• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

High energy explosvies and tertiary blast waves

000063: If you think you will get a response to that post, try again...
Actually, I expected you to ignore the inconvenient facts like every truther does.

And look what you did.

1. Explosives would be clearly audible.
2. Explosions are not necessarily indicative of explosives.
3. If the bad guys knew 7 would be hit by debris, they would have had to rig North tower so the debris would hit.
3a. That's impossible to do with any precision. Any miss would disrupt the explosives.
3b. It also means you have to prove North Tower (at least) was rigged before you can argue that 7 was rigged.
4. If They didn't know 7 would be hit, there was no reason to rig the building with explosives, but they did so anyway and it just happened to look enough like a collapse from fire and impact to fool shedloads of experts.

Both 3 and 4 are impossible. They are the only possibilities which follow from the premise. Therefore, the premise, that the building was rigged was explosives, is also impossible.

They guy ignores the facts in an arrogant way and comes to wrong conclusions.
Prove it.

He knows the answers to every question if he stops the political games and throws his hobby of defending the official story out the window.
Then why don't you answer the questions, and prove me wrong?

I dont got time for answering simple minded questions like that, it will only be followed by more simple minded questions that ignores the facts.
So you're ignoring the questions because you don't want to answer them, and are just attacking me, personally.

You're also confusing simple questions (and statements) with simple-minded questions (nice dig at me. Ergo would be proud, if he was capable of being more subtle than "bedunkers").

I took your premise, that the buildings were rigged, and showed how any conclusions following from that don't make sense. All you have to do is come up with another option that makes sense, one besides "they knew 7 was going to be hit by debris in that precise manner and rigged the explosives accordingly" or "they didn't know 7 was going to be hit by debris and just put explosives in there for no reason".
 
Last edited:
I don't mean to ruin the OPs day by asking an actual question, but are you saying that tertiary blast waves are a real thing?

I'm under the impression that our little truther friend is mistaking tertiary injuries with waves.

If they are real, could you explain what they are?

(I'm sufficiently convinced you know what you're talking about :D )


^^^

For R. Mackey
 
Last edited:
...
Lets ignore that most of the steel from the upper floors was removed from the rubble pile, cut into smaller sections, and either melted at the recycling plant or shipped out of the U.S. Some of the critical pieces of steel including the suspension trusses from the top of the towers and the internal support columns were gone before the first BPAT team member ever reached the site. That the evidence was shipped away, and melted down for reuse BEFORE it was inspected, as reported by the New york times, will of course not bother anyone who dont give to cents about the prober handling of the evidence of a crime scene. Anyone else, that dont like corrupt officials destroying a legal case in an investigation, will be honest and point out what James Quintiere, Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division, points out: "A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have"...
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/NotMelted.jpg
Oops, who let this guy inspect the steel from the WTC!?

New York Times? Did you tell them your delusional claims? You use the MSM for your facts?

James Quintiere says the WTC was a gravity collapse caused by fire, NO explosives. Why do you fail with your claims?

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/wtclookingforThermitenotfound.jpg
You failed to read NIST for comprehension, the big picture, and have cherry-picked your way to nonsense.
 
I don't mean to ruin the OPs day by asking an actual question, but are you saying that tertiary blast waves are a real thing?

I'm under the impression that our little truther friend is mistaking tertiary injuries with waves.

If they are real, could you explain what they are?

(I'm sufficiently convinced you know what you're talking about :D )


^^^

For R. Mackey

Sorry, didn't know that was aimed at me.

I've never heard the term "tertiary blast waves" before. His quoted experts also aren't describing a wave of any kind. There are secondary blast waves, i.e., reflections of the shockwave off of solid surfaces, which can indeed be significant in large explosions. But there's no accounting for how many times these waves reflect (else we'd also have "quartary blast waves," "quintary blast waves," etc.). It's only a question of whether you get the wave straight from the point of origin, or if it's reflected.

What the experts are describing is bulk fluid motion following the explosion, not waves at all. For example, if you set off a large explosion surrounded by baffles, and then you stand in the flame trench, you will feel what is basically a gust of wind. This is caused by the solid :: gas conversion generating a higher static pressure, which is then equalized at sonic speed by gas motion, also known as wind. There is also convection caused by heating, which creates additional sonic or subsonic fluid motion (more wind).

If you carefully set up this kind of situation, it is quite plausible for one to be physically blown around without being otherwise injured -- winds of several hundred miles per hour correspond to a dynamic pressure of only a couple of PSI, which is eminently survivable. But again, this is not a wave. The difference between waves and fluid motion is like the difference between causing pressure pulses in a stretched out Slinky versus actually carrying that Slinky from one place to another.

In complicated and large explosives we can see additional shockwave tricks, like the Munroe Effect in shaped charges, and the "precursor" effect in nuclear weapons exploded at optimal altitude. Both of these are essentially focusing and constructive interference of shockwaves. Neither is at all relevant to the OP, however. I only mention them out of general interest.

