[Split]Debris piles at GZ- split from: UL Moves For Sanctions Against Morgan Reynold

jammonius said:
Image128.jpg


Here is the proper frame of reference for assessing the height.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The top of that picture has an elevation of ~396' (7th floor, which is defined by the layer of spandrels at the start of the bowtie split)

This is easily verifed from the many architectural drawaings that show the elevations.

The plaza level has an elevation of 310', or a distance of 86' lower than this point.

If the man in the red shirt on top of the pile is ~6 ft tall, then he is standing about 24' below the the 7th floor

Thus 7th floor elevation 396' - ~24' from man in red's shoes to 7th floor = ~372' elevation - the 310' elevation of plaza level = a 62' debris pile above plaza level.

Of course, since much of the plaza caved in, this is also ~372' - 242' or a ~130' pile above ground level.
 
Last edited:
jammonius said:
I haven't, but these poor birds have. As you can see, however, even birds can do signficant damage to thin, hollow, built to be as lightweight as possible, aircraft:

[qimg]http://nomoregames.net/911/exploding_the_airliner_crash_myth/bird-wing.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

As others have pointed out, you fail utterly on this one. Why not find out how strong aircraft really are before you make silly claims.

By the way, have pictures of a DEW damage to a structural steel beam? You said the damage at GZ was consistent, yet you never produced proof.
 
LashL said:
That's fine, I'll call you jammonius if you prefer not to be addressed as "janedoe", "Dr. Wood" or "Judy Wood" these days, (why the change?) but you are Judy Wood, right?

...

And I said that I will not direct him to your website because your site, your theories, and your lawsuit are absolutely batcrap crazy. ...
Click to expand...

I love it when you talk dirty.

Just curious - how did you know this was Judy?
 
slyjoe said:
Just curious - how did you know this was Judy?
Click to expand...

I was wondering that too. Well we can give this person a test and see if it is Dr. Judy.

Why doesn't paper catch on fire when microwaved in a microwave oven for a long period of time?

The real Dr. Judy doesn't know the answer to this question.
 
Alt+F4 said:
I was wondering that too. Well we can give this person a test and see if it is Dr. Judy.

Why doesn't paper catch on fire when microwaved in a microwave oven for a long period of time?

The real Dr. Judy doesn't know the answer to this question.
Click to expand...
I learned that in a microwave cooking class.

Maybe, she should take one.
 
jammonius said:
Other posters can then determine for themselves whether you're legitimately interested in pursuing this matter in a way that might advance the state of knowledge or whether you're just declaring yourself to be right and not permitting further collaborative research.
Click to expand...
If you're interested in "further collaborative research", can I suggest you contact the Air Force Research Laboratory's Directed Energy Directorate?

Link: http://www.kirtland.af.mil/afrl_de/

On the home page are further links to:
SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research)
Partnering with AFRL
Small Business
Technology Transfer
IR&D (Independent Research & Development)

I mean, why not go to the experts in DEW if you're truly interested?
 
adoucette said:
I agree.

The top of that picture has an elevation of ~396' (7th floor, which is defined by the layer of spandrels at the start of the bowtie split)

This is easily verifed from the many architectural drawaings that show the elevations.

The plaza level has an elevation of 310', or a distance of 86' lower than this point.

If the man in the red shirt on top of the pile is ~6 ft tall, then he is standing about 24' below the the 7th floor

Thus 7th floor elevation 396' - ~24' from man in red's shoes to 7th floor = ~372' elevation - the 310' elevation of plaza level = a 62' debris pile above plaza level.

Of course, since much of the plaza caved in, this is also ~372' - 242' or a ~130' pile above ground level.
Click to expand...

I would strongly caution against doing this type of comparison (For Dr. Woods, adoucette, and for everyone else as well) the type of lens used in taking the photograph can introduce considerable distortion in near /far relationships (i.e. depth of field).
 
Large split from previous thread. Keep this thread on topic - debris piles (not planes)
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
jammonius said:
You can answer that question, right? I suspect you're being coy.

However, as and for my first picture, I'd like to offer up an example of a DEW, rather than visual proof that there was no debris pile. Doing so usually doesn't get anywhere because people have learned to conform their opinions, not to what can be seen, but rather, to what the official myth mandates. This is called a willing suspension of disbelief.

Here's a DEW:

http://drjudywood.co.uk/articles/DEWcon/DEWconpics/060322_spacecom_ABL_bcol.jpg
Click to expand...

jammonius said:
The danger here is that people tend to fall into one of only a few categories with respect to DEW; namely,

1--Those who are convinced by the information available to them that DEW exist and are deployed.

2--Those who are skeptical.

3--Those who assert DEW are, at most, in very early stages of development and are not deployed.
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on your definitions here. Aren't all weapons, and in fact, most tools, meant to apply directed energy? A gun fires the bullet by taking the chemical energy stored in the gunpowder and converting it to kinetic energy via the rapid expansion of gasses in the barrel of the gun, for instance.
 
jammonius said:
I also appreciate your reference to the above thread and post12086102. Boy was that ever b o r i n g in my opinion. There is no doubt that DEW exist and the evidence that they are found in every terrestrial venue, including orbit, is, at this point, beyond controversy even when one's sources of information are limited to unclassified sources (as mine are).
Click to expand...
Exactly what directed-energy weapons are in orbit?

jammonius said:
I do not even want to see classified information, it simply isn't that useful.
Click to expand...
Do you have a security clearance? If not, your claim is simply ignorant posturing. But, since classified information has a great deal to do with capabilities - such as the capability of your alleged WTC-vaporizer - it's also simply flat-out wrong.

jammonius said:
The danger here is that people tend to fall into one of only a few categories with respect to DEW; namely,

1--Those who are convinced by the information available to them that DEW exist and are deployed.

2--Those who are skeptical.

3--Those who assert DEW are, at most, in very early stages of development and are not deployed.
Click to expand...
The only problem is that you take (1) to mean that skyscraper-vaporizing weapons are real, instead of something you simply imagine.

jammonius said:
Almost all so-called 'technical' discussions of DEW centering, for instance, on the "power requirement" are so assumption riddled as to be next to useless.
Click to expand...
Not really. You are claiming that much of the structural material was simply vaporized. One can bound the energy needed to do this.

jammonius said:
Consider, for example, the oft stated canard, "to destroy the WTC in 10 seconds with DEW, more power than is generated on earth in an entire day would have been needed."

OK, well, if that is the case, then why aren't the Twin Towers still standing? After all, they did disappear down to next to nothing in 10 seconds, leaving a combined debris field
Click to expand...
Premise misrepresented. You are conflating the collapse of the buildings with the atomization of the majority of the structures. They are vastly different scenarios.

jammonius said:
that was almost completely uniform in a height of LESS THAN 1 STOREY.
Click to expand...
Factually incorrect.

jammonius said:
If kerosene (for that is what jet fuel is), gravity and a smack from a hollow aluminum tube can do that, why do we need any other kind of weapon?
Click to expand...
Appeal to ridicule noted, and rejected. Kerosene (for that is what RP-1 is) launched humans to the Moon in "hollow aluminum tube". And gravity - you may be excused for not realizing this given your apparent observational skill set - is what makes giant structures fall down.

jammonius said:
Plainly, the official story relies on energy events that are far too puny to have destroyed the Twin Towers as quickly and as thoroughly as was seen.
Click to expand...
Begging the question.

jammonius said:
Bringing this post more fully into the theme of this thread, one of the defendants in the cases at hand is Applied Research Associates Inc. (ARA).

It might interest posters to know that on their website, ARA boasts of having capabilities that look (I say "look") very much like taking credit for destroying the WTC.

Posters agree?
Click to expand...
I agree that you posted a couple of computer-generated pictures.

jammonius said:
Need more proof?
Click to expand...
The only "proof" you have offered so far is for the proposition that you are unable to distinguish fiction from reality.
 
Crazy people who attempt to debate their untenable position with those who actually know what they are talking about ROCK!
 
There's what, about 75-100 feet per story?

:dl:
 
Last edited:
Mr. Skinny said:
If you're interested in "further collaborative research", can I suggest you contact the Air Force Research Laboratory's Directed Energy Directorate?

Link: http://www.kirtland.af.mil/afrl_de/

On the home page are further links to:
SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research)
Partnering with AFRL
Small Business
Technology Transfer
IR&D (Independent Research & Development)

I mean, why not go to the experts in DEW if you're truly interested?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip, but Dr. Wood has been in direct correspondence with the head of the US Directed Energy Directorate for well over a year now, as exemplified by this correspondence FROM USDED, to DR WOOD in April, 2007:

Do not post personal correspondence without clear permission from all involved parties. Do not post personal details. Do not hotlink.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles


In other materials made available by Dr. Wood, she makes it clear that in corresponding with the USDED she has aske them, point blank, whether or not the destruction of the WTC was consistent or not with the use of DEW.

The above depicted communication was in reply to that question.

You may interpret the response in any number of ways, I think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SpitfireIX said:
US Navy T-44A Pegasus twin-engine trainer.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/17060484148245c158.jpg[/qimg]

Top speed: 287 mph
Click to expand...

bunker_buster_boeings.jpg



The illustrate strength of Boeing jetliners when they encounter a single steel cable.

1706048411dc99e6c2.jpg


Root canal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom