• 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.

New video of David Chandler: rockets at the World Trade Center

bill smith said:
Well.. I could argue that easily but we would get nowhere.

But suppose the 'rocket' was a oiece of the core or perimeter columns ? They are no more than tubes and packed with nanothermite (the more explosive type with added polymers to create the volumetric effect might be able to mimic a firework rocket. Certainly the piece of column that went out to the right behaved something like a firework rocket gone wrong. Erratic, spewing smoke etc.
Click to expand...
Bill, you're supposing something that can never be proven, as you know, which makes it pointless and worthless speculation.
 
chrismohr said:
I have a technical question about the David Chandler video about the rockets or whatever. By now I assume most of us have seen the two-part debunking of those claims my Alien Entity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzTGMQcXP1Q

When I first saw the Chandler "smoking guns" video and the smoke or dust trails changing direction, I immediately thought of embers in a campfire. Sit too close to the campfire and an ember might "pop" (perhaps caused by trapped air or water expanding) and the ember will shoot out a few feet and singe your knee. Maybe the white smoke could have been, well, smoke from the fire and not dust as Alien Entity claimed in his video. There could be some kind of "ember popping" phenomenon going on with a hot piece of debris?

This is just a hypothesis. Alien Entity talks only of violent shifting winds from the collapsing tower, but just observing Chandler's video it does look like there is something INTERNAL to the smoking debris piece that causes it to shift direction. Does my hypothesis have any merit?
Click to expand...

That's as far as I am too Chris.
 
OCaptain said:
Bill, you're supposing something that can never be proven, as you know, which makes it pointless and worthless speculation.
Click to expand...

Not neccessarily. David Chandler may be monitoring this thread and I want to put it out there. It may be something, it may be nothing but better out than in as they say.
 
OCaptain said:
No +1.

A troll on JREF is someone who repeatedly refuses to allow corrections to errors in his/her thinking, continually going over topics that have been settled by documented facts.
Click to expand...

If I am corrected and can verify it then I change my opinion. Anything else is pointless. On the other hand I am seldom corrected by a debunker saying for instance ''' 09/11 was brought about by 19 Muslims'.or any one of a hundred other similar statements. You guys seem to think that if fifty of you say something in concert then that is a successful debunking. Nothing could be futher from the truth.
 
bill smith said:
Not neccessarily. David Chandler may be monitoring this thread and I want to put it out there. It may be something, it may be nothing but better out than in as they say.
Click to expand...
Chandler doesn't have any more insight into the collapses than the rest of us.

For crying out loud...
 
bill smith said:
If I am corrected and can verify it then I change my opinion. Anything else is pointless. On the other hand I am seldom corrected by a debunker saying for instance ''' 09/11 was brought about by 19 Muslims'.or any one of a hundred other similar statements. You guys seem to think that if fifty of you say something in concert then that is a successful debunking. Nothing could be futher from the truth.
Click to expand...
So as to give hope to the rest of us that we're not just talking our fool heads off, could you please elaborate (either here or on a new thread) on points that you've changed your mind on due to facts presented on JREF?
 
OCaptain said:
So as to give hope to the rest of us that we're not just talking our fool heads off, could you please elaborate (either here or on a new thread) on points that you've changed your mind on due to facts presented on JREF?
Click to expand...

Well Oystein corrected me once. I thought the core in WTC1 covered 60% of the floor area. It turned out to be 27% and I changed my position accordingly. There may be some other things.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Well Oystein corrected me once. I thought the core in WTC1 covered 60% of the floor area. It turned out to be 27% and I changed my position accordingly. There may be some other things.
Click to expand...
What about the meme that the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 represent classic CD, as Gage says? Do you accept that has been refuted?
 
bill smith said:
If I am corrected and can verify it then I change my opinion. Anything else is pointless. On the other hand I am seldom corrected by a debunker saying for instance ''' 09/11 was brought about by 19 Muslims'.or any one of a hundred other similar statements. You guys seem to think that if fifty of you say something in concert then that is a successful debunking. Nothing could be futher from the truth.
Click to expand...

So how about you educate us?

Tell us how the entire day took place, in your words, in your opinion.
 
OCaptain said:
What about the meme that the collapses of WTC 1 and 2 represent classic CD, as Gage says? Do you accept that has been refuted?
Click to expand...

They were covert CD's so they were not classic CD's as you put it. I'm not getting into a general Q&A by the way.
 
GlennB said:
That's meaningless. "Spring action" may have components acting in both vertical and horizontal planes. Travel in the horizontal plane would not be detected from Chandler's video.



The exterior columns were lined with drywall. Drywall (plasterboard) is insubstantial and can create a huge amount of dust, as anybody who has demolished an old drywall ceiling or partition wall can testify.
Click to expand...


Its worse than that, The 911 trolls are unaware that the exterior column trees were sprayed with fireproofing. THAT'S what you are seeing come off the objects.

WTC8.jpg
 
chrismohr said:
I have a technical question about the David Chandler video about the rockets or whatever. By now I assume most of us have seen the two-part debunking of those claims my Alien Entity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzTGMQcXP1Q

When I first saw the Chandler "smoking guns" video and the smoke or dust trails changing direction, I immediately thought of embers in a campfire. Sit too close to the campfire and an ember might "pop" (perhaps caused by trapped air or water expanding) and the ember will shoot out a few feet and singe your knee. Maybe the white smoke could have been, well, smoke from the fire and not dust as Alien Entity claimed in his video. There could be some kind of "ember popping" phenomenon going on with a hot piece of debris?

This is just a hypothesis. Alien Entity talks only of violent shifting winds from the collapsing tower, but just observing Chandler's video it does look like there is something INTERNAL to the smoking debris piece that causes it to shift direction.

Does my hypothesis have any merit?
Click to expand...

Chris, I think AE has it right. With 500mph winds, parts with large surface area to catch the wind and the dust we have no reason to speculate on exotic causes for what is seen. Could it be smoke on some parts? sure since the building was on very over many floors so again its no mystery.
 
tmd2_1 said:
That's not exactly what I'm saying. What I am saying is that there was certainly other debris falling correct? It wasn't all dust. That piece would have had to start falling noticeably before anything else to achieve that kind of separation. I could see half a second a second maybe, but not 4 to 5.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. All it needs is less drag or a different initial trajectory.
 
bill smith said:
Not neccessarily. David Chandler may be monitoring this thread and I want to put it out there. It may be something, it may be nothing but better out than in as they say.
Click to expand...


sometimes its better to keep your mouth shut and look a fool, than open it and confirm the fact. Chandler just confirmed the fact.
 
bill smith said:
If I am corrected and can verify it then I change my opinion. Anything else is pointless. On the other hand I am seldom corrected by a debunker saying for instance ''' 09/11 was brought about by 19 Muslims'.or any one of a hundred other similar statements. You guys seem to think that if fifty of you say something in concert then that is a successful debunking. Nothing could be futher from the truth.
Click to expand...

Nope but its a good initial test of an idea......if 50 people say its nuts and only one or two say it has merit....the odds are its nuts......unless you happen to be Einstein......and You Bill, nor Chandler are Einsteins!
 
OCaptain said:
So as to give hope to the rest of us that we're not just talking our fool heads off, could you please elaborate (either here or on a new thread) on points that you've changed your mind on due to facts presented on JREF?
Click to expand...

To be fair Bill did concede that the panels out 600 feet and damaging the Winter Garden simply had peeled off and not been explosively blown there.
Thats about the first time I've seen a twoofer admit anything..........so he is not incurable however he does not seem to want to be cured.:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom