Someone please explain to me how a slow-motion demolition is done

[TerryUK]

Fall down PERFECTLY?!

[qimg]http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Front/ground_zero_arial2_ort.jpg[/qimg]

BIG version: http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/wtc-photo.jpg

So you will appreciate then, that all the arguments above, which claim MONTHS of preparation are necessary for CD, are BS!
The preparation etc mentioned would only apply to conventional CD, where damage to surrounding buildings must be avoided.

This of course would not apply to a criminal demolition...

 

[Gravy]

Check your PMs, Terry. I'm waiting for an answer.

 

[TerryUK]

Well according to the truth movement the building could not have fallen unless all floors were rigged.

Well also - according to some people in the truth movement - there were "no planes", so what?

 

[Garb]

So you will appreciate then, that all the arguments above, which claim MONTHS of preparation are necessary for CD, are BS!
The preparation etc mentioned would only apply to conventional CD, where damage to surrounding buildings must be avoided.

This of course would not apply to a criminal demolition...

How about you show me some of those neat-o explosions just prior to the collapse to prove your point.

 

[Totovader]

So you will appreciate then, that all the arguments above, which claim MONTHS of preparation are necessary for CD, are BS!
The preparation etc mentioned would only apply to conventional CD, where damage to surrounding buildings must be avoided.

This of course would not apply to a criminal demolition...

Of course!

It couldn't have been a controlled demolition, so it was a criminal demolition. And it was criminal demolition because it clearly was not a controlled demolition.

Circular reasoning is so fun- too bad it's completely useless for understanding reality.

 

[Bell]

So you will appreciate then, that all the arguments above, which claim MONTHS of preparation are necessary for CD, are BS!
The preparation etc mentioned would only apply to conventional CD, where damage to surrounding buildings must be avoided.

This of course would not apply to a criminal demolition...

Don't move the goalposts (surprise surprise)

You said:

According to the OT version of 9/11, all you have to do to demo a 110 storey building is take out a few columns of ONE STOREY near the top, and BINGO- it all falls down perfectly...
( And it wasn't a fluke because it happened again with the second tower...)

Sp why bother with MONTHS of prep. etc ?

Bolding mine.

I showed you a picture to make it clear the towers DID NOT fall down perfectly. Some demolition that was.

 

[TerryUK]

Check your PMs, Terry. I'm waiting for an answer.

Off Topic

Re the 'fake' image - I only know what anyone can see with their own eyes...
It's a montage , obviously done to have more impact...
It's a bit crude though, as you can see some parts of the added bits that are a give away.

 

[Plantfoam]

Creating a slow-motion CD is easy, actually. All you have to do is mix maple syrup in with the therm*te.

 

[TerryUK]

So you will appreciate then, that all the arguments above, which claim MONTHS of preparation are necessary for CD, are BS!
The preparation etc mentioned would only apply to conventional CD, where damage to surrounding buildings must be avoided.

This of course would not apply to a criminal demolition...

Don't move the goalposts (surprise surprise)

You said:


Originally Posted by TerryUK
According to the OT version of 9/11, all you have to do to demo a 110 storey building is take out a few columns of ONE STOREY near the top, and BINGO- it all falls down perfectly...
( And it wasn't a fluke because it happened again with the second tower...)

Sp why bother with MONTHS of prep. etc ?
Bolding mine.

I showed you a picture to make it clear the towers DID NOT fall down perfectly. Some demolition that was.

The towers DID NOT fall down perfectly?
As I clearly stated above, the towers fell down perfectly
because there was no requirement to avoid other damage, as would be in the case of a legal, conventional CD.
If you want to just play with words, please try someone else.

 

[Bell]

The towers DID NOT fall down perfectly?

No, they did not. Did you even LOOK at the picture I posted, or the big version I linked to?

As I clearly stated above, the towers fell down perfectly
because there was no requirement to avoid other damage, as would be in the case of a legal, conventional CD.

Yet, you say:

According to the OT version of 9/11, all you have to do to demo a 110 storey building is take out a few columns of ONE STOREY near the top, and BINGO- it all falls down perfectly...
( And it wasn't a fluke because it happened again with the second tower...)

Sp why bother with MONTHS of prep. etc ?

So, why bother indeed?

If you want to just play with words, please try someone else.

I'm not playing with words, just showing the sillyness of your claim.

 

[uruk]

Yup, perfectly right into its dodecahedral footprint.

Talk about moving the goal posts.

I though the towers foot print was square. So now the whole city block is the building foot print? Which part of the dodeahedron was WTC1 foot print and which one was WTC2?



OOPS! Sorry. Didn't get the sarcasm.