So, in short, the wind could be considered a tertiary effect of an explosive, but there is no well-defined term "tertiary blast wave." Our OP is mixing unfamiliar words.
 
Last edited:
They guy ignores the facts in an arrogant way and comes to wrong conclusions.

And how are you qualified to judge that?

And why are there none of the characteristic shock waves you get with high explosives?:confused: The velocities of debris looks wrong too...far to slow.
 
R.Mackey:

You people really are a strange bunch, how can you type something like that, after reading my post... Who are you guys?, really?....

R.Mackey:

Wrong, alot of people died in the towers and never escaped, you cant say that the people that escaped should have those bad injuries, they obviously shouldn't if they werent very close to the explosvies, why they should have been close to the explosvies you havent demonstrated, and you will not demonstrate it, because you can't. You argument is as flawed as it can be. i'm getting tired of answering this simple minded nonsens.

R.Mackey:

I dont claim that anybody were burned by any fireball from an explosvie, that could have been a jet fuel explosion. You probably have zero knowledge of explosives, and is basing what injuries they should have when in contact with the fireball from explosvies on nothing...

HAHA. Mr. Mackey more than likely has more experience and knowledge in this field than you or your so called experts. Here's a little info about Mr. Mackey...

Employer: NASA

/thread

Oh wait...NASA must be in on it too huh? There were no explosives in the Twin Towers...the onset of collapses both started at the impact points, you think the planes were laser guided into certain "Weakened" spots like our other resident "Creative" thinker Bill Smith? When did the super secret ninja's get past John O'neill's security teams to plant these "high energy explosives"? Ya know, John O'Neill formerly of the FBI, head of WTC security on 9/11, died in the collapses...that guy. He let them plant the stuff and martyred himself to keep the secret I guess huh?
 
WTH?

Why did you abandon your last thread were you were schooled on all these issues?

Have you learned to use the forum search function yet?
 
WTH?

Why did you abandon your last thread were you were schooled on all these issues?

Have you learned to use the forum search function yet?

Maybe he made a new one so people cant as easily see all the previous posts about this subject.
 
Wait... so you contact SECRAB about the effects of HE as to injuries & it doesn't occur to you to ask their opinion about what happened on 9/11?
 
I have two graduate degrees in aeronautics, and I know enough about "tertiary blast waves" and other fluid dynamic effects to answer any relevant issue raised by your OP. Feel free to ask.


I'm sure Liberty feels he put his time in as a student during middle school and high school. Now, apparently, he feels it's his turn to be the teacher. Folks with higher education and more experience be damned. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
They guy ignores the facts in an arrogant way and comes to wrong conclusions. He knows the answers to every question if he stops the political games and throws his hobby of defending the official story out the window. I dont got time for answering simple minded questions like that, it will only be followed by more simple minded questions that ignores the facts.

Edx:

I just proved you wrong, and you cant admit it?. Every post you make, that denies that you are wrong, is a troll post. Every high energy explosives expert in the world agress with me, you and your hobby debunker buddys are all victims of groupthink...

R.Mackey:

You people really are a strange bunch, how can you type something like that, after reading my post... Who are you guys?, really?....

R.Mackey:

Wrong, alot of people died in the towers and never escaped, you cant say that the people that escaped should have those bad injuries, they obviously shouldn't if they werent very close to the explosvies, why they should have been close to the explosvies you havent demonstrated, and you will not demonstrate it, because you can't. You argument is as flawed as it can be. i'm getting tired of answering this simple minded nonsens.

R.Mackey:

I dont claim that anybody were burned by any fireball from an explosvie, that could have been a jet fuel explosion. You probably have zero knowledge of explosives, and is basing what injuries they should have when in contact with the fireball from explosvies on nothing...

NoahFence:

The more you post, the more you expose yourself. If english is your first language, and you still type this post after reading my post, i really feel sorry... Its a good example of how bad shape humanity is in.


:jaw-dropp
 

The only fitting demotivational I could find:
images
 
Last edited:
So what exactly is a "tertiary blast wave"?

Comes after the Secondary blast wave and before the Quaternary blast wave in the
truther handbook.....
 
So, what...all those stories about soldiers standing too near a shell who died "without a mark on them" are confabulations? Is the OP claiming high velocity explosives are like the lava in movies; it can only hurt you if you get it on you?
 
To think that "tertiary blast wave injuries" are injuries sustained from "tertiary blast waves" is really funny.

It reminds me of a jung lad we poked cruel fun at on a social board. Upon turning 18, the legal age in Germany when you can get a driver's license, he got a used BMW from his uncle and, using very little money, tuned the hell out of it. Man, did he brag about it! One item he installed in his BMW was a "Sportluftfilter" - literally: "sports air filter". Apparently this is a high performance air filter used in motor sports. However, we understood it as a device that filters "sports air", and we wondered if that is the air in the gym's dressing room after teenage boys' basketball practice :D
 
Here we have a example of a pretty powerful explosion, that didnt cause any serious injuries to one of the victims:


http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/l...re_explosion_120103/20120103?hub=WinnipegHome

That incident did not involve high explosives

So much for your "knowledge" of explosives. Try thinking before posting.

Barry Jennings is a very good witness.
Yes. He is a perfect witness for the fact that the damage done to WTC 7 was done by gawdawful amounts of debris falling from the north tower.

There is no other logical reason, as to why the firefighters would run away from the rescue operation, besides what Jennigs said, that the other two towers collapsed, so then the explosions cannot be explained by the towers collapsing.
Total ********. The north tower was already down when the fire fighters found out that Jennings and Hess were inside. We have video.

It would be impossible not to recognise the lobby in WTC 7 a little more then an houre before Jennings was rescured, as we can see in this video below, and the firemen would never have told Jennings that quote: "This was the lobby" and they wouldnt haft to exit the lobby trough a hole in the wall:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bADURTAvtgk
The rescue of Jennings and Hess started after the lobby was chewed all to hell by falling debris. what is your point?

The total destruction of the lobby of WTC 7, the walls, escelators, lobby doors, everything beeing destroyed, is very strong evidence of high energy explosives.
Cow cookies. We saw what did that damage. It was pieces of the north tower.

That the cop wanted him to RUN from the building, very strongly indicates that MORE explosions were expected, the reports the police got and mentioned to Jennings, obviously was reports of the explosions that destroyed the lobby and killed fire and policemen, this is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn.
Horse feathers. Both towers were already down. The cops had no reason to believe that therre were explosive charges set in the buidling. They did, however, know by this point that damaged steel-framed buildings pre-weakened by heavy impacts and set afire can fall down. They had no way of knowing how long it would take, and thus made the wise decison not to wait around to find out.

Captain Karin Deshore:
She thinks you are an idiot. She describes cars cooking off from fires. Then drooling morons like MacQueen take this as a sign that there were bombs every place.

It is just ridiculous trying to explain this with something like Electric Transformer explosions, when she clearly states that the flashes and explosions where going up and down and all around the bulding. If it was only one flash at ONE location i would agree, but this was flashes and explosions on multiple locations all going off at almost the same time.
We have all seen what she saw. She saw fire beging squoze out of the floors thjat were still on fire when the collapse started. You also have to take into account that she could not see even that clearly because her eyes were full of crap from the first collapse.

Louie Cacchioli
Was inside the north tower when the south collapsed. Hard to tell the difference between a bomb and a hundred tons of steel hitting the outside of a building you are in.

So we have evidence of:

- The ground shaking before the collapse
Prove it.
-
Windows far away being blown out by the explosions
Not even one that you can prove.
- The lobby of WTC 7 being totally destroyed
Ballistic damage from the collapse of the north tower. We saw it happen.
- Powerful force winds and heavy shaking of floors/building
- People being thrown by explosions at different times
All copnsistant with the displacement of tons of air by tons of falling debris creating a turbidity flow.
- Orange flashes all around the building going up and down on different locations together with explosvie sound
How come, with every TV camera in NYC trained on the buildings, was this not recorded?
- Shockwaves visible to the eye going through the building before the collapse
Not true.
- Multiple explosions right before the collapse
Not true.
- Powerful squibs going trought the steel at the corner of the building (as shown by David Chandler).
Discussed and dismissed elsewhere. Chandler has no clue what he is talking about.
- Ejection speed of the squibs from the towers also matches the speeds recorded for ejections caused by explosives
Not in the least bit similar.
- Squibs and objects are being ejected before the tower begins to collapse
Got evidence?
- Speed of the collapse etc
Half the speed of gravity? WTF?

So yes, it is correct to state that we can see all the characteristics of high energy explosives. It is incorrect to assert otherwise.
:dl:

If explosives were used, we would expect the evidence to be destroyed and no real inspection being allowed, this was the case on 911.
Get a clue. there were cops and fire fighters screening rubble and finding things like keys and rings. You think they are going to ignore explosives residues? You lack the education to do this sort of thing.

Anyone else, that dont like corrupt officials destroying a legal case in an investigation, will be honest and point out what James Quintiere, Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division, points out: "A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have"...

Meadow muffins. Quintiere is not sure that the standards set by NIST for future construction are stringent enough. He thinks that steel might fail at lower temperatures. Have you noticed that he has never given twoofers the time of day?

Back to Jennings for a moment. When describing the "explosion" that he heard in WTC 7, it is clear that it did not involve HE. He and Hess were "blown back up" some stairs. Hess described it as a wind. Inside the building, it would have been a shock wave, not a wind, if it involved HE.

Jennings further stated that he had heard boilers blow up and that this in no way resembled boiler blowing up. This proves that it was not a bomb of any sort.

Your test results are in.

FAIL
 
Last edited:
Hey Liberty, question for you.

If all these firefighters believed that there were explosives/bombs in the WTC and surrounding area, why did none of them, not even ONE, report such a thing over the radio to dispatch, and order an evacuation?

But yet, in the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, there was a report of a bomb, and dispatch was notified, and incoming units from other houses, warned NOT to use the BBT?

Why is that?

Go ahead, explain that to me.

I'll wait.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom