Simple Calculations Showing The Official 911 Story Is Impossible, An explanation for the intelligent layman. Options

[SanderO]

Talayo,

911 was a complex technical event and puzzle to solve. It does not lend itself to sound bites. Good luck with that.

[talayo]

sanderso

You reply gives the impression that you do not have much of a sense of humor.

That was supposed to help to relax the exchanges!

Somebody states categorically that does not find you obnoxios in any manner and that is all you can respond.

I guess you decide to shelve Tolstoy and be brief with a sound bite.

The issue is as complicated as you want to make it.

If the towers were brought down by initial explosive charges, that is all that will need to be proven in court to dismisss the standard narrative.

The rest is interesting details, but you do not seem to think so.

Please let me know that whether your hypotesis is correct or the advocators of further demolition charges are correct what difference does it make from a legal stand point. A crime was committed. Now we are arguing about the "size of the crime". Either hypotesis is sufficient to put somebody in jail for a very long time, if not face capital punishment.

By the way, I do not believe that your hypothesis is correct or the multiple explosives is either.

Something very extraordinary took place that day that no theory/hypothesis formulated so far covers all the unusual events that took place that day.

[SanderO]

Absolutely correct in that a crime is a crime is a crime. The research into what happened reveals facts about what the crime actually was... and can lead to how extensive the plot or conspiracy was...how long it may have taken to set up and so forth. Of course this leads to WHO may have done it. Sure if we have a dead body with bullet holes in it we know someone or one's likely murdered the person. But we have to solve the ACTUAL details of the crime.

Or as Mies Van Der Rohe said... "god is in the details".

So I don't believe the official story... but I don't accept the entire alternate one either because unfortunately.. I believe it too is plagued with incorrect statements... We don't want to "convict the wrong perp9s)... and we don't want to let anyone get away with the crime. We are a ways from solving this one.

[trimble]

So it seems that when high rise buildings made with lightweight concrete slabs collapse from 700+ feet not much of them or the contents on them seems to survive. We don't have much of anything in the historical record to refer to... no buildings collapse with massive piles of concrete and contents.. and none of that size has ever collapsed or been CDed... with the tallest structure being 25 stories of so... completely different animals.

There is a lot of dust generated shortly, much less than 25-stories, after initiation. Arguing that pulverisation is a unique preserve of very tall building demolitions won't cut it. What is unique about the aerated concrete and steel floorpan sections? If nothing, what else could explain the difference? As much as I agree that collapse propagation was through a chaotic collapse from dynamic overload (resulting localised air pressures and velocity of components would be enormous), I cannot understand the quantities of observed DUST, even appearing well above (!) the collapse front, being expelled perhaps 10 stories after initiation. There surely must be an active agent at the start of collapse to produce such volumes of dust so early on.

An observation. Take a look at the second tower collapse. At the very start of collapse, in order to achieve collapse, an overloaded floor or floors (in a fragmentary but unpulverised state - chaotic collapse ...) will obviously have to start to fall, and then impact the one below. For this to happen, all the air below these floor fragments, which we might presume to be very large indeed courtesy of the interconnected floor structure, must either make its way above those fragments, or out of the side of the building. But there appears to be little expulsion of anything out of the sides of the building at first, and this must suggest very fragmented floor pans : this would support a chaotic collapse initiation and propagation method over "pancakes" (and, rather neatly, suggests the loss of rigidity of your tube). It also begs the question: how can an entire floor or floors become massively fragmentary across their entire area (ie. not just at the impact damage sites). We would expect little sideways expulsion around the impact site, but lots more on more distant sides. We do not see that disparity. What we DO see is little expulsion anywhere at the apparent external collapse front. Indeed, and very oddly imo, we get more expulsions much further up the tower (smoke not dust I assume?). Something has caused massive breakup of the floorpans. And are the floorplans broken for many floors above the visible collapse front, for we are getting instant displacement of smoke many stories above (no, its not ducting or a vacuum)?

This post has been edited by trimble: Sep 11 2011, 07:14 PM