy....if I heard galloping hoves out side my window tonight, would I likely be correct if I assumed them to be gazelles, or am I more likely to be right if I think my neighbours horses got out again?

of course just the thought of the GB administration coordinating such a detailed massive in both men and material, accurate and well timed event goes beyond credibility for me.....Remember this was the "hanging chad" administration that couldn't run a election without error, where counting is the single skill required :lol:

Now was there a conspiracy of actions and intent after this event ?, you bet, and multi pronged...but thats a separate issue...
0 x
a puppet is free, so long as it likes its strings.

Wayne
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 9:24 pm
x 28
x 34
Canada

Re: Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Postby Wayne » Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:14 am

helicopilot wrote:Ok, I'll play along as well. Assuming the cause of the destruction is indeed explosive related and someone pocketed $5bn in the process and - lets push this a bit further - the government managed to get it's agenda of fighting a couple of middle-eastern countries AND say people profited from the sale of military gear...

How can so many people be involved in the charade:

1) Acquiring a likely HUGE amount of explosive
2) Bringing in demolition experts to rig said explosive
3) Doing so in a very populated area without raising suspicions
4) Hijack 4 airliners
5) Find suicidal maniacs to fly said planes into targets
6) Ensure all explosives are in place and ready to detonate them at a convenient time while the planes are hitting the building or after a short period of time to ensure realism

Then, find a way to silence all those involved.

I suspect anyone approached by some sketchy person saying "I'll pay you bizilion dollars and move you on a private island in exchange for your explosives knowledge on a super-top secret mission" would also read that they may end up with cement shoes in the Hudson river... So unlikely people played along.

But anyway...

I've since finished my pilot training and other than having to remove my shoes at the airport, life goes on.



There's no doubt that this involved a large operation. At the time, renovations were underway. Specifically these were being done on several different floors and in the elevator shafts of the buildings. I'm confident that (specific to your first 3 points) any supplies could be moved around in these areas in the day time without notice. Workers did not need to use any public area (as is common in most large office buildings). Large projects and refitting was historically done to many areas of these buildings. Actions of this type were common place.

As to the hijacking of the aircraft, this would have been easier at that time than what it would be today. Many of the security measures used today were as a result of 911. Security was much more open and less restrictive then. Interestingly enough, the CIA had a project that involved switching out an airliner with a remotely flown aircraft. This was to be accomplished without notice of ATC. The 5 hour video I've listed shows more detail of this project.

The video also relates the flight path of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon. Several experienced airline pilots with 4000+ hours on type have started that with their skill set, they would be incapable of flying the same route that the alleged terrorist flew. We are to believe that this person (who had never been at the controls of a jet aircraft in his life) accomplished this. A few weeks prior a flight instructor who flew with him said he wasn't at the solo stage in a 150. Yet people swallow what is said without question.
0 x

Wayne
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 9:24 pm
x 28
x 34
Canada

Re: Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Postby Wayne » Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:51 am

Peppercorn,

The 2000+ engineers and architects I mention disagree with the NIST conclusion. Despite Building 7 having a higher degree of protection from fire (substantially above code) NIST is suggesting that Building 7 is the first steel supported structure in the planet's history to collapse as a result of fire. They do not offer any credible information to substantiate the temperatures required. To use your analogy, if I heard the beating of wings outside my window tonight, would I likely be correct if I assumed them to my neighbours horses who got out again or birds?

Fire generates heat at temperatures that relate to the material being consumed. In a steel office building you have limited wood and cloth. These can exert a maximum temperature of 1600 degrees.

It takes temperatures over 2500 degrees F to soften / melt steel. These temperatures are not present in a building fire (unless chemicals/explosives are introduced to it). In this case, said chemicals/explosives would have to be applied evenly to cause a near perfect horizontal collapse and free fall of the building. Even if this was a chemical plant we were talking about and not an office building, it would likely collapse/melt in the areas of chemical location and not uniformly with areas where no chemicals existed...

Why would the building collapse anyway when fire was not present in the lower floors. These areas surly wouldn't collapse under fire, when there was no fire in these areas. Why would these otherwise sound structures not slow the collapse of upper floor? Why does the 3D depiction of the NST collapse not resemble what actually transpired on camera? To wit, one side of the building collapsing and then the other, where it can be clearly seen falling in almost perfect horizontal symmetry...

If you doubt what I'm saying, start a fire in your fireplace and try to melt the steel grate. A ridiculous notion isn't it?
0 x

User avatar
Denob
Site Admin
Posts: 2603
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:35 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada
x 13
x 34
Contact:
Canada

Re: Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

Postby Denob » Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:19 pm

This has gone WAY off topic...shutting it down.
If anyone wishes to discuss conspiracy theories, please take it to the fringe area.
1 x


Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest