Horizontal Ejections and Squibs

[Grizzly Bear]

BUMP for papasmurf on post #100

and..

It's called denial.

How do you expect for people to ever take your word for it if you haven't even seen their side of the story?

You have to start THINKING FOR YOURSELF.

All PEOPLE here WAKE UP.

Get out of the MOB MENTALITY.

Make up your OWN MIND.

Afraid of the truth. You won't admit this, but deep down you know it is fear that is holding you back.

It's understandable. If indeed Alex Jones and millions of others are mostly correct, we are headed towards Nazi Germany.

The world will change for the worse soon. Bad things will happen to the economy and other sectors, and no one is going to be able to blame it on the truth movement.

Wow... IRONY at it's finest...

I've viewed that side of the story, If you want to place blame on anyone for leading me to not believe the truth movement you can blame your fellow truth movement friends for twisting the words of witnesses and establishing numerous strawman arguments. Sorry, the truth movement swayed me, but it clearly didn't have the intended effect.

I get called a government shill, and a loyalist just for correcting the idiotic physics other people peddle around... I am told I should be hanged for treason by other 'truth' movement members.

 

[papasmurf]

Its not a gradually expanding plume, it's a high velocity, focused ejection.

Yes i've already said some debris hits the ground first before the rest of the building. This is not inconvenient. It is only within a second of the rest of teh building. Hence why the debris fell at free fall, and the building at near free fall.

Pomeroo, No one calls what we are observing a gradually expanding plume. Are you sure your talking about the same thing as the rest of us. You have watched the videos i posted, right?

 

[Slayhamlet]

Gee, I'm always impressed when ineducable, agenda-driven dunces call me names. Now, let's take your points one-by-one:

You have accused Larry Silverstein of being complicit in a heinous crime. Your charge is baseless nonsense. You have not a shred of evidence to support it, and absolutely nothing suggests that it might be true. Many members of your evil, brain-dead movement are Jew-haters. They have demonized the owner of a building that was destroyed by falling debris and the resultant fires simply because he is a Jew. Therefore, I ask again: WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU GOT?

All the videos show debris falling faster than the building. That statement is incontrovertibly true. What precisely are you objecting to? Oh, wait--the observation is inconvenient to your fantasy. Now we understand.

To repeat: you have no "theories." You spout ancient, discredited rubbish. You have read nothing, learned nothing, and you presume to waste our time recommending the deranged ravings of the embarrassing fraud Alex Jones.

Show us where I'm being "irrational" in exposing your pretensions.

What else has he got? Probably a few more overused quotations from bad 90's Adam Sandler movies

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Its not a gradually expanding plume, it's a high velocity, focused ejection.

And squibs caused by explosives do not 'squirt' out in a continuous stream, they expand out and dissipate.

Yes i've already said some debris hits the ground first before the rest of the building. This is not inconvenient. It is only within a second of the rest of teh building. Hence why the debris fell at free fall, and the building at near free fall.

The first debris struck the ground withing about 10 seconds for both towers, however the collapses took several seconds longer to complete. 15+ for both towers. Why are you distorting those figures?

Pomeroo, No one calls what we are observing a gradually expanding plume.

It certainly is not dissipating as would be characteristic of a sudden high velocity dispersion of energy, and dissipation. The force driving your so called squibs is constant. THis actually contradicts your theory, in addition to the fact that the cores in some of the same regions did not collapse for an additional 15 or more seconds AFTER the main collapse

 

[pomeroo]

Its not a gradually expanding plume, it's a high velocity, focused ejection.

You haven't the faintest idea of what you're talking about. The plume most certainly does expand. And, yes, the compression of air does eject a lot of dust.

Yes i've already said some debris hits the ground first before the rest of the building. This is not inconvenient. It is only within a second of the rest of teh building. Hence why the debris fell at free fall, and the building at near free fall.

The fact that the debris falls faster than the rest of the building is highly inconvenient to the mythmakers who substitute explosives for the plane impacts and resultant fires that occurred in the real world.

Pomeroo, No one calls what we are observing a gradually expanding plume. Are you sure your talking about the same thing as the rest of us. You have watched the videos i posted, right?

Conspiracy liars have been pretending for years that the bursts of compressed air are explosions. The claim doesn't improve with age.
Hint: random explosions are not characteristic of controlled demolitions.

 

[papasmurf]

I did do my homework and look at the ventilation diagrams in the NIST report.

If you look at them. They have these green markings across entire levels showing where vents are located.

This has me to believe at this point that events are small and spread out, rather than just large vents at the midpoint of the building.

I need a reason to believe that the vents could have been large enough to launch the amount of debris we see out of them. I need a reason to believe the events exit the building perfectly horizontal. And i need a reason to believe that they should exit the buildings at the midpoints.

If you are confident in this theory, develop it and write a paper on it. Submit it to NIST.

Until then, those squib-like explosions are still suspect to being demolitions.

 

[pomeroo]

I did do my homework and look at the ventilation diagrams in the NIST report.

If you look at them. They have these green markings across entire levels showing where vents are located.

This has me to believe at this point that events are small and spread out, rather than just large vents at the midpoint of the building.

I need a reason to believe that the vents could have been large enough to launch the amount of debris we see out of them. I need a reason to believe the events exit the building perfectly horizontal. And i need a reason to believe that they should exit the buildings at the midpoints.

If you are confident in this theory, develop it and write a paper on it. Submit it to NIST.

Until then, those squib-like explosions are still suspect to being demolitions.

No, those bursts of compressed air are not suspected of being explosions by anyone who isn't flogging a deranged and thoroughly discredited agenda. You still think you can con us into believing that random blasts suggest controlled demoliton. They don't, and you can't.

 

[papasmurf]

Pomeroo, your critical thinking skills are abysmal. You think the plumes, as you like to call them are random???

They occur at the midpoint of the building, on all sides of the building, at the same level, at the same time. This is hardly random.

Why is it convenient that some debris hit the ground before the rest of the building collapsed? I am arguing that the debris should have hit the ground much sooner than the rest of the building if this was indeed a progressive, domino-effect collapse, but it doesn't. It's only a second sooner.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

You are getting mixed up. You're theory doesn't go against the NIST theory possibly, but the theory that there were air vents and not windows that the air escaped from is clearly a point that would have been addressed by NIST.
This is what you quoted me on, and this is what i was discussing.

NIST explanation that you posted is absolutely horrible. As is Beachnut's. How can one possibly believe that the ejected material is only air. It is clearly a huge mass of dust and pulverized material. I don't get it.

That's a silly objection. Nothing in NIST's explanation exclues the possibility of dust and pulverized material being in the air. In fact, the use of the term "puffs of smoke" clearly demonstrates that they're not talking about uncontaminated air at all. That rebuttal is terrible and does nothing to refute the explanation.

Furthermore, in your first paragraph, you're missing my point. Regardless of whether the ejections mischaracterized as "squibs" were from windows or HVAC vents, or other sorts of openings, they were driven by the falling mass of the upper section. Not squibs. It doesn't matter if those "puffs" of dust/smoke/whatever were coming out of a vent or some other sort of opening. The point is what was causing the dynamic pressure. It's not squibs. As I pointed out countless times in countless other threads, the notion of squibs/explosive charges has been refuted time and time again.

Start here:
http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm
... then here:
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html#Squibs debunked
... then read through the 911 Myths works on the topic:
http://www.google.com/search?q=squib+site:911myths.com&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:*&filter=0
... and then should you want to peruse them, here's a Google search of posts and threads where squibs were discussed:
Google search of JREF forum for "squibs"

The conclusion here is twofold:

1. The dynamic pressure is caused by the upper section falling. That's tons and tons of material, after all.
2. Squibs as an explanation for those jets/puffs/ejections of air and dust/smoke/debris/whatever fails on many levels.

 

[papasmurf]

This is what i am referring to by the way. This occurs a number of times during the collapse sequence.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

[qimg]http://visibility911.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/squibs.jpg[/qimg]

This is what i am referring to by the way. This occurs a number of times during the collapse sequence.

Do you have an answer to my questions posed in post #100 or will you continue to evade them?

 

[pomeroo]

Pomeroo, your critical thinking skills are abysmal.

And when you consider that my critical thinking skills are superior to yours by several orders of magnitude, that should suggest the dimensions of your problem.

You think the plumes, as you like to call them are random???

I "like" to call the plumes "plumes" for exactly the same reason that I "like" to call elephants "elephants." They are, of course, random in that there is no simultaneous series of explosions immediately followed by the collapse of the building.

They occur at the midpoint of the building, on all sides of the building, at the same level, at the same time. This is hardly random.

Gee, that's amazing. It's almost as though air was being forced out of the building.

Why is it convenient that some debris hit the ground before the rest of the building collapsed? I am arguing that the debris should have hit the ground much sooner than the rest of the building if this was indeed a progressive, domino-effect collapse, but it doesn't. It's only a second sooner.

You have been proved wrong.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Read NIST NCSTAR 1-5A. The plans showing the exhaust louvers are in Appendix A of that volume.




Because they only studied the collapse initiation.

ETA: I see NIST did address that in their most recent FAQ. Thanks EMH.

You're welcome. And thank you for the reference to the louvers. I didn't know that was there. I really, really need to do a cover-to-cover reading of the whole report, including supplements, instead of just reading sections pertinent to whatever it is I'm studying at the moment.

I may have to look for a cool Hokulele quote to use in my sig as tribute.

 

[Disbelief]

I did do my homework and look at the ventilation diagrams in the NIST report.

If you look at them. They have these green markings across entire levels showing where vents are located.

This has me to believe at this point that events are small and spread out, rather than just large vents at the midpoint of the building.

I need a reason to believe that the vents could have been large enough to launch the amount of debris we see out of them. I need a reason to believe the events exit the building perfectly horizontal. And i need a reason to believe that they should exit the buildings at the midpoints.

If you are confident in this theory, develop it and write a paper on it. Submit it to NIST.

Until then, those squib-like explosions are still suspect to being demolitions.

Buy that air cylinder yet? Put some oil in it (dirt would damage it) and see how it gets expressed with open/restricted ports.

Also, why would anyone write a paper for NIST? If you think these "squibs" demonstrate explosives, you should be the one writing the technical paper and submitting it.

 

[Slayhamlet]

It certainly is not dissipating as would be characteristic of a sudden high velocity dispersion of energy, and dissipation. The force driving your so called squibs is constant. THis actually contradicts your theory, in addition to the fact that the cores in some of the same regions did not collapse for an additional 15 or more seconds AFTER the main collapse

Actually, the force isn't constant: the jet of debris and air actually accelerates shortly after it appears. This behavior is not at all consistent with explosives, to say the least.

 

[pomeroo]

http://visibility911.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/squibs.jpg

This is what i am referring to by the way. This occurs a number of times during the collapse sequence.

I love the way you show a gradually expanding plume to demonstrate that there were no gradually expanding plumes.

Please explain why your "explosion" appears below the collapsing portion of the building.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Actually, the force isn't constant: the jet of debris and air actually accelerates shortly after it appears. This behavior is not at all consistent with explosives, to say the least.

Whoops blonde moment
Point made though with your clarification...

 

[Slayhamlet]

[qimg]http://visibility911.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/squibs.jpg[/qimg]

This is what i am referring to by the way. This occurs a number of times during the collapse sequence.

Yes, we know what the hell it is that 9/11 crackpots call "squibs", we've only been dealing with this same recycled nonsense since 2005. Have you ever watched any videos of the collapse with decent enough resolution to observe the behavior of these "squibs" in detail? They are not consistent with explosives. Not to mention none of these "squibs" appear until well into the collapse.

 

[~enigma~]

So whose information is it?

Probably copied from the internet somewhere because it does not belong to the poster here. But then again, I am sure he can claim his brother was posting as him since his password was password.

 

[~enigma~]

How am i a fraud?

I give you exhibits 7-14.

I just want to know the truth.

I am not a troll nor a fraud.

I am trying to understand both sides of the story.

I am trying to determine the degree of cover-up.

Those are the only two possibilities at this point.

Have you read operation northwoods?

Alex Jones

9/11 Press for truth

US imperialism