I'd add #1132 (second paragraph) as a strong recommendation.
OOS Collapse Propagation Model
- Thread starter Major_Tom
- Start date
- Status
Reality check:
A WTC1 tilt experiment everyone can do at home:
Watch this short clip of WTC1 collapse initiation from the west
http://www.youtube.com/user/femr2?&MMN_position=312:312#p/u/94/b_f3d-gETnk
Try to stop the clip just as you see the NW corner fail (the corner closest to you). Try to estimate the tilt angle with a protractor. What do you get?
And remember actual drop data will reveal even less of a tilt since it can be used to identify the exact set of frames when failure of the NW corner begins. It is much more sensitive than your eyes.
A WTC1 tilt experiment everyone can do at home:
Watch this short clip of WTC1 collapse initiation from the west
http://www.youtube.com/user/femr2?&MMN_position=312:312#p/u/94/b_f3d-gETnk
Try to stop the clip just as you see the NW corner fail (the corner closest to you). Try to estimate the tilt angle with a protractor. What do you get?
And remember actual drop data will reveal even less of a tilt since it can be used to identify the exact set of frames when failure of the NW corner begins. It is much more sensitive than your eyes.
Major Tom. Your going to feel stupid when you do this, but I think I've figured out how you might finally get this. Repost the photos in post 1086 that NIST used to get 8 degrees. Then measure antenna's angle from the last one.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6314465&postcount=1086
What number do you get
A. Closer to 1 degree
B. Closer to 8 degrees
Was it
A. At the same time as your measurement of 1 degree
B. A later time where as right before the smoke obscured the view.
Do we know where NIST got 8 degrees from?
A. Why yes we do.
B. I still haven't got the foggiest clue.
Then get back to me.
Last edited:
Yes, my hint does contain the word "basement." Very perceptive of you.
Now, have you figured out what kind of pressure pulse NIST is talking about, and how it got from the collapsing tower to the lower fire floors of the north tower?
Respectfully,
Myriad
NIST NCSTAR 1-6D, p 312, Table 5-2: "Rotation of at least 8 degrees to the south occurred before the building section began to fall vertically under gravity."
This is obviously wrong.
Is there anyone intellegent reading this forum that can respond to this?
Someone, please show me that this forum is more than just propaganda.
Last edited:
And only non-engineers who have delusions of CD can see this? Did Heiwa help you with this one?
Please answer my last post from 1164.
I'll add another set of questions.
So then which "building section" do you think they are referring to?
A. The entire section of the building above the impact zone. I don't care if NIST explains it correctly within other sections.
I don't care if NIST says states the "UPPER building section moving downward" was at 10:28:18 and the tilt of 8 degrees was at 10:28:20.
B. The building section below the impact zone.
C. Doesn't matter, they are wrong either way. I don't care if NIST explains what they mean correctly within other sections.
Last edited:
Kent, you have wasted pages of this thread already.
Let's try inward bowing...
The NIST description of WTC1 south wall inward bowing:
1-6D, pg 314:
55 inches of inward bowing (IB) requires about 9 ft of floor sagging. According to the NIST's own description of the event, the floors sagged about 9 ft between 9:06 and 9:23.
9 feet of floor sagging in 17 minutes is what the official story of collapse initiation depends upon. Make sense?
Great visual model of the extent of the sagging required to produce a 55 inch IB is shown by mmmlink at the following link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwXLIdMzmG8
Even worse, there was no visible fire on the east side of the south face until the 3 large fire ejections appeared at 9:59.
The NIST's own heat simulations do not estimate temperatures sufficient to create IB:
Let's try inward bowing...
The NIST description of WTC1 south wall inward bowing:
1-6D, pg 314:
55 inches of inward bowing (IB) requires about 9 ft of floor sagging. According to the NIST's own description of the event, the floors sagged about 9 ft between 9:06 and 9:23.
9 feet of floor sagging in 17 minutes is what the official story of collapse initiation depends upon. Make sense?
