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

More Lidar

You know, the CUNY website that is the source of the LIDAR image Hokulele is working with clearly explains that the levels that we are here entertaining as being tan to yellow are considered to be "STREET LEVEL."

The website states:

"Advances in Geographic Information Science (GIS) software and high-speed computers give geographers tools to manipulate LIDAR's drab data (just gray dots on a black background) and transform it into striking color presentations. Seen here (illus. D) is a color image created by converting the point data into a solid surface and assigning color to elevation ranges. Areas of orange are below street level, street level elevations uses brown hues, and greens to blues represent height above street level. This data set gave the first clear rendering of the extent of damage. This data set was then converted into a 3D image that could be viewed from all angles.

See: http://www1.cuny.edu/events/cunymatters/2001_december/groundzero.html

Here's Illustration D:
carsi2,16.jpg
 
jammonius said:
For instance, the Air Force Space Command, that has been OPERATIONAL for more than 25 years has not been referenced once in the various posts that seek to suggest the impossibility of DEW in earth orbit.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but no one's saying DEW doesn't exist, only that nothing capable of creating the damage necessary to fell the towers could be put up in orbit without somebody noticing due to the size which would be necessary.
 
jammonius said:
I don't know who you folks think you're fooling with the construction of your hypotheticals about why certain configurations of DEW are impossible, and then concluding that Dr. Wood must, therefore, be wrong.
Click to expand...
Four posters (myself , myriad , R. Mackey, and BenBurch) have offered quantitative analyses bounding the problem, each refuting the DEW scenario without requiring a specific identification of the weapon. You have failed to offer any challenge these analyses, so your complaints about them are irrelevant.
jammonius said:
Dr. Wood has not proposed the hyptheticals, you have.
Click to expand...
Ms. Wood has not even defined her claim. On the other hand, several posters here have offered specific, verifiable information and analysis, which you have studiously ignored.
jammonius said:
Moreover, in trying to knock down your own strawperson constructs, you haven't even referred to publicly availble information on space military resources or where that information can be found.
Click to expand...
No need. I work in aerospace, and have experience in civil, commercial, and military programs.

In any case, since you claim that public information suffices for all your needs, you should have no difficulty in offering specific evidence to back up your claims. You have been repeatedly asked for such evidence. Do you, or do you not, intend to offer any?
jammonius said:
For instance, the Air Force Space Command, that has been OPERATIONAL for more than 25 years has not been referenced once in the various posts that seek to suggest the impossibility of DEW in earth orbit.
Click to expand...
Handwaving. How exactly does the existence of a particular branch of USAF support your claim?

In any case, I've actually contracted for, or otherwise have experience with, several wings within Space Command, and I see that you have missed the mark. Again. Space Command does not develop directed-energy weapons; that is the job of organizations such as the Missile Defense Agency. You have repeatedly shown pictures of the ABL, which is an MDA project; I am at a loss to understand how you could not have known this. Other organizations primarily responsible for developing DEW include the U.S. Army and USAF and USMC Special Operations Commands. Not AFSPC.

*Chuckle* Google is no substitute for understanding. You've managed to identify the contractors and parts of the military not primarily responsible for DEWs, and missed the ones that are!

Would you like to try again to bolster your claim (whatever it is) by posting yet another random image? Maybe of Ming the Merciless' spaceship? Or the Federation seal?
 
Last edited:
OK, here are a few more images that will hopefully clarify the scale of the debris. All three images are of the southwestern corner of the site, with WTC 2 to the right, one end of WTC 3 in the middle, and the southern skybridge off to the left. Downloading the images to your computer may make them easier to view. The first image shows the aerial photo of the area of interest (click to enlarge).



Note the skybridge makes a clear landmark to help determine size, location, and scale. The next image is the same section of aerial data with the LIDAR TIN overlay.



This is to give a sense of perspective and to verify that the portions of the images I am discussing are in fact oriented and located correctly. The last image shows the same area in the LIDAR TIN.



Again, the skybridge can be clearly seen. The color of the top of the skybridge is the pale yellow (not any shade of brown), and you can clearly see that the middle of the elevation range across the debris pile inside the footprint of WTC 2 matches this shade, and covers almost half the area of the footprint. This means that almost 50% of the WTC 2 debris pile was between 50 to 75 feet above street level. This corresponds to a (very) rough conservative estimate of 21,500 sq.ft * 60 ft = 1,290,000 cu.ft. of material for just half of the area of the pile.

ETA: I should clarify, half of the area of the pile above street level. I refuse to enter the debate about debris below street level. /ETA

Also note that you can see the blue areas that most likely represent the outer wall panels and the remnant of the core which fall in the 150-200 feet above street level range.

One last thing I should point out here that can help in estimating the size of the debris pile is the average slope across WTC 2's footprint. When estimating slope from survey data (regardless of the type of survey), there are a few things you can check. For the purposes of this image, we only need one of these methods which is to look at the width of each elevation band.

For example, when you look at the skybridge, the color changes from the tan of the road surface to the pale yellow of the top of the bridge in a short horizontal distance. There are a few TIN faces that show the mustard yellow color that represents elevations between 25 and 50 feet. The outer wall panels jump from tan to blue almost instantly. Both of these areas are in extremely steep slope, pretty much vertical.

On the other hand, when you look at the tan area around the skybridge, there are hardly any changes in color, with just the occasional face in orange, meaning the area is fairly flat. You can see a few bumps in the tan areas of the TIN, which most likely correspond to the construction, emergency, and other service vehicles on the site (all less than 25 feet tall). Just think, a full-sized truck is barely a pimple at this scale!

The debris pile within the footprint of WTC 2 has bands of color including the mustard yellow (25-50), pale yellow (50-75), bright yellow (75-100), and culminates with the greens and blues of the core remnant. Measuring these bands (they average 40 feet in width) and comparing them to the elevation ranges gives us a slope of about 62.5%. Considering the steepest road grades you will typically encounter are only about 12% (with a few as much as 20%), this is a huge, steep pile.

The site at Ground Zero was not flat.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
Correct. (The size required is simply immense.)
Click to expand...


So basically jammoumouis/Judy Wood think that the US Government secretly built and launched something the size of the Death Star in "Star Wars" and the NWO used it to bring down the WTC.
And Judy Wood used to teach at a respected university?:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp
 
dudalb said:
So basically jammoumouis/Judy Wood think that the US Government secretly built and launched something the size of the Death Star in "Star Wars" and the NWO used it to bring down the WTC.
And Judy Wood used to teach at a respected university?:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be the size of the Death Star, but in terms of keeping it a secret it might as well be.
 
Hokulele said:
OK, here are a few more images that will hopefully clarify the scale of the debris...

[snipping for brevity]

... The debris pile within the footprint of WTC 2 has bands of color including the mustard yellow (25-50), pale yellow (50-75), bright yellow (75-100), and culminates with the greens and blues of the core remnant. Measuring these bands (they average 40 feet in width) and comparing them to the elevation ranges gives us a slope of about 62.5%. Considering the steepest road grades you will typically encounter are only about 12% (with a few as much as 20%), this is a huge, steep pile.

The site at Ground Zero was not flat.
Click to expand...

That is an excellent analysis. Between this work, articles specifically mentioning the height of the piles as well as the underground damage, and witness testimonies found in places like the NYTimes Oral Histories page, we can safely say that the idea of Ground Zero being flat is very firmly refuted.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
That is an excellent analysis.
Click to expand...

It is, indeed. Thank you, Hokulele.

ElMondoHummus said:
Between this work, articles specifically mentioning the height of the piles as well as the underground damage, and witness testimonies found in places like the NYTimes Oral Histories page, we can safely say that the idea of Ground Zero being flat is very firmly refuted.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Huh, there I was, minding my own business, and I suddenly stumbled upon indisputable photographic evidence that Mount Everest is flat. It immediately brought this thread to mind.

1301248594d6fcba28.jpg


That rock in the background near the center may be a story high; there's certainly nothing there that's any higher than that. (And yes, this is a genuine photograph that was taken at the South Col of Mount Everest. Supposedly at 26,200 feet elevation, well below the summit at over 29,000 feet, but of course that has to be a lie because we now know that Mount Everest is flat!)

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Hokulele said:
OK, here are a few more images that will hopefully clarify the scale of the debris. All three images are of the southwestern corner of the site, with WTC 2 to the right, one end of WTC 3 in the middle, and the southern skybridge off to the left. Downloading the images to your computer may make them easier to view. The first image shows the aerial photo of the area of interest (click to enlarge).

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_15083485836007546a.jpg[/qimg]

Note the skybridge makes a clear landmark to help determine size, location, and scale. The next image is the same section of aerial data with the LIDAR TIN overlay.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_150834858386e037cb.jpg[/qimg]

This is to give a sense of perspective and to verify that the portions of the images I am discussing are in fact oriented and located correctly. The last image shows the same area in the LIDAR TIN.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_1508348583677942a2.jpg[/qimg]

Again, the skybridge can be clearly seen. The color of the top of the skybridge is the pale yellow (not any shade of brown), and you can clearly see that the middle of the elevation range across the debris pile inside the footprint of WTC 2 matches this shade, and covers almost half the area of the footprint. This means that almost 50% of the WTC 2 debris pile was between 50 to 75 feet above street level. This corresponds to a (very) rough conservative estimate of 21,500 sq.ft * 60 ft = 1,290,000 cu.ft. of material for just half of the area of the pile.

ETA: I should clarify, half of the area of the pile above street level. I refuse to enter the debate about debris below street level. /ETA

Also note that you can see the blue areas that most likely represent the outer wall panels and the remnant of the core which fall in the 150-200 feet above street level range.

One last thing I should point out here that can help in estimating the size of the debris pile is the average slope across WTC 2's footprint. When estimating slope from survey data (regardless of the type of survey), there are a few things you can check. For the purposes of this image, we only need one of these methods which is to look at the width of each elevation band.

For example, when you look at the skybridge, the color changes from the tan of the road surface to the pale yellow of the top of the bridge in a short horizontal distance. There are a few TIN faces that show the mustard yellow color that represents elevations between 25 and 50 feet. The outer wall panels jump from tan to blue almost instantly. Both of these areas are in extremely steep slope, pretty much vertical.

On the other hand, when you look at the tan area around the skybridge, there are hardly any changes in color, with just the occasional face in orange, meaning the area is fairly flat. You can see a few bumps in the tan areas of the TIN, which most likely correspond to the construction, emergency, and other service vehicles on the site (all less than 25 feet tall). Just think, a full-sized truck is barely a pimple at this scale!

The debris pile within the footprint of WTC 2 has bands of color including the mustard yellow (25-50), pale yellow (50-75), bright yellow (75-100), and culminates with the greens and blues of the core remnant. Measuring these bands (they average 40 feet in width) and comparing them to the elevation ranges gives us a slope of about 62.5%. Considering the steepest road grades you will typically encounter are only about 12% (with a few as much as 20%), this is a huge, steep pile.

The site at Ground Zero was not flat.
Click to expand...

Greetings hokulele,

Thanks, as usual, for your splendid work here. You appear, yet again, to display that solomon-like trait of splitting that which is in contention down the middle, managing, for instance, to declare part of GZ 'flat' and part 'not flat.' I think your reference to thw south walkway provides a good frame of reference; however I disagree somewhat with conclusions you draw from it as a reference. That walkway towered above that which should have been a portion of WTC 3, I think. As you know, that was the Marriott hotel, standing 22 stories as seen here:

Image143.jpg


Note, too, the sheer volume of material that was reduced, as you have aptly described, to something amounting to, in many places, <25ft -- or 2 storeys.

Here, also is a nearly horizontal shot of that pedestrian walkway:

Image313.jpg


Since we've already dealt with a certain gender issue, perhaps we should refer to your talent in splitting the differences between some of the rest of us, we should refer to you as Bilqis...;)
 
I assert that I am highly satisfied that the essential contention that GZ was flat has been fully substantiated.

At most, the 1 storey contention has been shown to amount to 2 storeys in a few areas. However, that was not the point in the first place. The pictures are not inaccurate and the LIDAR data confirms, rather than contradicts the way I have analyzed that material.

As I've said all along, the proof actually is in the visual evidence. The capacity to argue with it can continue ad infinitum as far as I'm concerned. But the fact remains that 2 110 story buildings, plus an additional 22 storey building were reduced to next to nothing, very clearly amounting to <1 storey in many areas, up to 2 storeys in a specific areas that can be seen and in a few outer wall remnants.

There's no further need to belabor the underground issue. The photos show there was no damage and the witnesses confirm this in many particulars. The subway damage assetions are highly inconclusive and have not even been specifically delineated for location purposes.

One remaining issue to be dealt with, I think, is to make note of the difference in demands for proof as between those of us who contend GZ was flat and that there was no underground damage, on the one hand, with those who contend otherwise. I think it fair to say that in all these pages there have been 2 or perhaps 3 pictures showing some underground damage in some subway, somewhere. The photos are narrow in scope and highly inconclusive. Yet, those who rely on them have treated them as though they are conclusive and confirming of the broad claim that there were some 5 to 7 storeys of underground damage. Those photos don't show that at all.

But, the one advantage that side has is that there is a very strong 'wish' to find something, anything, no matter how puny, weak or insubstantial to justify that claim. Add to that the tendency to try hard to confirm the official version of events and we have the makings of a sefl-fulfulling claim that is based, largely, on the emotional need to avoid having to reckon with the fact that the official version of events is simply untenable.

The information here does not provide sustenance for that emotional need.

Kudos to hokulele for being among those who relies less on emotion and more on reason.
I do not have a monopoly on reliance on reason, either. Accordingly, there are some areas of GZ that are yellow; i.e., 2 storeys. My problem may have been to overemphasize the word 'flat' that is accurate in a general sense, irrespective of a few exceptions. Once again, there are some 2 storey areas of debris and the outer wall remnants are as tall as the largely intact WTC 5,6 buildings at their peak. That would be about 8 storeys.
 
I am glad you appreciate the modest effort I have put into analyzing those images, and I am also glad that you realize the absurdity of the < 1 storey claim for the debris pile at WTC 2. Kudos for appreciating how the data clearly demonstrates the 75+ foot claim in several areas of the site (the bright yellow areas) and admitting that 8 storeys is a number much closer to reality for large areas of the site. It is a shame that people who have been following this discussion from the beginning may still fall into the error of believing the nonsensical claims that the site was "flat" and most of the building materials were "missing". It is good to see that you agree that the volume of material remaining on site was huge by any reasonable standard.
 
Hokulele said:
I am glad you appreciate the modest effort I have put into analyzing those images, and I am also glad that you realize the absurdity of the < 1 storey claim for the debris pile at WTC 2.
Click to expand...

It was inevitable that jammonius had to realise it eventually. What a breath of fresh air breezing over the stale 9-11 debate. Well done Jam!
:-]
BV
 
Hokulele said:
I am glad you appreciate the modest effort I have put into analyzing those images, and I am also glad that you realize the absurdity of the < 1 storey claim for the debris pile at WTC 2. Kudos for appreciating how the data clearly demonstrates the 75+ foot claim in several areas of the site (the bright yellow areas) and admitting that 8 storeys is a number much closer to reality for large areas of the site. It is a shame that people who have been following this discussion from the beginning may still fall into the error of believing the nonsensical claims that the site was "flat" and most of the building materials were "missing". It is good to see that you agree that the volume of material remaining on site was huge by any reasonable standard.
Click to expand...

hokulele,

I try hard not to 'put words into other researchers mouths' and, until the above quoted post, I had not noted that tendency in you either, hokulele. My post is not an admission of wrong interpretation. Moreover, your refernce to yellow and 75' is misleading. Among those that are yellow are the WTC 7 pile and very small piles in some other areas.

Look, the predominate height of GZ is <1storey, followed next by 1 storey followed next by 2 storey areas. The other indicators of height are the remnant walls.

Is that clear to you?

If you disagree, kindly point to the data, including the lidar and the photos.

It is interesting to note that the yellow begins within the height range of the pedestrian walkway. That walkway is barely 2 stories above the street level and it TOWERS OVER most of GZ.

Your data confirm this observation, hokulele, and you, yourself, have mentioned this.

What gives?:confused:
 
thum_1508348583677942a2.jpg


Can someone put some sort of grid over the above so that we can then quantify what parts are 1,2 etc. storeys in height?

As I look at it, the largest amount of area is <1 storey, followed next by 1-2 stories. The pedestrian walkway clearly tops out in yellow, however the yellow is not easy to see. the entire area next to that walkway is clearly beneath it, as is a substantial percentage of all else shown.

There's nothing the matter with using a quantitative approach here. I suggest we let the numbers settle this once and for all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom