Official story: why believe it?

[lisabob2]

No, it's called a 'fact'.

your opinion is a fact how?
Lets get specific.how does the official story explain the squibs that were seen during the buildings collapses? Air pressure would not explain it. The squibs came out of specific locations below collapse. How could air pressure in those buildings be confined to specific locations and all about the same pressure? The air would go to path of least resistance and would increase as the collapse continued. The twin towers were designed as a tube in a tube. It did not have tubes from impact areas down to specific locations

 

[rwguinn]

your opinion is a fact how?
Lets get specific.how does the official story explain the squibs that were seen during the buildings collapses? Air pressure would not explain it. The squibs came out of specific locations below collapse. How could air pressure in those buildings be confined to specific locations and all about the same pressure? The air would go to path of least resistance and would increase as the collapse continued. The twin towers were designed as a tube in a tube. It did not have tubes from impact areas down to specific locations

It's called "Science".
Specifically, Fluid flow, statics, and dynamics, mixed with some materials science.
Also Chemistry.
When you take a real science class--by the time you're in High School, maybe--You'll learn that "Least Resistance" is not always "No Resistance".
'Till then, you could read some science books.
Sometimes breaking a window is the easy way out.

 

[Drudgewire]

Lets get specific.how does the official story explain the squibs that were seen during the buildings collapses?

That's easy, they explain them the same way they explain the flying manatees around the towers... THEY DON'T SAY ANYTHING BECAUSE THERE WEREN'T ANY!

You have to be working a gimmick, because no one can legitimately be this ignorant.

 

[lisabob2]

My money says she won't...because if she says "this investigation would satisfy me" and spells it out, there are 2 possibilities:

1) The terms of the investigation, and those responsible, are so biased that "inside job" is the only possible conclusion.

2) The terms are reasonable, and the proposed investigators are legitimate. The investigation concludes that it was not an inside job, lisabob2 claims that the investigation was hampered, interfered with, [insert some other claim here as to why the results cannot be accepted]

Tell us, Lisa...what specific requirements do you have for an investigation whose conclusions you would accept?

useless speculation on your part. I have said a open scientific investigation has not been done yet. If one is done or at the very least a open independent review of the nist report then I will accept the results.

 

[nicepants]

useless speculation on your part. I have said a open scientific investigation has not been done yet. If one is done or at the very least a open independent review of the nist report then I will accept the results.

That tells us nothing. All you're saying is "I want an open and independent investigation". We say "one has already been done". You say "it hasn't". So, in order to understand why we have a difference of opinion, you need to answer the following:

1) What, specifically, would satisfy your requirement for an "open scientific investigation"? Specifically, describe who would be involved, how it would be structured & organized, who would fund it, and what (if any) subpoena power, etc it would have. Also describe how it would differ from previous investigations.

2) What, specifically, would satisfy your requirement for an "open independent review of the nist report"? Specifically: Who would do the review? Who would oversee/manage the reviewing and make decisions based on the findings?

ETA: Just to clarify...When I say "who", I'm looking for NAMES. Not just blanket statements like "top scientists", etc.

 

[GStan]

your opinion is a fact how?
Lets get specific.how does the official story explain the squibs that were seen during the buildings collapses? Air pressure would not explain it. The squibs came out of specific locations below collapse. How could air pressure in those buildings be confined to specific locations and all about the same pressure? The air would go to path of least resistance and would increase as the collapse continued. The twin towers were designed as a tube in a tube. It did not have tubes from impact areas down to specific locations

All I can say is...Huh?


Are you trying to say that the locations of the release of air pressure from a collapsing 110 story building would be predictable? Are you hinting at an explanation for why the so-called squibs should not have been seen where they were seen?

 

[lisabob2]

It's called "Science".
Specifically, Fluid flow, statics, and dynamics, mixed with some materials science.
Also Chemistry.
When you take a real science class--by the time you're in High School, maybe--You'll learn that "Least Resistance" is not always "No Resistance".
'Till then, you could read some science books.
Sometimes breaking a window is the easy way out.

still not a answer for air pressure from collapse shooting out from specific locations. what would cause the air to go only to specific locations? the air from collapse would go everywhere it wasn't blocked or possibly force it's way thru weaker locations, which would be spread out all over buildings. The path of least resistance is not specific location below collapse.
watch some videos of CD's you see explosion squibs just like 9-11 then you'll see the air pressure coming from the lower levels shooting the dust up. just like on 9-11.
coincidence? not likely

 

[beachnut]

Will lisabob2 have facts, or were they given up for 9/11 truth member ship? Where are the facts, how can you respond to idiotic junk with no real base in reality?

How can 9/11 truth member understand 9/11 when they can not bring a fact to bear on simple things. What a non starter, 9/11 truth.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

still not a answer for air pressure from collapse shooting out from specific locations. what would cause the air to go only to specific locations?

duct work and exhaust vents

plus if you slowly overpressurize a floor until a window breaks its unlikely more than 1 will break, because once that happens the pressure is released

explosives onthe other hand provide such a large jump in pressure so fast it would probably break more than 1 window

coincidence? not likely

no, its not a coincidence, thats what happens when gravity pulls buildings down, the initial cause of the collapse has little effect on how the collpase progresses

 

[Drudgewire]

watch some videos of CD's you see explosion squibs just like 9-11 then you'll see the air pressure coming from the lower levels shooting the dust up. just like on 9-11.
coincidence? not likely

Really? Link to a single CD where squibs look anything at all like what happened to the towers.

Oh, and don't forget you'll have to find ones that are not only silent, but also go off as the building is already starting to fall, rather than before the fall which is what would seemingly cause the collapse.

So coincidence? Not at all... because in the real world there is no comparison at all.

 

[Horace Wheeljack]

still not a answer for air pressure from collapse shooting out from specific locations. what would cause the air to go only to specific locations? the air from collapse would go everywhere it wasn't blocked or possibly force it's way thru weaker locations, which would be spread out all over buildings. The path of least resistance is not specific location below collapse.
watch some videos of CD's you see explosion squibs just like 9-11 then you'll see the air pressure coming from the lower levels shooting the dust up. just like on 9-11.
coincidence? not likely

Hi lisabob,

Watch this video and check out the explanation for the squibs between 4.30 - 5.30 mins. It seems a pretty logical explanation to me.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WSQYOq71io8&feature=related

Good Luck.

 

[lisabob2]

All I can say is...Huh?


Are you trying to say that the locations of the release of air pressure from a collapsing 110 story building would be predictable? Are you hinting at an explanation for why the so-called squibs should not have been seen where they were seen?

No I am saying there is no way air pressure would cause squibs from specific locations. If you watch CD's you will see squibs just like the squibs seen on 9-11. those squibs are from explosions, and they come from specific locations. Then after the building collapses you see where the air pressure created by the collapse come out from the lower levels. This air pressure event is widespread, not specific locations.
The squibs you see on CD's are not created by air pressure of the collapse. they are results of explosions. The squibs on the 3 wtc buildings look just like the squibs you see on normal CD's. If you watch videos of CD's then watch the 3 WTC collapses you'll see the same squibs caused by explosions at the normal CD's. You'll also see the air pressure caused widespread event at the lower levels near end of collapses.

 

[rwguinn]

No I am saying there is no way air pressure would cause squibs from specific locations. If you watch CD's you will see squibs just like the squibs seen on 9-11. those squibs are from explosions, and they come from specific locations. Then after the building collapses you see where the air pressure created by the collapse come out from the lower levels. This air pressure event is widespread, not specific locations.
The squibs you see on CD's are not created by air pressure of the collapse. they are results of explosions. The squibs on the 3 wtc buildings look just like the squibs you see on normal CD's. If you watch videos of CD's then watch the 3 WTC collapses you'll see the same squibs caused by explosions at the normal CD's. You'll also see the air pressure caused widespread event at the lower levels near end of collapses.

Stundied!
Specific locations

 

[lisabob2]

Really? Link to a single CD where squibs look anything at all like what happened to the towers.

Oh, and don't forget you'll have to find ones that are not only silent, but also go off as the building is already starting to fall, rather than before the fall which is what would seemingly cause the collapse.

So coincidence? Not at all... because in the real world there is no comparison at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGLktxPbxPk
funny I hear lots of similar sounds in the WTC collapses as I heard during the normal CD's I think you would have to be blind & death not to see the similarites.

 

[GStan]

No I am saying there is no way air pressure would cause squibs from specific locations. If you watch CD's you will see squibs just like the squibs seen on 9-11. those squibs are from explosions, and they come from specific locations. Then after the building collapses you see where the air pressure created by the collapse come out from the lower levels. This air pressure event is widespread, not specific locations.
The squibs you see on CD's are not created by air pressure of the collapse. they are results of explosions. The squibs on the 3 wtc buildings look just like the squibs you see on normal CD's. If you watch videos of CD's then watch the 3 WTC collapses you'll see the same squibs caused by explosions at the normal CD's. You'll also see the air pressure caused widespread event at the lower levels near end of collapses.

What do you mean by 'specific locations'? There is no good explanation for why the air pressure released where it did. The collapse of a 110 story building in progress is far to chaotic an event to imply that there is something suspicious about the 'specific locations' the overpressure was released.

If you watch a real CD, the explosives are planted at strategic (not random) 'specific locations'; the squibs precede the collapse; they are perfectly in time with the very loud accompanying explosions, and THEN the building starts to fall. Nothing like this was observed as the towers collapsed.

 

[lisabob2]

Stundied!
Specific locations

nice dog.
I would expect that kind of responce.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGLktxPbxPk
funny how they all look so similar and the widespread air pressure event can be seen after all the squibs in the CD's and in the WTC collapses.

 

[nicepants]

Lisabob2 - Please address the questions below:

useless speculation on your part. I have said a open scientific investigation has not been done yet. If one is done or at the very least a open independent review of the nist report then I will accept the results.

That tells us nothing. All you're saying is "I want an open and independent investigation". We say "one has already been done". You say "it hasn't". So, in order to understand why we have a difference of opinion, you need to answer the following:

1) What, specifically, would satisfy your requirement for an "open scientific investigation"? Specifically, describe who would be involved, how it would be structured & organized, who would fund it, and what (if any) subpoena power, etc it would have. Also describe how it would differ from previous investigations.

2) What, specifically, would satisfy your requirement for an "open independent review of the nist report"? Specifically: Who would do the review? Who would oversee/manage the reviewing and make decisions based on the findings?

ETA: Just to clarify...When I say "who", I'm looking for NAMES. Not just blanket statements like "top scientists", etc.

 

[Drudgewire]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGLktxPbxPk
funny I hear lots of similar sounds in the WTC collapses as I heard during the normal CD's I think you would have to be blind & death not to see the similarites.

No, you hear charges that time perfectly with the squibs. You see windows being blown out. You see the charges force the debris out a great distance...

...and most importantly, you see the buildings collapsing from the bottom up.

You'd have to be unwilling to accept any theory besides "controlled demolition" to see any similarity between those and the Towers... which explains your position to a T.

 

[Corsair 115]

Lets get specific.how does the official story explain the squibs that were seen during the buildings collapses? Air pressure would not explain it.

First, "squibs" are small explosive charges usually used in the film industry to simulate bullet hits. You really ought to use correct terminology. If you want you can call a car a "horseless carriage" but it really isn't a term which is used anymore.

Second, those "squibs" of yours appear when the building is already collapsing and thus explosives are no longer needed. What point is there in detonating explosive demolition charges in a building which is already collapsing?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

nice dog.
I would expect that kind of responce.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGLktxPbxPk
funny how they all look so similar and the widespread air pressure event can be seen after all the squibs in the CD's and in the WTC collapses.

A very deserving dog too. Did you read your own statement? I know I sure got a good laugh out of that. And your claim that air pressure could not cause air to blast debris out of the windows is based on what? Was this a magical collapse where air just disappears? Perhaps matter was destroyed by this magical bomb?

Nice video, another good demonstration of how the WTC collapse looked absolutely nothing like any demolitions.