• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Hardfire: Szamboti / Chandler / Mackey

Mel Odious said:
IIRC, the part of the core that remained standing after the collapse of tower 2 was about 40 stories in height, and the part of the core that remained standing after the collapse of tower 1 was 60 stories in height. If I'm remembering wrong, I'd appreciate it if someone would correct me.

In any case, if Bazant's paper includes destruction of core columns, then he's overestimating the energy needed to continue collapse, at least for the lower part of each tower.
Click to expand...

I think that's essentially correct.
 
bs,

bill smith said:
... blah, blah, usual blah...

It changes the entire dynamic. And yet RM does not think it worth even mentioning. That is not credible.
Click to expand...

You need to learn to distinguish "... RM does not think [this topic] worth even mentioning ..." from "... RM does not think bothering with your demonstrably, determinedly ignorant butt to be a worthwhile expenditure of milliseconds ..."

The second thesis is far, FAR more than credible. It is the overwhelming consensus. And it is certain.

As in this note, people respond to you only as they would scratch an annoying rash.

Congrats on your chosen role in life: the brainless, thoughtless, pointless, persistent annoyance.

The illegitimate love-child of Gilbert Gottfried & Homer Simpson...

Let's have a show of hands for legalizing retroactive abortion. 18 years ought to be sufficient to distinguish the "keepers".


TomK
 
tfk said:
bs,



You need to learn to distinguish "... RM does not think [this topic] worth even mentioning ..." from "... RM does not think bothering with your demonstrably, determinedly ignorant butt to be a worthwhile expenditure of milliseconds ..."

The second thesis is far, FAR more than credible. It is the overwhelming consensus. And it is certain.

As in this note, people respond to you only as they would scratch an annoying rash.

Congrats on your chosen role in life: the brainless, thoughtless, pointless, persistent annoyance.

The illegitimate love-child of Gilbert Gottfried & Homer Simpson...

Let's have a show of hands for legalizing retroactive abortion. 18 years ought to be sufficient to distinguish the "keepers".


TomK
Click to expand...

I've had bill on ignore for ages...life is good.;)

ETA 'The illegitimate love-child of Gilbert Gottfried & Homer Simpson...'

Maybe something like this...
 
Last edited:
tfk said:
bs,



You need to learn to distinguish "... RM does not think [this topic] worth even mentioning ..." from "... RM does not think bothering with your demonstrably, determinedly ignorant butt to be a worthwhile expenditure of milliseconds ..."

The second thesis is far, FAR more than credible. It is the overwhelming consensus. And it is certain.

As in this note, people respond to you only as they would scratch an annoying rash.

Congrats on your chosen role in life: the brainless, thoughtless, pointless, persistent annoyance.

The illegitimate love-child of Gilbert Gottfried & Homer Simpson...

Let's have a show of hands for legalizing retroactive abortion. 18 years ought to be sufficient to distinguish the "keepers".


TomK
Click to expand...

Well hello there T. Heavy on the vitriol today I notice.

I guess that any interested observers will be noticing a certain reluctance on the part of debunkers (such as RM) to explain whether or not the 30-storey antenna starting to fall into WTC1 prior to any other movement is significant. Of course you may consider yurself free to address the issue as soon as you like. People will be asking by now why you guys are obviously avoiding the ssue like the plague.
 
Mangoose said:
The tilt that you have no interest in is the very reason why the antenna *looks like* it falls "into the building" when you view videos that show the North Face straight on. The bias in the video record to the North Face (owing to the evacuation of lower Manhattan) predisposes you to view the collapse from the angle that most obscures the tilt; you see the antenna falling without anything on the North Face falling. The North Face however showed signs of the collapse later than the other sides of the building. You need to balance these videos with those taken from the northeast, northwest, and the south which show clearly that the antenna mast did not simply fall but tilted southward and such movement was synchronous with collapse activity visible on the South, East, and West Faces.
Click to expand...

bill smith said:
I guess that any interested observers will be noticing a certain reluctance on the part of debunkers (such as RM) to explain whether or not the 30-storey antenna starting to fall into WTC1 prior to any other movement is significant.
Click to expand...

