OOS Collapse Propagation Model

[Major_Tom]

Pgimeno, the animated gif in post 800 was posted to show that neither the NIST nor the posters here know anything about the correct sequence of events during the WTC1 collapse initiation.

You do not even know whether the core or south perimeter failed first.

I do not know what those ejections are but they seem to line up with the core pretty well. Are they due to moving slabs in the core? The 99th floor OOS west floor slab?

Either way we can see that the NIST has no clue about what actually happened.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A second example showing that in reality you have no idea what the hell is going on during the WTC1 collapse initiation:

Three videos synchronized. Has anyone ever measured the antenna drop relative to the first even row of west face ejections? How do they time out?

Honestly, have any of you did any research of the WTC1 collapse initiation events or did you just bend over and take whatever incomprehensible crap the NIST offered with no critical analysis of your own?

Can you offer any proof that OOS south floor slab sagging led to the south wall loosing strength as the NIST claims?

Do you have the slightest clue whether the perimeter pulled down the whole core within 1 degree of tilt, or more sensibly the sagging core pulled in the south perimeter?

The slightest video confirmation of the NIST scenario? (You have nothing because most of you are too lazy to measure or observe for yourselves).

 

[Major_Tom]

Ignorant, some of you read from official reports as if they are the Word of God.

How do the ejections time with the drop of the antenna?

(you have no clue)

Do you need official permission to think?

 

[bill smith]

Pgimeno, the animated gif in post 800 was posted to show that neither the NIST nor the posters here know anything about the correct sequence of events during the WTC1 collapse initiation.

You do not even know whether the core or south perimeter failed first.

I do not know what those ejections are but they seem to line up with the core pretty well. Are they due to moving slabs in the core? The 99th floor OOS west floor slab?

Either way we can see that the NIST has no clue about what actually happened.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A second example showing that in reality you have no idea what the hell is going on during the WTC1 collapse initiation:

[qimg]http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/666/initialtilt175230b.gif[/qimg]

Three videos synchronized. Has anyone ever measured the antenna drop relative to the first even row of west face ejections? How do they time out?

Honestly, have any of you did any research of the WTC1 collapse initiation events or did you just bend over and take whatever incomprehensible crap the NIST offered with no critical analysis of your own?

Can you offer any proof that OOS south floor slab sagging led to the south wall loosing strength as the NIST claims?

Do you have the slightest clue whether the perimeter pulled down the whole core within 1 degree of tilt, or more sensibly the sagging core pulled in the south perimeter?

The slightest video confirmation of the NIST scenario? (You have nothing because most of you are too lazy to measure or observe for yourselves).

Personally I am convinced that the core failed first for reasons I gave earlier. How do you think the ejected columns relate to the dropping antenna and what was below it ?

Anyway I found this video interesting..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWn8QNQWSsY

 

[pgimeno]

Pgimeno, the animated gif in post 800 was posted to show that neither the NIST nor the posters here know anything about the correct sequence of events during the WTC1 collapse initiation.

Still, my question actually was:

Isn't there an equivalent one for WTC2?

That question is closely related to these ones:

Could it be the case that NIST is right about WTC2 and wrong about WTC1?

If so, would that prove that WTC2 collapse was due to fire and WTC1 collapse was a controlled demolition?

These questions were carefully chosen to expose fundamental weaknesses in Mjr Tom's papers.

The fact that each tower fell due to a different mechanism, supports my assertion (educated belief, if you want) that the towers were doomed, which is also based in (my answer to) the following question, which I also formulate to you:

The strain on both the core and the perimeter columns was progressively increasing as time passed (NCSTAR 1-6D, pp. 234-238). Do you think it's possible that it ceased to increase before reaching the critical point at which the building would not stand?

 

[bill smith]

Pgimeno, the animated gif in post 800 was posted to show that neither the NIST nor the posters here know anything about the correct sequence of events during the WTC1 collapse initiation.

You do not even know whether the core or south perimeter failed first.

I do not know what those ejections are but they seem to line up with the core pretty well. Are they due to moving slabs in the core? The 99th floor OOS west floor slab?

Either way we can see that the NIST has no clue about what actually happened.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A second example showing that in reality you have no idea what the hell is going on during the WTC1 collapse initiation:

[qimg]http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/666/initialtilt175230b.gif[/qimg]

Three videos synchronized. Has anyone ever measured the antenna drop relative to the first even row of west face ejections? How do they time out?

Honestly, have any of you did any research of the WTC1 collapse initiation events or did you just bend over and take whatever incomprehensible crap the NIST offered with no critical analysis of your own?

Can you offer any proof that OOS south floor slab sagging led to the south wall loosing strength as the NIST claims?

Do you have the slightest clue whether the perimeter pulled down the whole core within 1 degree of tilt, or more sensibly the sagging core pulled in the south perimeter?

The slightest video confirmation of the NIST scenario? (You have nothing because most of you are too lazy to measure or observe for yourselves).

Did you ever think that if the South Perimeter Wall had collapsed first that the antenna support cables attaching to that wall would have stretched and ' twanged ' the antenna unmercifully. And visibly ?

 

[bill smith]

Did the antenna vibrate or wobble here ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk

 

[bill smith]

ISAAC NEWTON vs, NIST

this presentation strongly idicates that the core was deliberately compromised first as illustrated by the early antenna drop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tejFUDlV81w&feature=player_embedded#!

 

[DGM]

ISAAC NEWTON vs, NIST

this presentation strongly idicates that the core was deliberately compromised first as illustrated by the early antenna drop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tejFUDlV81w&feature=player_embedded#!

I thought you bought into Jammonius DEW theory? There were no explosives used.

You starting to have a whole **** load of inconsistency issues in your posts.

 

[bill smith]

I thought you bought into Jammonius DEW theory? There were no explosives used.

You starting to have a whole **** load of inconsistency issues in your posts.

I don't know where you got that impression. So just to show that this is not just another cheap propaganda trick why don't you show the Readers where you read that ?

 

[DGM]

I don't know where you got that impression. So just to show that this is not just another cheap propaganda trick why don't you show the Readers where you read that ?

Was this not you that showed his support for his efforts?

You

Dr van Helsing never did better than Jammonius has here. I's amazing to watch as he extends the garlic of logic to you guys only for you all to shrink away hissing.

'Ignoring' is just' raising your shields ' or ' sliding back under your rock ' or whatever analagy you want to use. It couldn't be more obvious.

Face him like a man with solid arguments if you think you have any. Otherwise it will inevitabably be assumed that you do not.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6158650#post6158650


Were you just trolling for attention?

 

[twinstead]

garlic of logic? Are you KIDDING me?

 

[bill smith]

Was this not you that showed his support for his efforts?


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6158650#post6158650


Were you just trolling for attention?

In the grown-up world DGM a person can admire another's style and effectiveness without neccessarily being in 100% agreement with all his theories. Jammonius and I have some areas of common ground but each have a different slant on it. However all these roads are leading to Rome as they say.

You are exposed for propaganda. I may expose you every time.

On DEW I have no strong opinon.

 

[DGM]

In the grown-up world DGM a person can admire another's style and effectiveness without neccessarily being in 100% agreement with all his theories. Jammonius and I have some areas of common ground but each have a different slant on it. Hpwever all these roads are leading to Rome as they say.

On DEW I have no strong opinon.

So this is all a game to you? We're talking about the truth, Is there different versions of the truth?

He claims bizarre theories and you clearly support him. What's your game?

 

[Andy_Ross]

I don't know where you got that impression. So just to show that this is not just another cheap propaganda trick why don't you show the Readers where you read that ?

Your support for his ideas in another thread perhaps?

Do you round off the morning with Breakfast at Milliways?

 

[bill smith]

So this is all a game to you? We're talking about the truth, Is there different versions of the truth?

He claims bizarre theories and you clearly support him. What's your game?

This is too off topic for this thread. So I am going to stop . Readers may recognise the propaganda in even this last post of DGM's ' I am only playing a game'....'I respect sonmebody's technique therefore I support everything he does' This is all in the standard propaganda manual.

 

[twinstead]

In the grown-up world DGM a person can admire another's style and effectiveness without neccessarily being in 100% agreement with all his theories. Jammonius and I have some areas of common ground but each have a different slant on it. However all these roads are leading to Rome as they say.

You are exposed for propaganda. I may expose you every time.

On DEW I have no strong opinon.

Dude. He's a nut case. What is wrong with you? Do you REALLY think he is arguing effectively that there were NO planes on 911? Do you admire the ability to debate endlessly a completely untenable position? Jesus, I know you know better--you're not an idiot.

 

[Andy_Ross]

This is too off topic for this thread. So I am going to stop . Readers may recognise the propaganda in even this last post of DGM's ' I am only playing a game'....'I respect sonmebody's technique therefore I support everything he does' This is all in the standard propaganda manual.

You gotta pick a story and stick to it. If you jump horses mid race people are going to think you aren't taking this seriously.

 

[DGM]

This is too off topic for this thread. So I am going to stop . Readers may recognise the propaganda in even this last post of DGM's ' I am only playing a game'....'I respect sonmebody's technique therefore I support everything he does' This is all in the standard propaganda manual.

"technique"? Are you kidding me? You accuse me of propaganda yet you use this word to describe the rantings of someone you don't agree with? This is a game to you, isn't it?

 

[tsig]

I thought you bought into Jammonius DEW theory? There were no explosives used.

You starting to have a whole **** load of inconsistency issues in your posts.

Having lost the crown she's flailing desperately to get back in the fight.

 

[tsig]

This is too off topic for this thread. So I am going to stop . Readers may recognise the propaganda in even this last post of DGM's ' I am only playing a game'....'I respect sonmebody's technique therefore I support everything he does' This is all in the standard propaganda manual.

Now you admit to doing propaganda.