• 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.

OOS Collapse Propagation Model

Status
Not open for further replies.
femr2 said:
I provided you with extensive reference material. Start with the second link if you want a shorter start point.

Please read the information provided. Some of it will be included within this thread at some point.
Click to expand...

I'll probably do that. I assume that there is sufficient visual evidence in the video for you to put this to the top of your list. This is totally shocking if the video is a faithful representation of what happened. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that this could lead to the breaking of the whole 9/11 story.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I'll probably do that. I assume that there is sufficient visual evidence in the video for you to put this to the top of your list.
Click to expand...
It's a common view. Have probably watched various versions of it thousands of times over the years.

The problem with interpreting an eyeball of the video is that it doesn't take account of the perspective. As you will see if you read the second thread, there is strong indication that multiple feature movement began much earlier, around the time of the camera shake in the sauret footage, which could be around 10s earlier than you are looking at (depending upon where you place t0).
 
bill smith said:
Propaganda even to the desperate stage of denying what is writtten in black and white by the officially competent authority not two inches from where you are denying it. Mind you I would expect no less of you DGM.
Click to expand...
Major Tom and Femr2 have Bill to clear up the failed CD delusion.
 
femr2 said:
It's a common view. Have probably watched various versions of it thousands of times over the years.

The problem with interpreting an eyeball of the video is that it doesn't take account of the perspective. As you will see if you read the second thread, there is strong indication that multiple feature movement began much earlier, around the time of the camera shake in the sauret footage, which could be around 10s earlier than you are looking at (depending upon where you place t0).
Click to expand...

I do not see how the vertical perspective will show anything other than the antenna dropping into WTC1 prior to any other visible movement of the building- wherever you place the camera. And it is that early movement that is so vitally important. Please correct me if I got anything wrong there.

Thanks for those llinks. I can see that you have done a lot of work in this area. I always think that the the antenna is something like the needle on a gauge giving information about what is happening directly under it.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I do not see how the vertical perspective will show anything other than the antenna dropping into WTC1 prior to any other visible movement of the building- wherever you place the camera.
Click to expand...
There's little doubt that the release point of the antenna is in advance of the release point of the north face. However, as I just said, and pointed you directly to, movement of multiple features begins well in advance of those releases.

The viewpoint you are discussing makes it very difficult to eyeball movement of the south side features (SE and SW corner).

The generalised initial motion is that of tilting, so with that premise you'd clearly expect to see movement of the antenna before movement of the north face, yes ? Please affirm this point.

Another however...the upper block did not act as a rigid structure...it deformed.

Keep reading the threads provided, and I'll go into more detail.

And it is that early movement that is so vitally important. Please correct me if I got anything wrong there.
Click to expand...
The post you were responding to indicated early movement up to 10s prior to the time you're talking about.

I always think that the the antenna is something like the needle on a gauge giving information about what is happening directly under it.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
femr2 said:
There's little doubt that the release point of the antenna is in advance of the release point of the north face. However, as I just said, and pointed you directly to, movement of multiple features begins well in advance of those releases.

The viewpoint you are discussing makes it very difficult to eyeball movement of the south side features (SE and SW corner).

The generalised initial motion is that of tilting, so with that premise you'd clearly expect to see movement of the antenna before movement of the north face, yes ? Please affirm this point.

Another however...the upper block did not act as a rigid structure...it deformed.

Keep reading the threads provided, and I'll go into more detail.


The post you were responding to indicated early movement up to 10s prior to the time you're talking about.


I agree.
Click to expand...

'' The generalised initial motion is that of tilting, so with that premise you'd clearly expect to see movement of the antenna before movement of the north face, yes ? Please affirm this point.''

I do not see a tilt on the North side which implies of course no tilt on the South side. Even if there had been such a tilt the movement ogf the antenna would have been lateral and not the clear visuals we have of the antenna dropping vertically downwards into the building before there was any other visible motion of WTC1.

I will read your links about the movements that hapened 10s previous to the anteanna drop with great interest. I assume that they are visible movements and I just haven't noticed them. If they are all internal and implied rather than visible then we are in general agreement.
 
bill smith said:
I do not see a tilt on the North side
Click to expand...
You are using your eyes. Easily deceived. The tilt angle before release is under 1 degree. The perspective of the video you are watching amplifies certain movement.

which implies of course no tilt on the South side.
Click to expand...
It is not wise to use *of course*, especially with a wealth of specific information available to you. As you can see between myself and a few others we've honed techniques to show movements in a much more direct form (graphs-n-wotnot).

Bottom line, you're wrong. North tilt is not the same as south, is not the same as antenna, as the upper block is not rigid, but all three *tilt*.

I assume that they are visible movements and I just haven't noticed them.
Click to expand...
They are *visible* but I doubt you will have noticed them. Magnitudes are low.

It may take you quite a while to digest some of the linked information, but please spend the time. There's no rush.

As I said, I'll be posting certain relevant elements here in time. I don't think this thread is the right place to have a discussion about the technical process of movement tracing and the pitfalls of eyeball interpretation of video.
 
femr2 said:
You are using your eyes. Easily deceived. The tilt angle before release is under 1 degree. The perspective of the video you are watching amplifies certain movement.


It is not wise to use *of course*, especially with a wealth of specific information available to you. As you can see between myself and a few others we've honed techniques to show movements in a much more direct form (graphs-n-wotnot).

Bottom line, you're wrong. North tilt is not the same as south, is not the same as antenna, as the upper block is not rigid, but all three *tilt*.


They are *visible* but I doubt you will have noticed them. Magnitudes are low.

It may take you quite a while to digest some of the linked information, but please spend the time. There's no rush.

As I said, I'll be posting certain relevant elements here in time. I don't think this thread is the right place to have a discussion about the technical process of movement tracing and the pitfalls of eyeball interpretation of video.
Click to expand...

For me the antenna movement is so undeniably downwards and so large that I do not need micro-measurements elsewhere in the building to tell me it happened. Not that I will be ungrateful for the additional confirmation those measurements may bring. But I do not need said confirmation to confirm the initial early downward movement which is so striking and so massively informative. I am surprised that you do not see it in the same way.

I guess that you have to be careful in science. But maybe not to be so careful that you do not acknowledge the obvious and find yourself rejecting it out of hand.
 
bill smith said:
For me the antenna movement is so undeniably downwards and so large that I do not need micro-measurements elsewhere in the building to tell me it happened.
Click to expand...
I've clearly said that antenna movement preceeds north face release in the video you have been watching, but if you take that to be the end-all of observations, you're going to end up getting nowhere at all, and spend the rest of your days engaging in pointless banter with the locals.

Here is a question for you, which I expect a detailed and provable response to, or nothing at all...

Which released first, Antenna or South West corner ?

Not that I will be ungrateful for the additional confirmation those measurements may bring. But I do not need said confirmation to confirm the initial early downward movement which is so striking and so massively informative.
Click to expand...
The lower level movements are more informative, and less misleading. If you take the extensive measurement information I've pointed you to in one hand, and throw it out with the other based on your *watching* a video, then bon voyage.
 
Last edited:
femr2 said:
I've clearly said that antenna movement preceeds north face release in the video you have been watching, but if you take that to be the end-all of observations, you're going to end up getting nowhere at all, and spend the rest of your days engaging in pointless banter with the locals.

Here is a question for you, which I expect a detailed and provable response to, or nothing at all...

Which released first, Antenna or South West corner ?


The lower level movements are more informative, and less misleading. If you take the extensive measurement information I've pointed you to in one hand, and throw it out with the other based on your *watching* a video, then bon voyage.
Click to expand...

The antenna gave first. If the SW wall had given the antenna would have fallen in that direction and being 360-feet tall it would not have stopped falling in that direction..It was only attached to a stub on the roof which was attached to the hat-truss.

If you are talking about a SW corner collapse that did not cause the antenna to tilt sufficiently in that direction to fall off then the straight down collapse is confirmed.

But maybe you would like to tell me what I am seeing ?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6121796&postcount=703 hyperlink antenna
 
Last edited:
femr2 said:
I've clearly said that antenna movement preceeds north face release in the video you have been watching, but if you take that to be the end-all of observations, you're going to end up getting nowhere at all, and spend the rest of your days engaging in pointless banter with the locals.

Here is a question for you, which I expect a detailed and provable response to, or nothing at all...

Which released first, Antenna or South West corner ?


The lower level movements are more informative, and less misleading. If you take the extensive measurement information I've pointed you to in one hand, and throw it out with the other based on your *watching* a video, then bon voyage.
Click to expand...

Was this in Tom's paper?

btw, bill smith's engineering degree is the same as the one you have
 
Last edited:
Please stay on topic, and make each post productive.

Mods: Suggest the last few posts, including this one, are deleted from this thread.
 
bill smith said:
That doesn't sound like ol' Trutherlie..
Click to expand...

You're right. That's more like fitzgibbon.

On second thoughts, he'd probably say: "I eagerly await your question being published in an engineering journal."

Maybe you should start a new thread on the question, Bill, especially if these posts are going to get deleted.
 
Guys, the correct order of events must be determined by careful measurement. Eyeballing may be useful, but it needs to be followed by measurements from multiple viewpoints.

A few of us already have these measurements. They are in the forum threads to which femr linked.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Those who label yourselves "debunkers": According to yourselves, the earliest even row of ejections must be due to a natural cause.

femrnew.gif


The row of ejections must be the result of a large falling floor slab, no?

Since I have rarely received answers to any of the questions posed over the last 20 pages, shall I assume yes if I receive no answer?

The west wall has yet to begin moving downward, so we look to core (antenna) movement to explain how a floor slab could be moving downward at this time.

What if we find there only sagging of the antenna of about 2 ft at this time? If the west wall movement cannot explain the timing of the ejections and the antenna movement cannot explain them, what other activity can explain the even forceful row of ejections at this moment in time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom