I've seen that site and they do not have the images i use on the site, so there can hardly be answers to my questons about them there.
I would be surprised if you actually know the meaning of the word "idiot". Like twinstead doesn't actually know the origin of "insane".
Haha, you really are good. You are provided with SCIENTIFIC FACTS and you don't agree with them because there are no pretty pictures that you've PROBABLY ALREADY SEEN?
You won't even look at video evidence; when someone posted hard VISUAL evidence, you said (and I quote):
Sorry, no time for another video of the towers. I'm fully satisfied as the visibility is not good enough to apply an accurate time. The fall was way too fast and it went to far down to be a collapse under any definition.
Let me highlight something for you:
Sorry, no time for another video of the towers. I'm fully satisfied as the visibility is not good enough to apply an accurate time. The fall was way too fast and it went to far down to be a collapse under any definition.
You YOURSELF claim that the visibility is not good enough. Now, let me ask you something.
If the central core was made purely of concrete (containing some kind of explosive), how can you prove that? I looked at that absolutely retarded site you posted, and given there are a bunch of his self drawn images, along with INCONCLUSIVE photos of the collapse, and a clip from an article that for all we know he could have PULLED OUT OF HIS ASS.
However, since you are so sure that it is a concrete core, let's assume that it is (for the sake of argument). How does that prove that explosive devices were planted in the core? In fact, your arguments ARE IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION WITH EACH OTHER. You are saying that the explosives used made the building fall that fast; HOWEVER, you are also saying that the thermite was in the concrete core that was somehow STILL STANDING after these explosions tore down the rest of the building (at "free fall" speeds as you say). YOU have yet to explain how YOUR RIDICULOUS THEORY WORKS.
Now, for some citations. On the page I linked, the author made the following statements about the "free fall" of the towers:
The rate of free fall in a vacuum, at least, is easier to define. The towers were around 417 metres tall (excluding the spire), giving 417 = 0.5 gt^2, so with g = 9.8m/s^2 that gives a time of about 9.22 seconds. So if you dropped a ball off the roof, and there were no air resistance, then that’s the time it would take to reach the ground.
So that is the speed of free fall in a vacuum, which is what you're trying to prove that the towers fell at, correct?
Okay, now ignoring the fact that quite obviously the debris was falling at a much higher rate than the building (which by the way COMPLETELY DEBUNKS YOUR THEORY), let's look at the siesmic evidence:
There is one way to try and resolve this. We know the start time of the graph (9:28:30 in New York), and we also know from LDEO that it took about 17 seconds for the signal to travel through the ground, therefore if the start time of the North Tower collapse can be determined by another means, then we’ll be able to see how the seismic record relates to other evidence.
And as it happens, we can do just that. 9-11 Research point out that a CNN video recorded the moment of the collapse, and we calculate that their clock turns from 10:27 to 10:28 around 24 seconds before the tower began to fall. That is, the collapse began around 10:28:24; adding 17 seconds for the signal to reach the LDEO station gives us 10:28:41; and that’s 11 seconds from the start of the chart.
The chart then indicates that the fall took approximately 15.5 seconds, which is quite a bit slower than your "free fall". QED Your original question has been answered on that site (with verifiable scientific facts AND images). If you actually bother going to the site I pointed out, you can find many references, pictures, links etc to BACK THIS UP.
So will you please just shut up and properly research the BS you're spouting before you start preaching nonsense? How about instead of trying to prove that the government killed thousands of innocent people (for no apparent reason, unless you believe in that Unocal ****, which is also handled on that site), you respect those that died and just accept that something terrible happened on 9/11, that will hopefully never happen again.
