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 )

26 Pages V  « < 24 25 26  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Wtc7 Demolition, Putting the pieces together

onesliceshort
post Apr 3 2013, 10:59 PM
Post #501



Group Icon

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



QUOTE
If a close to FF collapse caused by destruction of axial load paths at the bottom.... wouldn't a FF collapse of 8 stories result of the structure below 8 catastrophically failed? Are bombs the ONLY way a structure can fail? One with fires burning for 7 hrs and not fire suppression over 30,000 gal of diesel? That's quite the barbe!

Why do intelligent people refuse to understand a (structural) system cascading failure? This wasn't invented on 9/11. It's settled science.


Can you believe the horseshit that this guy posts unchallenged on a supposedly "neutral" forum?

I see lots of "psychoanalysis" on the cultists here but there are definitely a few "goggles" overlooked (Major_Tom knows what I'm talking about).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kawika
post Apr 4 2013, 10:45 AM
Post #502





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 476
Joined: 16-August 07
From: Upstate NY/VT border
Member No.: 1,719



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Apr 2 2013, 12:59 AM) *
Can you believe the horseshit that this guy posts unchallenged on a supposedly "neutral" forum?

I see lots of "psychoanalysis" on the cultists here but there are definitely a few "goggles" overlooked (Major_Tom knows what I'm talking about).


A 30,000 gallon diesel fuel BarBeQue?

Actually it was 36,000 and they were buried under 3 feet of concrete slab in the loading dock. 19,000 gallons were recovered from Silverstein's tanks and the rest was lost into the soil by some yet to be determined mechanism.

There was absolutely no evidence of fuel fires at any time, certainly not seven hours worth.

The transfer trusses were not subjected to any fire, because that fire would have to be below floor seven.

Conclusion: Something else besides fire made the building free-fall.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 4 2013, 12:47 PM
Post #503





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



QUOTE (kawika @ Apr 4 2013, 04:45 AM) *
Conclusion: Something else besides fire made the building free-fall.

The “Swine Pit” has been listening with deaf ears.

10 pages of name calling and not one cap full of evidence.

These guys should sell hot air balloons.

Pretty soon, they will have Jeff cleaning the Out-houses!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Apr 4 2013, 02:02 PM
Post #504



Group Icon

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



QUOTE
Conclusion: Something else besides fire made the building free-fall.


That's the bottom line.

The guys at 9/11 Forum agree that NIST was a crock. We have evidence and FDNY statements (alleged but nobody has denied them) that there were no fires on the lower floors coupled with multiple images. And the disregard for physics in that there would have been a need for a raging fire for over 3.5 hours minimum before any heat based theory can even be contemplated, etc, etc.

You can talk in extreme detail about how WTC7 collapsed as it was going down but if the very basic concept that there were no fires to provide a "natural" explanation is passed over like some irrelevant detail, anything after that is like pissing into the wind.

I mean, visual evidence provided here is "irrelevant"? Fireproofing? The actual constant heat required? FDNY statements? Admission of freefall acceleration by a person that got off his ass and approached NIST and actually forced NIST to admit they were wrong. And whose achievement has since been trolled to death. Samples of sulfidized steel that have never been explained but basically put down to "acid rain" (yea! that'll do! Let's move on!).

Yeah, I'm the cultist.

@elreb

It's not the "swine pit" lol. It's taken from a SanderO quote alright, but from 9/11 Forums. The "neutral" forum. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 4 2013, 02:10 PM
Post #505





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



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Apr 4 2013, 08:02 AM) *
@elreb

It's not the "swine pit" lol. It's taken from a SanderO quote alright, but from 9/11 Forums. The "neutral" forum. rolleyes.gif

No, no…I am talking ‘Swine Pit”

QUOTE
“You have the same gravity did it, as does NIST.”

Don't need NIST.

NIST is like a trap, catching the gullible 911 truth followers who can't do math, physics, and they love (911 truth followers) to make fun of models; they can't comprehend the math behind the models, so them make fun of them.

NIST, a trap to discover those who lack knowledge.

You have been labeled troll by the dolt Balsamo. [dolt = A stupid person]

Quote:

Go play at the govt loyalist site, Jeff... you have worn out your welcome here....

What did you call the govt loyalist site posters?

Legacy, the legacy of Gage, spreading nonsense about CD and thermite.


My add =
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

New add =
QUOTE
"you well know that it takes very little to become persona non grata at PfT JSO questioned the "Pilots of Failed Tactics" on their dearly held idiocy"

Which is not true. We asked for his evidence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 4 2013, 05:46 PM
Post #506





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



I believe it was Sigmund Freud who explained the psychological defense of “distorting reality” and called it = “Projection”.

Most “GL’s” need to maintain their social compartment and find refuge in generating confusion and a distortion/coping mechanism

In effect, what they call you…is what they are.

If they accuse you of “stupid” behavior…in reality…they are exposing their own nature.

In some cases…it is a compulsive obsession disorder.

In either case…it denies reality…

ADD:

Your mother's so stupid she exercises when she could just get like, liposuction or something!

Your mother is so stupid that she goes to Barney's Rooftop Deck Restaurant for lunch and orders a niçoise salad and calls it a 'ni-coise' salad.

Your mother's butt is so hairy, it looks like Don King's about to pop out and say, "Only in America”
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 7 2013, 04:22 PM
Post #507





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



This is after 10:30 am

We see the broken window and fire mentioned by "the bullhorn guy".

We see water pressure…and down the street we see lights on.

If necessary, I have a photo of the hydrant.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 7 2013, 05:07 PM
Post #508





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



Back in the late 1700’s a “Loyalist” was a person who remained loyal to the kingdom and were often called “Royalist” or “Kings Men”.

They were totally opposed to “Patriots”.

Empire or freedom forced Americans to choose sides.

A loyalists/royalist always sought a “Gain” and placed no value in rights, freedom or life.

They were pillars of social conflict and immoral activities. They encourage murder, hatred, and “bias-motivated crime”.

Rights are granted and endowed to the Kings men “Only” and common Americans are the source of the funding.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Apr 21 2013, 01:17 PM
Post #509





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





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DoYouEverWonder
post May 14 2013, 06:53 AM
Post #510





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



Implosion Interruptus: Silo Needs Extra Push To Come Down

http://youtu.be/c6zG2lTNjcE

This is what the collapse of WTC 7 should have looked like if the building failed only because of fires on the lower floors.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jul 11 2013, 08:35 AM
Post #511



Group Icon

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



SEC corruption. Very relevant to WTC7.

http://youtu.be/2IzB0o3RJTs
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
IsaacNewton
post Aug 19 2014, 02:49 PM
Post #512





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 42
Joined: 9-November 13
Member No.: 7,578



Hey guys....

You know, I actually solved the mystery of whether or not Building 7 was brought down by explosives long before it ever happened.... all the way back in 1686. Though the possible composition and placement of the explosives can still be debated, the fact that they were indeed composed and placed cannot.

Newtonian physical principles haven't changed. It's physically impossible for the lower part of the asymmetrically damaged building (three core columns and nine perimeter columns) to have progressively/naturally collapsed in any way that could result in the upper part of the building symmetrically descending straight down through itself (starting with column 79, circled below), through the path of greatest resistance, at anything near gravitational acceleration for any period of time....



....and there is absolutely no mode or combination of modes of progressive/natural structural failure driven solely by gravity that can ever give rise to the conditions required (below) for free fall to have occurred at any point during its descent....



....and anyone who believes otherwise (below) belongs in a lunatic asylum (I know, I've been in one)....



There is simply no point during a natural progressive gravity driven collapse of a steel frame skyscraper like this where one could say....

"Hold it.... right there! That's the point where all the steel columns and structural
components
that were supporting the building just a moment ago (with an area
greater than that of a football field) will undoubtedly be found to be behaving in a
manner very much like air (below left).... so much so that it will take very careful
calculation to tell the fall times apart during this period of the
ongoing progressive structural failure (below right)"....




How could anyone really believe that it's not only possible but probable that the lower asymmetrically damaged part of the building progressively/naturally collapsed in a way that resulted in the upper part of the building actually accelerating as it descended symmetrically straight down through itself, through the path of greatest resistance (below right), and also, incredibly, that driven on solely by gravity it actually continued to accelerate so nearly to gravitational acceleration (below left) as to require very careful calculation for any difference between the two to be detected....



So far, the explosion model (below) is still the only one....



....that can realistically match and empirically be expected to create the conditions (below) that we know must have existed....



....beneath the literally falling visible upper part of the building (below) during its observed largely symmetrical descent at gravitational acceleration for approximately 105 feet in 2.25 seconds....



The undisputed confirmed observation of a significant period of gravitational acceleration....



....means an explosion or other type of event must have occurred that was powerful enough to quickly remove the support from beneath the upper part of the building (below right), either all at once or incrementally in advance of its descent, permitting it to descend at gravitational acceleration for the observed period and under the conditions required (below left) for free fall to occur....



I'm afraid there's simply no other explanation, the building was brought down by means of explosives.... that's just the way it is.

Sincerely, Isaac Newton

This post has been edited by IsaacNewton: Aug 19 2014, 02:56 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kawika
post Aug 21 2014, 09:10 AM
Post #513





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 476
Joined: 16-August 07
From: Upstate NY/VT border
Member No.: 1,719



Excellent!

NIST tells us that the East Penthouse falling indicates C79 was buckling, dragging all the floors from F13 up to the roof downward. Then the floors from east to west experienced a progressive collapse, essentially gutting the interior. Then the facade fell straight down.

If this were true we should have seen severe deformation of the exterior surfaces as the floors hinged downwards. Granite panels and windows would have been popping out. We should have seen dust being ejected from the openings.

WTC7 was demolished from the lower area, probably at least eight floors above F7 where the extremely strong cantilever girders (9 foot tall!) were located.

Take a look at this monster!

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=E097D925456F1330%21220

This post has been edited by kawika: Aug 21 2014, 09:12 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
IsaacNewton
post Aug 22 2014, 11:11 PM
Post #514





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 42
Joined: 9-November 13
Member No.: 7,578



QUOTE (kawika @ Aug 21 2014, 08:10 AM) *
Excellent!

Thanks man (nice to meet you).

QUOTE (kawika @ Aug 21 2014, 08:10 AM) *
NIST tells us that the East Penthouse falling indicates C79 was buckling, dragging all the floors from F13 up to the roof downward. Then the floors from east to west experienced a progressive collapse, essentially gutting the interior. Then the facade fell straight down.

Right, they describe a progressive collapse (starting with column 79 on the left) over an area greater than a football field....



....that essentially happens all at once, which is obviously inconsistent with physical principles governing progressive structural failure (the time consuming sequential faililure of a series of structural components)....


But, as we know from fundamental well established and time tested empirically verifiable experiment, even if a giant laser beam suddenly vaporized the interior of the building causing the exterior columns to begin buckling, free fall still would not occur for even a moment. The strength of buckling columns (whether buckled one at a time or all at once) doesn't just go from 100% to 0% when they fail, they go from 100% to 0% while they fail, and that takes time.

Buckling, whether caused by heat....


....or overloading....


....cannot create the conditions required for gravitational accelration to occur, it's literally impossible. Some force must have been used to quickly remove all support from the literally falling visible upper part of the building seen in the video....


Control on the right, details....
http://picasion.com/pic76/ef2992a1bed34a1a...8f520c5ad7e.gif
This is currently the only empirically verifiable scenario that matches observations.

QUOTE (kawika @ Aug 21 2014, 08:10 AM) *
If this were true we should have seen severe deformation of the exterior surfaces as the floors hinged downwards. Granite panels and windows would have been popping out. We should have seen dust being ejected from the openings.

Agreed. The video evidence doesn't show any "hollowing out" stage either, with the exception of the descent of the Eest Penthouse, all the rest of the columns essentially failed at the same time.

QUOTE (kawika @ Aug 21 2014, 08:10 AM) *
WTC7 was demolished from the lower area, probably at least eight floors above F7 where the extremely strong cantilever girders (9 foot tall!) were located.

Even someone with a botched hemisperectomy can see it, it's the Law, the building was brought down by explosives.... that's just the way it is.

This post has been edited by IsaacNewton: Aug 22 2014, 11:25 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
IsaacNewton
post Aug 26 2014, 06:11 AM
Post #515





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 42
Joined: 9-November 13
Member No.: 7,578



Hey kawika....

I see you "liked" my animations over at The911Forum, glad you enjoyed them.... there's more! My post here is actually distilled from a two month long exchange.... "What Is Free Fall?".... that I lured Dr. Alan Calverd into (a seasoned forty year veteran Ph.D. research physicist) that was devoted exclusively to this topic over at TheNakedScientists. One of the weirdest converstaions (six pages) I've ever had....



Also (off topic), I started another thread there questioning the authenticity of photographs taken during the Apollo Moon Landing.... "Was This Apollo Photograph (AS14-66-9306) Really Taken On The Moon?".... more animations there, and another really weird conversation (two pages)....



.

This post has been edited by IsaacNewton: Aug 26 2014, 06:14 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
IsaacNewton
post Sep 11 2014, 04:16 AM
Post #516





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 42
Joined: 9-November 13
Member No.: 7,578



I posted a longer more detailed version of the above post over at LetsRollForums and was immediately banned forever.... http://letsrollforums.com/showpost.php?p=2...mp;postcount=25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
IsaacNewton
post Sep 11 2014, 04:37 AM
Post #517





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 42
Joined: 9-November 13
Member No.: 7,578



One post, banned forever. What's the story with this Phil Jayhan character?



This post has been edited by IsaacNewton: Sep 11 2014, 04:39 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Sep 11 2014, 05:51 PM
Post #518





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (IsaacNewton @ Sep 11 2014, 03:37 AM) *
One post, banned forever. What's the story with this Phil Jayhan character?



I gave my best effort to provide solid, personal research and input to that forum.
I no longer go there anymore.

If you don't tow the line and kiss their rear ends regularly, you will be given the boot.

They have very specific theories as to what happened on 9/11.
If you don't agree with their theories they have no use for you and would rather you get lost.
They don't want to hear alternative theories, or the worst, theories that directly counter their personal theories.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

26 Pages V  « < 24 25 26
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: 19th October 2019 - 04:09 PM