Great visual model of the extent of the sagging required to produce a 55 inch IB is shown by mmmlink at the following link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwXLIdMzmG8
Even worse, there was no visible fire on the east side of the south face until the 3 large fire ejections appeared at 9:59.
The NIST's own heat simulations do not estimate temperatures sufficient to create IB:
Last edited:
Even without hint I see no problem in involving the shared basements in any shared pressure pulse. I have walked through that basement. I am pretty sure we were still in that shared basement when I turned down the MCdonalds with piano in favour of trying to find real food.
So I'm guessing you feel a little stupid right now.
Its OK to admit you were wrong. In fact it makes people think you are a better person.
Next time just answer the simple questions and read the thread. It will save us ALL time.
Its OK to admit you were wrong. In fact it makes people think you are a better person.
Next time just answer the simple questions and read the thread. It will save us ALL time.
Last edited:
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Last edited:
Major_Tom,
Your refusal (inability?) to answer Kent1's or Myriad's simple, straightforward questions is an example of what I alluded to above. It does not inspire confidence. You seem to be arguing from incredulity and quote-mining, which are logical fallacies.
Your refusal (inability?) to answer Kent1's or Myriad's simple, straightforward questions is an example of what I alluded to above. It does not inspire confidence. You seem to be arguing from incredulity and quote-mining, which are logical fallacies.
OMG
Well, that's interesting! But I hope you don't want to implicate that some overpressure due to the collapse of the 82nd floor WTC2 traveled down the tower - through the basement - up the express elevator shafts and caused darting flames in the impact zone of WTC1 in 3 seconds.
Or is it some new edition of the nonsensical "piston theory"?
CD or not CD, it doesn't matter.
No evidence was found.
No black boxes.
And just 3 core columns from the burning floors.
(...but the DNA of all the Hijackers.)
Your believe is based on nothing but fake! Take your head out of your a**!
You have no evidence. 19 terrorists did 911, there is so much evidence your delusions are doomed to remain idiotic lies made up by people who can't figure out 911. 9 years of failure; and you have nothing but lies, delusions, and moronic claims.
The OOS with reality based evidence proves gravity collapse. If Major Tom was right, he has debunked CD delusions due to the addition of evidence.
What is your point? Take your 9 years of failure and you got nothing but failed ideas proved wrong on 911.
Wow, you put all your evidence for your delusions and MT's CD fantasy in one post.
cool, faith based zero evidence.
Last edited:
wrong
Who is we?
Where is your proof for that?
What failed first, the core or the perimeter?
You are now in the fake engineering land of OOS, and you can't figure out what Rummy was saying, or what that money anomalies you think was related to 911 was. Now you expect to figure out engineering? Does 911 truth have any evidence? No. Does Major Tom think he can back in CD with his OOS? Yes. Delusions like you and Major Tom share are anti-intellectual claptrap that drive the 911 truth movement further into fantasy land.
It does not matter how the WTC collapsed, it was due to impacts and fire. But knock yourself out, if 9 years of failure is not enough, go for 10!
We are millions of rational engineers! WE ask us, we don't lie like 911 truth, we tell the truth. You have 9 years of failure, I have 9 years of success. Darn, what you doin wrong?
Last edited:
It's funny how often you wrote "9 years" in the last few posts.
So much evidence for 19 terrorists did 911? Show me! Start a new threat e.g. "The passport of Abdul Aziz Al Omari" or "Attas parking lot in front of the home of the wrong Alomari" or "the transformation of a pilots suit into a wedding suit" or "the visa applications" or "Atta try to buy crop duster in US while observed by the CIA in Hamburg" or "Atta paymaster in White House on 9/11". There are hundreds of interesting names for a funny thread. Choose one! Face the 9 years of failure!
...but seemingly you are not happy about that. Is it because you still have no reality based evidence for what initiated that? ...after 9 years of babble?
- Status