High energy explosvies and tertiary blast waves

[ComsatAngel2017]

"When the skeptics came out to play,
Brave old Liberty ran away.
It's twenty hours since he last posted,
Can't really blame him - he got toasted."

 

[Edx]

He is pondering what to do I suspect. At least he is less kneejerk than Ergo which just posts whatever nonsense response immediately pops into his head.

 

[Edx]

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?
.

I wonder if he will post the quote from the firefighter about Stuyvesant High School bomb threat

 

[A W Smith]

OST Bennette does not describe bombs in 7 and he was IN IT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bADURTAvtgk&t=2m30s


Also the lobby after the south tower collapse looks pretty intact to me, There were no reports of "explosions" within the time frame the south tower collapsed and the north tower falling into seven.

 

[ergo]

Great OP, Liberty.

But I too have to assume you mean tertiary blast injuries rather than waves.

Regardless, it seems to fly over the heads of our bedunker friends that that correction doesn't change your OP whatsoever. It is a point I have argued in other threads using inuries reports from known blasts compared with the WTC events, but without the benefit of professional backup from industry sources. Well done!

 

[Edx]

Great OP, Liberty.

But I too have to assume you mean tertiary blast injuries rather than waves.

Regardless, it seems to fly over the heads of our bedunker friends that that correction doesn't change your OP whatsoever. It is a point I have argued in other threads using inuries reports from known blasts compared with the WTC events, but without the benefit of professional backup from industry sources. Well done!

You lost then too Ergo. I know you're too delusional to notice. Neither you or Liberty will ever address the critical issues against your position, a little while later you just come back and say the same thing as if no one ever said anything.

 

[ergo]

No one ever does say anything, especially when it's things like this:

Edx wrote: If you have tertiary blast injuries you WILL have primary blast injuries as well.

 

[ergo]

Also the lobby after the south tower collapse looks pretty intact to me, There were no reports of "explosions" within the time frame the south tower collapsed and the north tower falling into seven.

How do you know when this footage was taken? How did Jennings and Hess get trapped then? The emergency personnel in this video state that everyone's been evacuated.

 

[Edx]

No one ever does say anything, especially when it's things like this:

Go read the post in question, not just that one line. I gave lots of sources for saying that.

How is it possible to be caught in an explosive, get picked up and thrown around by it and and not sustain any soft inner tissue injuries the most common injury associated with an explosive? That despite bombs apparently going off all over the place before the towers collapsed no one sustained any such injuries, despite such injuries being common in every other bombing. Then when the towers actually did collapse extraordinarily huge explosives created shockwaves so powerful they propelled heavy steel hundreds of feet through the air and still none of this was capable of causing anyone any inner ear damage from this extreme blast. Of course none of those explosives were loud enough to be caught on tape either, but there lies the disconnect in general. Truthers have no idea what explosives sound like, what they do to the human body, how they create damage, and they really dont understand that explosIONS in normal fires are incredibly common and expected.

 

[ProBonoShill]

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?

Yes, I find this very puzzling too.

A person who is supposedly interested in finding the "TRUTH" contacts people who are "experts in the blast effects of explosvies and energetic materials" yet fails to make a single inquiry about 9/11.

Strange that.

Liberty do you intend to contact SECRAB again and ask them if they believe explosives brought the towers down?

 

[000063]

Great OP, Liberty.

But I too have to assume you mean tertiary blast injuries rather than waves.

Regardless, it seems to fly over the heads of our bedunker friends that that correction doesn't change your OP whatsoever. It is a point I have argued in other threads using inuries reports from known blasts compared with the WTC events, but without the benefit of professional backup from industry sources. Well done!

You have also ignored people telling you, time and time again, that explosions do not necessarily indicate the presence of explosives, preferring to strawman it into those people telling you "explosives are never explosives". You are either biased or lying. Given that Liberty also equates explosions to explosives, no wonder you're supporting him. He has also been shown to be flatly wrong on several other points, such as his dodging the question of why the explosives would be in 7 in the first place.

Either They knew it was going to be hit by debris and give them an excuse, or they were in there for no reason. And no, it couldn't have had anything to do with Shanksville, as that plane crashed shortly after the debris from North Tower hit, and would've produced a drastically different impact and fire pattern than the one which was present. In fact, the explosives set up for such would've been disrupted by the debris impact and hours of fire.

The whole 7 question is a way to avoid proving 1 and 2 were demoed. Never mind the tertiary blast injuries; people who were actually inside the collapsing twin towers and survived didn't report explosions consistent with explosives, nor did they display any such injuries. Nor did people in the area. Explosives sufficient to bring down a building, yet leave the people inside the building unaffected in any way? That's physically impossible.

 

[000063]

No one ever does say anything, especially when it's things like this:

How do you know when this footage was taken? How did Jennings and Hess get trapped then? The emergency personnel in this video state that everyone's been evacuated.

Ah, yes, the careful avoidance of any actual assertion you have to backup. Standard Ergo.

 

[tmd2_1]

Great OP, Liberty.

But I too have to assume you mean tertiary blast injuries rather than waves.

Regardless, it seems to fly over the heads of our bedunker friends that that correction doesn't change your OP whatsoever. It is a point I have argued in other threads using inuries reports from known blasts compared with the WTC events, but without the benefit of professional backup from industry sources. Well done!

I echo these sentiments great OP.

Liberty do not be dissuaded by some posts here. They're really is not a whole that can be said in reply to your post. You could have verifiable video of the explosives being planted, and somehow (according to them) it would not be what we are seeing, or there is some reason for it.

 

[DGM]

I echo these sentiments great OP.

"Great" in what way? Length? Exactly what did he prove?

 

[Edx]

I echo these sentiments great OP.

Liberty do not be dissuaded by some posts here. They're really is not a whole that can be said in reply to your post. You could have verifiable video of the explosives being planted, and somehow (according to them) it would not be what we are seeing, or there is some reason for it.

So you're the 3rd truther to join this thread and while offering Liberty your support still haven't actually addressed any of the points against his claims. Why is that? How can you tell us explosives were going off all over the place, people being thrown around by these explosives, that explosives so powerful flung heavy steel around (something no real demolition is trying to do btw), and yet the most common injury associated with explosives are nowhere to be found despite them being common in every other bombing? When there are other explanations and causes that dont involve explosives, many of which are common occurances in building fires, why would we assume it was explosives when doing so requires that they don't actually behave like an explosive?

 

[Justin39640]

How do you know when this footage was taken? How did Jennings and Hess get trapped then? The emergency personnel in this video state that everyone's been evacuated.

Everyone was evacuated after the second plane impact. That's a well known fact. Hence why only two people out of thousands are known to have been inside when the north tower collapsed. That collapse trapped them and they were rescued after.

 

[DGM]

So you're the 3rd truther to join this thread and while offering Liberty your support still haven't actually addressed any of the points against his claims. Why is that? How can you tell us explosives were going off all over the place, people being thrown around by these explosives, that explosives so powerful flung heavy steel around (something no real demolition is trying to do btw), and yet the most common injury associated with explosives are nowhere to be found despite them being common in every other bombing? Why do you truthers require explosives to behave like no other explosives known to man?

Strange the OP uses Barry Jennings as a demolition witness. He was rescued from 7 WTC around 6 hours before the building collapsed. The "explosions" under him happened hours before that. Now, that's some slow CD.

 

[NoahFence]

Great OP, Liberty.

But I too have to assume you mean tertiary blast injuries rather than waves.

Regardless, it seems to fly over the heads of our bedunker friends that that correction doesn't change your OP whatsoever. It is a point I have argued in other threads using inuries reports from known blasts compared with the WTC events, but without the benefit of professional backup from industry sources. Well done!

So I take it you don't find it odd that Liberty asked about this hypothetical and got the answer he looked for, only because he ommitted the little fact that the same blast wave also threw giant pieces of steel hundreds of feet?

This is the question he should have asked:

"Could a human survive with no major injuries, an explosive wave that could also throw giant pieces of steel hundreds of feet"?

And that's the question he won't ask, nor will you or any of your kind, because you know for a fact the answer will not be to your liking.

That's called being dishonest. Par for the truther course.

 

[Justin39640]

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

lol. As a mechanic I probably would have jumped on his side. Those are called "cold air intakes". Maybe in German that doesn't translate into something cool and or fun. Basically they improve the airflow into the manifold over a stock filter/air ducting and gives you a 10 to 20 boost in HP. Doesn't sound like much but that would make a noticeable difference.

In the context of improving a car's performance I would have to wonder why the rest of the posters were wondering about teenage boys basketball locker rooms. lol

 

[NoahFence]

I echo these sentiments great OP.

Liberty do not be dissuaded by some posts here. They're really is not a whole that can be said in reply to your post. You could have verifiable video of the explosives being planted, and somehow (according to them) it would not be what we are seeing, or there is some reason for it.

Well done.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. If there were video, we'd have to accept it. Curious though, that even though all the video evidence supports a theory other than explosives, you fail to see it.

There is nothing on any video anywhere on 9/11 that would indicate explosives. Not a single one.