IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Wtc Misrepresentations: New Book, Requesting Feedback

MajorTom
post May 24 2012, 12:08 PM
Post #41





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 16
Joined: 3-May 12
Member No.: 6,812



There has only been one attempt to measure the early acceleration of a very tall building undergoing demolition.



The Demolition of 1515 Flagler Dr...




WTC7 tracing in green, this demoed building in red.

A quick look at derived acceleration suggests very near to freefall, if indeed it is not actually reached...


Point traced:


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MajorTom
post May 24 2012, 12:10 PM
Post #42





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 16
Joined: 3-May 12
Member No.: 6,812



There has only been one attempt to measure the early acceleration of a very tall building undergoing demolition.



The Demolition of 1515 Flagler Dr...




WTC7 tracing in green, this demoed building in red.

A quick look at derived acceleration suggests very near to freefall, if indeed it is not actually reached...


acceleration:


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 24 2012, 03:16 PM
Post #43





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (SanderO @ May 23 2012, 11:42 AM) *
Amazed... think of the *problem* like this for example.

If there was a CD.... that is someone placed devices in the structures to destroy them... they would have had to placed them... whatever they were to INITIATE the collapses. It makes no sense that some natural phenomena caused the buildings to begin to *collapse*... and THEN after... the CD devices kicked in to *finish the job*.... or as Gage claims pulverize 90,000 tons of concrete in mid air.

I would ask.. if a natural phenomena has collapsed the top sections... why CD the whole building? So I ask my CD friends to explain how the collapse was initiated by CD devices. And were they like the traditional CDs where gravity does 90% (?) of the destructive work and still breaks the frame into the sizes it came to the site in...

If B7 falls and crushes like a CD... why not let the tops of the twins finish the job? The were collapsing down from the damaged plane impact zones (with or without CD devices to bring those tops down) Was the twin design such that it was immune to the downward forces that a 15 or 30 story mass would do? I think not... I think if you hired CDI to CD the top 15 floors of a twin tower ... you can bet he would not remain in the 93rd floor expecting no damage where he was (below the CD level).

I do not dispute that there were odd things to explain. And they must be explained.

I will also point out that no one has ever seen a skyscraper or that design collapse ... so we don't have a clue as to what it would look like and what weirdness it would produce... like heat or chemical residues and so forth. It was a first and it was repeated on that day as a second!

But simply because the building was destroyed, and it was very violent... and there were sounds of explosions and materials flying every which way... and dust ejections and lots of dust clouds and heat is NOT evidence that the building was blown to bits. It's would evidence as well of a collapse.



You may already know this, but there is a military term "Command detonated" regarding explosives, and all it means is that the device is not triggered automatically (which is another option), but rather by a person, when the timing is perfect. For example, when the enemy is inside the target area.

It is my theory that the EOC belonging to the City of New York located in building 7 was the position from which the towers were detonated by personnel.

That would suggest that WTC 7 was also command detonated, and I have not a clue from where that might have been accomplished, but probably from another building nearby. That is just my theory, and I am NO expert in explosives or demolition, not by a long shot.

The reason to CD the entire building might have been as mundane as simply making the cleanup that much quicker and easy. Why CD only part of a building, no matter how that process might have initiated?

Clearly the airplanes were just for show and shock and awe.

As Jowenko has commented, this was a professional job on all 3 buildings.

Nobody has ever seen a skyscraper of that design collapse? Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Indeed, as Peter Jennings commented, the entire world did see that happen, on TV. It may have been the first time, and probably was, but we saw it.

That we are in the proverbial "uncharted territory" seems to be quite right, especiallly for those like yourself who are in the engineering and construction profession.

For us common folks, it seems pretty damn obvious that we all witnessed that design collapse, WITH ASSISTANCE AND BY DESIGN.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post May 24 2012, 03:53 PM
Post #44





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (amazed! @ May 24 2012, 09:16 AM) *
Clearly the airplanes were just for show and shock and awe.

Amazed,

It appears that WTC7 was scheduled to be hit by plane #3 by 9:15 am per an “SS” agent but something went wrong.

It appears that this became the imaginary Shanksville plane or plan B. [Plan BS]

Keep in mind…”I have no theory”.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post May 24 2012, 11:45 PM
Post #45





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (MajorTom @ May 22 2012, 02:58 PM) *
Another glimpse of that knuckle



What are we to look for?


Hi Major,

i wouldn't recommend you staring yourself blind looking at that knuckle, but instead

rather compare the two different core structures - the first seen from 0:17 - 0:34, and

the second seen from 0:45 - 0:58, - and then notice the 'amazing' similarity between

the two, as well as noticing how they both disintegrate in like manner!


Some people maintain that when the spires start collapsing, it is simply just a part of

the rising dust cloud which surrounds the spires, making it 'appear' as if the spires

turn into dust.

Other people maintain that the spires actually do turn into dust - and so do i.


Please, take another look, and let me know how you perceive it to be!

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SanderO
post May 25 2012, 07:53 AM
Post #46





Group: Troll
Posts: 1,174
Joined: 23-December 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,814



The spire columns came down from Euler buckling.

Tom... what say you?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 25 2012, 03:31 PM
Post #47





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (elreb @ May 24 2012, 03:53 PM) *
Amazed,

It appears that WTC7 was scheduled to be hit by plane #3 by 9:15 am per an “SS” agent but something went wrong.

It appears that this became the imaginary Shanksville plane or plan B. [Plan BS]

Keep in mind…”I have no theory”.


I have heard that before, and of course as far as 'planning' goes, anything is possible.

As a pilot, I have trouble with that sort of plan being very successful, MAINLY because hitting WTC7 with a Boeing would have been most difficult because the height of the building was insufficient for a successful strike. It was a 47 story building surrounded by many higher buildings. The towers, of course were quite easy because of their 110 floors towering above all the other buildings. Relatively easy.

And I'm not familiar with the SS agent you refer to? That is, what evidence is there that 7 was supposed to have been struck with an airplane?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post May 25 2012, 04:46 PM
Post #48





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (amazed! @ May 25 2012, 09:31 AM) *
And I'm not familiar with the SS agent you refer to? That is, what evidence is there that 7 was supposed to have been struck with an airplane?

Several points

No one said anything about a Boeing or it being flown by a human. You must be one hell of a pilot; if flying a 767 point blank into WTC1 was easy.

(9:30 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Emergency Responders Receive [False] Report of a Third Plane Approaching New York

Richard Rotanz, the deputy director of the New York Office of Emergency Management (OEM), who is reportedly in the OEM command center on the 23rd floor of WTC Building 7.

A Secret Service agent in WTC 7 [reportedly] told him there were [unconfirmed] reports of other planes in the air.

Emergency medical technician Richard Zarrillo is currently in WTC 7, and is informed by an OEM rep there of the [alleged] third plane inbound for New York.

While the rest of Building 7 was evacuated earlier on (9:03 am) September 11, 2001 the threat reportedly leads to the evacuation of the OEM command center.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
KP50
post May 25 2012, 10:47 PM
Post #49



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 843
Joined: 14-May 07
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 1,044



I always find the best starting point for 9/11 is to assume that absolutely everything was planned. The evidence backs this up - the plan for the 4th plane was always for it to appear to crash exactly where it did - no heroic passengers required. Likewise at the Pentagon and likewise in NYC. It was also planned that there would be various other stories floating around to keep confusion high, such as reports of a 3rd plane approaching.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post May 25 2012, 11:00 PM
Post #50





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



I have always been a team player.

He is still welcome to be on our side.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SanderO
post May 26 2012, 12:41 AM
Post #51





Group: Troll
Posts: 1,174
Joined: 23-December 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,814



I am on no one's side Elreb. I am interested in getting the truth and having the criminal behavior, the incompetent behavior, or derliction of duty behavior, the cover up behavior and the those who committed the acts to be held accountable.

The OCT is a cover story and that to me is a conspiracy to conceal and deceive the American people. It's more than over turn it.. but getting the one's who passed on the rubbish into the hot seat with consequences.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post May 26 2012, 01:17 AM
Post #52





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (SanderO @ May 25 2012, 06:41 PM) *
I am on no one's side Elreb.

That could be your problem.

The “Truth team” does not need a theory. They need information.

Membership only requires common sense.

It is less important to know what happened verses what did not happen.

If you really want to get to the truth, ask more questions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SanderO
post May 26 2012, 08:52 AM
Post #53





Group: Troll
Posts: 1,174
Joined: 23-December 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,814



Elreb,

Asking questions is what is needed. I have no problem with that approach. I have been engaged in some fundamental research for 3 years mostly with the twins.

Falsifying is certainly important as well...

Unless we were there we have to rely on evidence left behind... look for clues to piece together the story or the truth... Can't ignore outlier evidence that undermines the explanation. If it does not fit... we must acquit...

Analyzing evidence about technical complex events requires sophisticated understanding... the application of science and engineering and of course observations must be accurate and turned into data. It looks like is not data...

Proposing a theory is fine... and then you need to test it to see if the evidence supports it.

It appears to me that we have many problems in figuring out the entire story... not the least of which we have established that the sources for the evidence is the same source as official story and we've shown those sources to be unreliable at times, inaccurate at others and deceptive as well. We know that there is also a political context and that the narrative was self serving as most are.

When we stick to the verifiable data and connect those dots... the story which emerges, as Tom has stated is not the OCT nor the 9ll truth positions, though there are elements of truth in each.. there are elements that are not truth in each. The two sides are engaged in a false debate... about the destruction at the WTC.

We should therefore not take sides but look as objectively as possible at the data and base the explanation on that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 26 2012, 10:52 AM
Post #54





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Thanks Elreb--now I see what you're saying.

It's funny that all that misinformation would come from the OEM in WTC7. That supports my thought that it was INDEED a command post for the false flag operation. Basically, those reports of the other airplane inbound were just part of the script.

The two tall towers would be easy targets because they were so tall and easy to see. That's why for me, assuming there were actually humans piloting those aircraft, the last second maneuver by 175 was so strange. A real person flying would have been able to line up on the target many miles out, especially with the weather being what it was that day.

Last second maneuver suggests some sort of homing device at play, which suggests drone control.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post May 26 2012, 06:02 PM
Post #55



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (SanderO)
Proposing a theory is fine... and then you need to test it to see if the evidence supports it.


rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post May 26 2012, 06:33 PM
Post #56



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (MajorTom @ May 24 2012, 04:58 PM) *
Another glimpse of that knuckle



What are we to look for?


When you see that gif in its entirity, I see 30 (or 40?) storys of a cold steel framework desintegrating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqSLIPwZ430

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW82nyrSOCQ

And falling straight down.

I'm trying to figure out how it came apart and fell the way it did.

1. Was there any visible evidence of this steel framework more or less in one piece in the debris pile?

2. Was that framework connected by shear studs? Bolted?

3. At first glance it appears that the base was pulled away from underneath it rather than the falling debris pushing it over. The remaining concrete on the framework that turns to dust suggests that it collapsed in on itself. That it fell desintegrated as it fell.

4. Is there any footage below that eyeline?

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: May 26 2012, 06:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post May 26 2012, 07:09 PM
Post #57



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Just thought I'd add a few images I came across

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/elev_guide.rail.supp.jpg

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/southcorestands.gif

http://home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/wsb...16/site1074.jpg

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/superimp.spire.wtc1.jpg

Courtesy of poster "christophera".

Good visuals in his video too

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6...h&plindex=0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post May 27 2012, 02:55 AM
Post #58


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,033
Joined: 16-October 06
From: dc
Member No.: 96



my take on the oft-called "spire": they are steel beam/columns whose cutter charges failed to detonate during the first (and intended-to-be primary) sequence. somewhere close by, someone with a view of the tower and its still standing beams, then triggered the redundant backup demo sequence, which it seems was initiated somewhere at the lower levels, out of view and obscured by rising dust clouds. its probable imo, that unlike the primary sequence, which began high up and peeled/worked its way down, the secondary / backup sequence was started at lower floors, because IT HAD TO BE. without the building there to hide the cutter charges from being visible (and to some degree audible), the only choice was to detonate from the bottom up.

have a peek at this pic also:


wtc - south tower core still standing




tongue.gif
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHwVBirqD2s


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post May 27 2012, 05:25 PM
Post #59



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Definitely weird mate.

Here's another image (aerial)



Is it still standing or is that the dust trail??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post May 27 2012, 06:43 PM
Post #60





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ May 27 2012, 11:25 AM) *

Your picture shows a clear shot for plane 3 to hit WTC7.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 15th October 2019 - 05:01 AM