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

[Mr. Skinny]

No, my analysis of that ARA minature looks more like a little airplane, not helicopter. However, that said, ARA also is thought to make those minature weapons in all sorts of configurations, including birds and including helicopters.

You might want to research that, if you're interested. See also, DARPA.

The part I bolded makes no sense. What "analysis"?

Did ARA stiff you on a government contract or something? You seem overly attentive to their research.

And I'm familiar with DARPA, thank you. They teach us all about them in NWO operative school.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Some videos from the events of 9/11 show strange minature flying objects that look like birds, but are thought by some researchers to be weapons.

Because DEWs cause real birds to fly off, right?

 

[Alferd_Packer]

No, my analysis of that ARA minature looks more like a little airplane, not helicopter. However, that said, ARA also is thought to make those minature weapons in all sorts of configurations, including birds and including helicopters.

You might want to research that, if you're interested. See also, DARPA.

Is that how they "sprinkled" the dirt about the site?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

OT: HBD wishes!

Happy Birthday to Mr. Skinny!

<sniff>The forum outage deprived me of balloons... </blatant attempt at sympathy>

 

[phunk]

We are awaiting photos, any photo, showing damage underground. We are also awaiting edmundo's research of the witness statements attesting to damage underground.

The 1%, as you claim it to be, is 100% more than has been shown that attests to damage underground, phunk.

This took all of 1 minute to find on google:

 

[phunk]

and this:

ETA: in case you can't tell, that's a path train.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Now, because you contested the inferences that I drew from Edward Cachia's statement, I went back and re-read that statement again. In it, I found this little gem:

"As my officer and I were looking at the
south tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a
lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit,
because we originally had thought there was like
an internal detonation explosives because it went
in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then
the tower came down."

This seems somewhat incompatible with a collapse triggered by a DEW from orbit. How do you suppose the beam bypassed the upper floors to initiate the collapse "at a lower floor"?

Dave

 

[jammonius]

and this:

[qimg]http://phunkadelic.org/gzh5.jpg[/qimg]


ETA: in case you can't tell, that's a path train.

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you cannot find photos showing any damage to the lower levels of the wtc.

As this is now a mature thread, most posters who are interested in it will easily discern why your photos do not support the contention that the damage seen was caused by the destruction occurring on 9/11.

So, no, it did not take 1 minute. This thread has been up and running for at least 10 days and there's still not one shred of evidence of damage to the underground area of the WTC.

Zero, zip, zilch, nada.

 

[twinstead]

Perhaps one shred of evidence that a 'space beam' destroyed the WTC would be in order then, huh?

 

[jammonius]

Perhaps one shred of evidence that a 'space beam' destroyed the WTC would be in order then, huh?

Ah, so, when you can't find any reliable, verifiable information showing damage to the sub-levels of the WTC caused by the destruction on 9/11, you switch the subject.

This is not a DEW thread and that subject will not be discussed by me here at all.

As I've said, I used this as merely a way of saying bye for now.

 

[JimBenArm]

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you cannot find photos showing any damage to the lower levels of the wtc.

As this is now a mature thread, most posters who are interested in it will easily discern why your photos do not support the contention that the damage seen was caused by the destruction occurring on 9/11.

So, no, it did not take 1 minute. This thread has been up and running for at least 10 days and there's still not one shred of evidence of damage to the underground area of the WTC.

Zero, zip, zilch, nada.

Except for all the photos that were just posted that do, that you only want to not do that, even though they do.

Deny all you want, it just shows your ability to shrug off what is blatantly obvious to people with working brain stems.

 

[twinstead]

Ah, so, when you can't find any reliable, verifiable information showing damage to the sub-levels of the WTC caused by the destruction on 9/11, you switch the subject.

Ah, no, I can't find any evidence that YOU find reliable and verifiable. You are playing game #1: ignore a huge amount of what actually IS reliable and verifiable evidence that puts your theory into doubt by simply declaring it unacceptable. It's almost like you don't think we've seen this tactic before.

IMO the evidence is overwhelming that you are totally wrong. I am not the only one who thinks so, and this company includes people with pretty good credentials from around the world. Your denial of this is irrelevant.

 

[BenBurch]

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you cannot find photos showing any damage to the lower levels of the wtc.

As this is now a mature thread, most posters who are interested in it will easily discern why your photos do not support the contention that the damage seen was caused by the destruction occurring on 9/11.

So, no, it did not take 1 minute. This thread has been up and running for at least 10 days and there's still not one shred of evidence of damage to the underground area of the WTC.

Zero, zip, zilch, nada.

You damned liar. You know damned well that these good people have showed you ALL sorts of proof of underground damage. Start being honest or leave.

 

[Alt+F4]

A thread like this is good. It shows the lurkers what an insane liar Dr. Judy Wood and her followers are.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you cannot find photos showing any damage to the lower levels of the wtc.

As this is now a mature thread, most posters who are interested in it will easily discern why your photos do not support the contention that the damage seen was caused by the destruction occurring on 9/11.

So, no, it did not take 1 minute. This thread has been up and running for at least 10 days and there's still not one shred of evidence of damage to the underground area of the WTC.

Zero, zip, zilch, nada.

What?? Where do you think the PATH trains went at the WTC? On elevated tracks, like the Chicago El?? There's a reason they call it a "subway"!

Good Lord... simply pretending the pictures don't exist doesn't change the fact they do!

 

[phunk]

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you cannot find photos showing any damage to the lower levels of the wtc.

As this is now a mature thread, most posters who are interested in it will easily discern why your photos do not support the contention that the damage seen was caused by the destruction occurring on 9/11.

Oh please, do explain.

So, no, it did not take 1 minute.

You're right, it took LESS than a minute. I opened a browser, typed "wtc subway collapse", and it was the FIRST image in google images.

This thread has been up and running for at least 10 days and there's still not one shred of evidence of damage to the underground area of the WTC.

Zero, zip, zilch, nada.

This is one of the worst cases of denial I've ever seen.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you cannot find photos showing any damage to the lower levels of the wtc.

Since jammonius hasn't posted in this thread since the 8th of June, we may safely conclude that he/she has conceded this debate entirely.

Hey, look, our side can ignore the evidence and claim victory too!

Dave

 

[jammonius]

Except for all the photos that were just posted that do, that you only want to not do that, even though they do.

Deny all you want, it just shows your ability to shrug off what is blatantly obvious to people with working brain stems.

Your kidding no one but yourself here. The bald faced assertion "...all the photos that were just posted..." consists quite plainly in two poor quality images that are clearly unrelated to damage caused on 9/11 by the destruction of the WTC complex and have nothing whatever to do with that event.

This thread is 11 pages and 11 days old and those 2 puny, stupid pictures posted above are an insult to the collective intelligence of this thread; on one level that is; and, on another, they are a blatant acknowledgment that the claim there was sub-level damage cannot be substantiated. The reason it cannot be substantiated is that it was false.

The reason why it is important, nonetheless, to make the claim of damage, and stick with it, no matter what, is that absent that damage, the assertion that the Twin Towers merely collapsed leaving a debris stack that was all but noneexistent puts paid to the official lie about what caused their destruction.

The myth of 9/11 will not withstand scrutiny and it is crumbling.

Dr. Judy Wood has seen to that.

 

[Myriad]

This was mentioned in passing by WildCat much earlier in the thread, but I don't think anyone paid enough attention to it.

LIDAR mapping was used at Ground Zero after 9/11 to create (and then continuously update) extremely precise and accurate maps of, among other things, the rubble pile heights.

A National Geographic column explains:

Additional LIDAR views showed color-coded heights of the damaged structures and the constantly shifting rubble piles. This information helped officials know how tall debris-removal cranes needed to be.

(On might ask, why would officials need this information if the debris were no more than a story high? Any crane can reach a height of one story. Fortunately, there's no need to engage in such speculative, albeit convincing, questioning. The maps themselves exist and can be examined.)

A CUNY publication explains the project in more detail, including its background in pre-9/11 digital mapping work, and how the new technologies it had developed were put to use in rescue and restoration efforts. I recommend this fascinating article for anyone who hasn't read it yet.

Images generated from some of the maps themselves are now part of the collection of the Library of Congress. Posted here: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/911/911-maps.html. Of particular value is the post-September-11th flythrough visualization video (link is about halfway down the page, on the right side). This is based on the same LIDAR data used to plan rescue operations, locate and repair damaged utility links, and plan debris removal. Note that in some areas the rubble is relatively flat, and in others it's piled many stories high.

CARSI's Web site, including current personnel and contact information, and links to other publications and media reports, is here: http://www.geo.hunter.cuny.edu/~carsi/.

Directly from that site, the height of the rubble piles on 9/19/01: http://www.geo.hunter.cuny.edu/~carsi/INDEX/CURRENTAFFAIRS/exhibit/lidar_sep.htm. It shows that the top of the rubble piles (NOT counting still-standing structures) relative to the surrounding street level reaches the 75-100 foot elevation range in both tower footprints. Note also the regions of negative elevation, especially in the plaza area where the pre-9/11 elevation was about 30 feet higher than the surrounding street level -- which is certainly not possible without damage to the underground structures in those areas.

More images and renderings here: http://www.geo.hunter.cuny.edu/~carsi/

This is unambiguous and decisive evidence of large debris piles.

No claims of lack of large debris piles require any rational consideration whatsoever unless they address this evidence.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[jammonius]

This was mentioned in passing by WildCat much earlier in the thread, but I don't think anyone paid enough attention to it.

LIDAR mapping was used at Ground Zero after 9/11 to create (and then continuously update) extremely precise and accurate maps of, among other things, the rubble pile heights.

A National Geographic column explains:



(On might ask, why would officials need this information if the debris were no more than a story high? Any crane can reach a height of one story. Fortunately, there's no need to engage in such speculative, albeit convincing, questioning. The maps themselves exist and can be examined.)

A CUNY publication explains the project in more detail, including its background in pre-9/11 digital mapping work, and how the new technologies it had developed were put to use in rescue and restoration efforts. I recommend this fascinating article for anyone who hasn't read it yet.

Images generated from some of the maps themselves are now part of the collection of the Library of Congress. Posted here: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/911/911-maps.html. Of particular value is the post-September-11th flythrough visualization video (link is about halfway down the page, on the right side). This is based on the same LIDAR data used to plan rescue operations, locate and repair damaged utility links, and plan debris removal. Note that in some areas the rubble is relatively flat, and in others it's piled many stories high.

CARSI's Web site, including current personnel and contact information, and links to other publications and media reports, is here: http://www.geo.hunter.cuny.edu/~carsi/.

Directly from that site, the height of the rubble piles on 9/19/01: http://www.geo.hunter.cuny.edu/~carsi/INDEX/CURRENTAFFAIRS/exhibit/lidar_sep.htm. It shows that the top of the rubble piles (NOT counting still-standing structures) relative to the surrounding street level reaches the 75-100 foot elevation range in both tower footprints. Note also the regions of negative elevation, especially in the plaza area where the pre-9/11 elevation was about 30 feet higher than the surrounding street level -- which is certainly not possible without damage to the underground structures in those areas.

More images and renderings here: http://www.geo.hunter.cuny.edu/~carsi/

This is unambiguous and decisive evidence of large debris piles.

No claims of lack of large debris piles require any rational consideration whatsoever unless they address this evidence.

Respectfully,
Myriad

You're fooling no one but yourself. This LIDAR imagery is old hat. This is nothing that Dr. Wood didn't already deal with at least a year or so ago.

Look at the actual depictions:

Pre-911:

Now look at 9/17/01

There is no signficant difference. The use of the 'deep red' coloring is undifferentiated over a large variable. The hint of this is found in the quoted text: 75 - 100 ft. That is a huge spread, entailing a 25% differential for a ground level chart.

Accordingly, the coloration of the chart is highly deceptive and does not enable one to accurately measure the rubble pile.

Plus, that is only an illustration of how charts and graphs can mislead.

I have long since stated and reiterated that people do not believe their own eyes when it comes to 9/11. The more direct imagery -- photographs -- show you exactly what the rubble pile looks like. Merely by using a piece of technology with an acronym to support it -- LIDAR -- in this instance (how apt is that, come to think of it?) does not change the fact that one can plainly see that GZ was all but flat.

OK, two can play the game. Those who assert that GZ was not flat are close on to delusional. I hasten to add, however, that I am not here descending to the name-calling stage. There is good reason to try, and try mightily, to defend the common version of events. It is overwhelmingly painful to have to entertain that 9/11 was a false flag operation and that we have been lied to. It makes all of us look like chumps and it puts that which we hold dear on the same level as those we like to accuse of being evil, if not worse.

pomgranite (or was it pompomerand, whatever) has alluded to this. S/he said that whosoever shalt question 9/11 is unamurikan and hates our freedom fries and wants god not to bless us and such like.

Thus, at the end of the day, this whole exercise has more to do with emotion than reason. Emotion trumps reason.

Not amount of reason is going to persuade anyone who is guided by emotion that GZ was anything other than a huge pile of debris.

That said, you will not be allowed to slip false data by me.

Once again, people, you will simply not get away with this kind of deception, try as you might.