 

[TerryUK]

Did you even LOOK at the picture I posted

Yes, but it's not relevant, because for the purposes we are talking about, damage to surrounding buildings does not matter at all - so, perfect , meaning perfect for the requirements of a criminal cd, ok?

So, why bother indeed?

You mean WRT "months of prep" etc.

Obviously for the requirements of a conventional CD, the way the towers collapsed may be deemed to be unacceptable, because of surrounding damage, and would therfor have called for more planning and preparation, had it been a conventional cd.

But you debunkers argue that these stated requirements - "months of prep" -
would be necessary also for the hypothetical criminal cd, which is obviously not the case - and that's the whole point.

I'm not playing with words, just showing the sillyness of your claim.

Well, I think you'll find that a bit difficult.

 

[Gravy]

Re the 'fake' image - I only know what anyone can see with their own eyes...
It's a montage , obviously done to have more impact...
It's a bit crude though, as you can see some parts of the added bits that are a give away.

Fascinating. Tell you what: start a new thread, present your analysis, and then I'll present my information. We'll make a little bet on the side. Fair enough, Terry?

 

[Bell]

Yes, but it's not relevant, because for the purposes we are talking about, damage to surrounding buildings does not matter at all - so, perfect , meaning perfect for the requirements of a criminal cd, ok?

No, not OK. You didn't address that (criminal CD) in your original post. Your original post stated that to get a perfect demolition (?) all one needed to do is to take out a few columns of one storey.

You mean WRT "months of prep" etc.

Obviously for the requirements of a conventional CD, the way the towers collapsed may be deemed to be unacceptable, because of surrounding damage, and would therfor have called for more planning and preparation, had it been a conventional cd.

But you debunkers argue that these stated requirements - "months of prep" -
would be necessary also for the hypothetical criminal cd, which is obviously not the case - and that's the whole point.

So, your so-called 'criminal' CD doesn't need months of preparation, but only one floor to give way?

Well, I think you'll find that a bit difficult.

Watch me.

 

[TerryUK]

You have a strange definition of "perfectly." From the numerous times I've seen various videos of the collapse of the WTC twin towers, they most certainly did not fall down perfectly. The collapses were highly chaotic events with debris falling everywhere and covering a considerable area. How on earth does that rate as "it all falls down perfectly"?

Well, "perfectly", or "as required", etc. ( see post#34)
Obviously, if you really demand absolute accuracy,too bad. I think it's just playng with words...

 

[TerryUK]

No, not OK. You didn't address that (criminal CD) in your original post. Your original post stated that to get a perfect demolition (?) all one needed to do is to take out a few columns of one storey.



So, your so-called 'criminal' CD doesn't need months of preparation, but only one floor to give way?

Well, according to you debunkers, that's what happened (no explosives necessary)

 

[Slayhamlet]

Well, according to you debunkers, that's what happened (no explosives necessary)

Yes, that is what happened more or less. The point is that you seem to agree that the failure of the columns on only a few floors can initiate global collapse. Is this correct?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

So you will appreciate then, that all the arguments above, which claim MONTHS of preparation are necessary for CD, are BS!
The preparation etc mentioned would only apply to conventional CD, where damage to surrounding buildings must be avoided.

This of course would not apply to a criminal demolition...

That very badly misses the point. How much of the months of prep work is the simple predemolition work of getting the structural members uncovered and simple logistics of getting the explosives by the those supports?

The devil's in the details of the CD "argument": It doesn't provide any explanation for the very difficult logistics of accomplishing such an act.

It's so weird that there's so much incredulity about the plane crash-fire-global collapse scenario, but yet, the machinations to make CD work are so much more complicated.

 

[Bell]

Well, according to you debunkers, that's what happened (no explosives necessary)

Acoording to you:

According to the OT version of 9/11, all you have to do to demo a 110 storey building is take out a few columns of ONE STOREY near the top, and BINGO- it all falls down perfectly...
( And it wasn't a fluke because it happened again with the second tower...)

Sp why bother with MONTHS of prep. etc ?

Where "falls down perfectly" in your eyes means damage and/or destroy about a dozen other buildings (killing hundreds and hundreds of people in the proces)

And why bother with months of prep indeed? Because the floors failing where enough to collapse the whole building? Or the Criminal CD (??) did indeed need months of preparation?

 

[TerryUK]

Fascinating. Tell you what: start a new thread, present your analysis, and then I'll present my information. We'll make a little bet on the side. Fair enough, Terry?

Well, as I said, I think the image speaks for itself.

I'll just let others decide for themselves, as I have, by simply looking.

If you want to demonstrate that the image is not manipulated, please do so.

I will always be willing to accept that I'm wrong - if that is the case.