Still not bothered learning to read, then, bill?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Still not bothered learning to read, then, bill?

Dave
Click to expand...

I didn't bother responding Dave because it is too reminiscent of your own panicky statement that it was an 'optical illusion' when I first showed you the video. Remember ?
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I didn't bother responding Dave because it is too reminiscent of your own panicky statement that it was an 'optical illusion' when I first showed you the video. Remember ?
Click to expand...
Bill:
You are essentially saying that a unicorn brought down the towers, do you have proof of this?
 
bill smith said:
I guess that any interested observers will be noticing a certain reluctance on the part of debunkers (such as RM) to explain whether or not the 30-storey antenna starting to fall into WTC1 prior to any other movement is significant.
Click to expand...

No reluctance on my part....I've dealt with precisely this question and presented images that show that while the antenna started to fall prior to any movement on the North Face, its movement was simultaneous with movement on the East, South, and West Faces.
 
Mangoose said:
No reluctance on my part....I've dealt with precisely this question and presented images that show that while the antenna started to fall prior to any movement on the North Face, its movement was simultaneous with movement on the East, South, and West Faces.
Click to expand...

Do you have some video of that from he beginning of the downwards movement of the antenna ? It would be very surprising if you don't have with three of the four sides to choose from.
 
A W Smith said:
There was no downward movement of the antenna previous to tilt and collapse of the top floors.. and it is as simple as that.

Click to expand...

Did you ever notice how the 360-foot (or 30-storey) antenna looks as though it has a free-falling heavy weight pulling it down. You can see by how the visible part of the antenna moves. Something long and heavy like a bunch of core columns is my guess. If it was only the hat truss ( three floors) I think the antenna would have fallen over sideways.

The question is How could the bunch of core columns fall straight down ? Where were the columns they had been sitting on ? It's almost as if those had been melted down into the basemant leaving a void for the bunch of core columns and the antenna to fall freely into.
 
Last edited:
What a turkey

bill smith said:
Did you ever notice how the 360-foot (or 30-storey) antenna looks as though it has a free-falling heavy weight pulling it down. You can see by how the visible part of the antenna moves. Something long and heavy like a bunch or core columns is my guess. If it was only the hat truss ( three floors) I think the antenna would have fallen over sideways.

The question is How could the bunch of core columns fall straight down ? Where were the columns they had been sitting on ? It's almost as if those had been melted down into the basemant leaving a void for the bunch of core columns and the antenna to fall freely into.
Click to expand...

are you that stupid? the antenna was attached to the hat truss which was attached to the core and perimeter columns which were part of the top section which started falling through the lower portion. Of course its going to follow the top section down. Notice that at no point during the first clip does the antenna fall faster than the nearest 3 corners. Almost as if it is attached!!! with some sort of hat truss!!!
 
Last edited:
Bill,
Have you seen the video where a large suspension bridge in the background moves from one side of the towers to the other?
A clear proof that the every video was manipulated in real time.
 
A W Smith said:
are you that stupid? the antenna was attached to the hat truss which was attached to the core and perimeter columns which were part of the top section which started falling through the lower portion. Of course its going to follow the top section down. Notice that at no point during the fist clip does the antenna fall faster than the nearest 3 corners. Almost as if it is attached!!! with some sort of hat truss!!!
Click to expand...

Yes,Bill is that stupid,or pretending to be.
 
If anybody sees RM you could ask him how did the antenna fall more or less straight downwards. I mean if the hat truss and attached core columns had put up even a moment's resistence the antenna would have fallen over sideways.
 
bill smith said:
Do you have some video of that from he beginning of the downwards movement of the antenna ? It would be very surprising if you don't have with three of the four sides to choose from.
Click to expand...

See the thread on the subject that alienentity started.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom