• 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

DGM said:
I'm still wondering what's stopping you ("truthers") from doing an independent investigation?
Click to expand...

The movement can assemble tens of demonstrator and do lots of google-vestigation.

Not that impressive when compared to other movements.
 
I just don't GET it. The building neither fell into their own footprints NOR fell at near freefall speed. Why would any serious investigator use those non facts to support an argument?
 
I would warn everyone that Tony is a member of the forum, and hence the same rules (in terms of name calling, being civil, mocking, etc...) apply.

Just a friendly reminder.

TAM:)
 
TruthersLie said:
Your fail boat has arrived.

falling into own footprint? Not one of the towers or wtc7 collapsed into their own footprint. You might want to look that up. Feel free.

At near freefall speed? Not one of the towers or wtc7 fell at "near freefall speed." You might want to look up that claims.

South tower took 15 seconds to collapse. That is 66% longer than freefall. that isn't "near freefall."

North tower took over 20 seconds to collapse. that is 200% of freefall speed. that isn't "near freefall."

World trade center 7 took about 18 seconds to collapse. That is OVER 200% of freefall.

try again.



Swing and a miss. Please compare buildings of similar design which have sustained fire across multiple floors for hours that were UNFOUGHT fires.

simple. It should be easy.

Have you even figured out momentum yet?
Click to expand...

You forgot the angle of inclination. Don't forget to post a link to videos or photos so we can measure it and verify that the lean doesn't just exist in your vivid imagination.
 
bardamu said:
It's not me who's making extraordinary claims. He seems to believe the building was leaning.
Click to expand...

Actually you're making the claims, not anyone else. There's alot of people who said that they felt the buildings lean after the planes impacts. About 6 feet!

As far as the tilt in WTC2, I saw that on TV when I watched the whole thing unfold.
 
DGM said:
I'm still wondering what's stopping you ("truthers") from doing an independent investigation?
Click to expand...


For the same reason they do absolutely nothing with all this "proof" they claim to already have: they simply want to perpetuate the illusion of doubt, suspicion, and mystery.

This is a grand adventure for them; a fantastic struggle between Good™ and Evil™. They don't want it to stop, even if they come out on top.

Many probably believe that this struggle is exactly what they were meant for. What would they do with themselves if it all came to an end?
 
bardamu said:
It's not me who's making extraordinary claims. He seems to believe the building was leaning.
Click to expand...

Oh. I'm sorry. I thought you were going to address the question as to why you are using two lies, that the buildings fell at near-freefall speed and fell into their own footprints, to support your arguments.

Carry on
 
carlitos said:
Don't forget, NYCCAN asked the government for "permission" to have an independent investigation. That's some serious illogic there. "Can we please have your permission to investigate how YOU MURDERED THOUSANDS AND COVERED IT UP!!1!!1!"
Click to expand...

What's funny is we have all of these shows on how to catch sex predators or catching infidelity, & with local news stations investigate many different stories without actually needing to make it an official police thing. Hell political corruption is often exposed the same way. Yet exactly what you say, they seem content with having the government hold their hands through the investigation they want even though according to the same people the government is the culprit.
 
bill smith said:
Maybe it's best if you tell the readers all you know of the bulge Tri. Just so that we can cross reference anything we might know with what you actually saw and remove any possible suspicion that you are mistaken.
Click to expand...

BS,

I have posted my observations before.
 
TruthersLie said:
Your fail boat has arrived.

falling into own footprint? Not one of the towers or wtc7 collapsed into their own footprint. You might want to look that up. Feel free.

At near freefall speed? Not one of the towers or wtc7 fell at "near freefall speed." You might want to look up that claims.

South tower took 15 seconds to collapse. That is 66% longer than freefall. that isn't "near freefall."

North tower took over 20 seconds to collapse. that is 200% of freefall speed. that isn't "near freefall."

World trade center 7 took about 18 seconds to collapse. That is OVER 200% of freefall.

try again.



Swing and a miss. Please compare buildings of similar design which have sustained fire across multiple floors for hours that were UNFOUGHT fires.

simple. It should be easy.

Have you even figured out momentum yet?
Click to expand...

Are you sure that NIST are wrong about the fall speed of the buildings ? By a factor of over 50% ? Surely they would have corrected the record if that was so ?
 
Last edited:
bardamu said:
We'd have to know the angle of inclination. Please provide that information, then we can work out whether the building would be expected to fall into its own footprint at near freefall speed.
Click to expand...

No, we don't need an angle of inclination. FDNY is trained on this sort of thing.

7WTC did not fall into its own footprint. Why you ask? Because the ROOF of FITTERMAN HALL was hit by the collapse of 7.

Why do you insist on this footprint bull****?? Do you not understand what the word footprint means?


bardamu said:
Unless it happened on 9/11, you'd expect it to remain standing, like all the other tall buildings that have never collapsed primarily due to fire, according to NIST.
Click to expand...

Wrong. I would have expected it to still be standing if it had a concrete frame and core. BTW, it was the first time that a SKYSCRAPER had fallen PRIMARILY from fire. Do you know why that is?
 
Here's a seemingly simple question that I've had a heck of a time finding a specific answer for. What is NIST's collapse time for WTC 7 and where is that info located?

I'm not interested in anyone's interpretation of video. I'm looking for NIST's recorded time. This is a sincere question.
 
RedIbis said:
Here's a seemingly simple question that I've had a heck of a time finding a specific answer for. What is NIST's collapse time for WTC 7 and where is that info located?

I'm not interested in anyone's interpretation of video. I'm looking for NIST's recorded time. This is a sincere question.
Click to expand...

I believe that info does exist, I remember seeing it, but sorry, can't remember where exactly.

TAM:)
 
RedIbis said:
Here's a seemingly simple question that I've had a heck of a time finding a specific answer for. What is NIST's collapse time for WTC 7 and where is that info located?

I'm not interested in anyone's interpretation of video. I'm looking for NIST's recorded time. This is a sincere question.
Click to expand...

It's in the 2008 WTC7 report. P 599, table 12.2

-6.0 seconds Start of cascading failure of floors surrounding column 79 (observed, building began to oscillate)
0 s. Start of descent of E PH

etc etc
6.9 s Initial downward motion of the N. Face roofline at the E section of bldg
9.3 sec Descent of W PH below roofline

Global collapse

Also see B.5 SEISMIC SIGNALS FROM THE WTC 7 COLLAPSE p 667
B.7 SUMMARY OF SEISMIC DATA p672

NCSTAR 1-9
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom