2 questions re 1120 'Missing bodies' from WTC 1&2 & media complicity in mass murder

[beachnut]

OKC 93 and 911; CT time based on Nonsense.

Who? the people who wanted US taxpayers to pay 3-5 trillion for wars and homeland security, i.e. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc.

The planning? big picture was planned with e.g. the PNAC -guys, the Demo itself was propably done by experts - not like the people in Oklahoma or WTC '93

How planted? According to Susan Lindauers State department friend, WTC security tapes caught 3 truck vans coming to WTC atn 3am and leaving at 5 am every night from August 23 to September 3. Ace elevator guys propably did the assembling during day time while doing "elevator maintenance". some assembling was propably done during the night time too, especially during the power down period befor 9/11. Did you know that all the Ace elevator guys left the building against regulations after the planes struck and left people stuck in the elevators? Only elevator-service guy who tried to rescue people from elevators was old WTC elevator service guy who was fired earlier.

Politics mixed with more lies. Where do you find this junk you believe due to your hate of Bush?

You can do politics, where opinions are used, but with facts, evidence and physics you come up empty.

You hate Cheney and the Bush administration. Oops, they are not in office. Stuck with your hate you make up lies about 911, the same as 911 truth.

OKC, 93 bombing and 911 are all done by PNAC? lol, Dick Cheney and his army of words? No CT is too dumb to be adopted by you.

 

[Oystein]

What do you think made the spire drop like a rotten wood tower?

Euler buckling.

If you never heard the term, look it up.

 

[Jbui]

Euler buckling.

If you never heard the term, look it up.

Euler buckling requires a load on the core, but there was just the core, no load on it. Anyways Oystein, give me the answer for the 1.-4. part question, how did gravity shred people in small pieces and throw them 1000 feet away?

Would you agree that explosives would do exactly that?

 

[dafydd]

How planted? According to Susan Lindauers State department friend, WTC security tapes caught 3 truck vans coming to WTC atn 3am and leaving at 5 am every night from August 23 to September 3. Ace elevator guys propably did the assembling during day time while doing "elevator maintenance". some assembling was propably done during the night time too, especially during the power down period befor 9/11. Did you know that all the Ace elevator guys left the building against regulations after the planes struck and left people stuck in the elevators? Only elevator-service guy who tried to rescue people from elevators was old WTC elevator service guy who was fired earlier.

I assume that you have no proof of this campfire story?

 

[Spanx]

Jbui how do you get the figure of 1000ft ?

 

[dafydd]

Euler buckling requires a load on the core, but there was just the core, no load on it

Well Googled!

 

[dafydd]

Jbui how do you get the figure of 1000ft ?

From Trutherland.

 

[carlitos]

Jbui how do you get the figure of 1000ft ?

He's ignoring the high speed plane crashes and pretending that the only force available to propel anything sideways is gravity. It's a fail on all fronts.

 

[Spanx]

From Trutherland.

That's where you can build a ladder to the moon

 

[Spanx]

He's ignoring the high speed plane crashes and pretending that the only force available to propel anything sideways is gravity. It's a fail on all fronts.

I wonder if it could be Jason bermas going by the letters in his name

 

[Animal]

Euler buckling requires a load on the core, but there was just the core, no load on it. Anyways Oystein, give me the answer for the 1.-4. part question, how did gravity shred people in small pieces and throw them 1000 feet away?

Would you agree that explosives would do exactly that?

Fail. Next try googling "dead load"

 

[dafydd]

He's ignoring the high speed plane crashes and pretending that the only force available to propel anything sideways is gravity. It's a fail on all fronts.

He could be a no-planer.

 

[beachnut]

Euler buckling requires a load on the core, but there was just the core, no load on it. Anyways Oystein, give me the answer for the 1.-4. part question, how did gravity shred people in small pieces and throw them 1000 feet away?

Would you agree that explosives would do exactly that?

No, explosives can't do what we see on 911.
Zero people were blown up on 911. No blasts, no blast effects.

The gravity collapse destroyed the building and the people.

The collapse had the energy of 130 TONS of TNT, enough to shred people into small parts? Yes. Got Physics?

Euler buckling? The core of the WTC can't stand without the shell. The shell was the lateral support.

 

[Oystein]

Euler buckling requires a load on the core, but there was just the core, no load on it.

Is the core weightless?
Where did the spire buckle - at its very top, or closer to the bottom?
What, then, is the load on the region that bukcled - a) 0 b) >0

(Answer: Of course the spire buckled well below the top. The entire weight of the spire above that buckling region is the load you wanna look for)

Anyways Oystein, give me the answer for the 1.-4. part question, how did gravity shred people in small pieces and throw them 1000 feet away?

Alright.

Of course I can only speculate, as you have not provided me with sufficiently detailed information about these remains, for example their total volume, or which victims they belong to. The latter question is of interest, as I'd expect victims killed immediately by the plane crashes (passengers, and office occupants in its path) to show a markedly different distribution of body parts both in terms of particle size and geography.

147 passengers and crew were aboard the two planes, and hundreds were on the impact floors. As the plane was torn to shreds, so were the people caught in the crash, only worse. Some of their body pieces no doubt were carried out the other side of the towers by momentum, much of the rest came to rest inside the towers, with probably a good portion near the wall opposite to entry point.

So the collapse didn't have to rip these body parts.

As everybody could observe, and as happens every time a large building collapses, all kinds of pieces are caught in the stron air currents ("dust clouds") that are produced, and as all kinds of dirt from the towers were deposited all around, so were many of the light body parts from I just described.

Would you agree that explosives would do exactly that?

As you explained, only if the explosives were placed very near the people. As you explained yourself, and smart perpetrator would have placed the explosive charges at the connections of the steel structure, which are all away from the spaces for human occupancy.

So, following your logic, no, explosives would not easily explain the distribution of human remains.

But the question es well as my answer are irrelevant. There were no explosives.

 

[fitzgibbon]

Jbui, watch out for ergo he is a government paid shill, he tries to feed gullible truthers nonsense to make the truth movement look stupid.

No, 'truthers' manage to accomplish that with no help whatsoever.

Fitz

 

[Jbui]

Jbui how do you get the figure of 1000ft ?

From this pic:

...looks like the maximun is actually more like 600 feet. Anyways I would be happy to see a gravity driven collapse with something bouncing +200 feet away. All pictures of collapsed buildings you can find are with stuff with about max 100 feet radius in one big pile of big chuncks of concrete. no dust. Take a look at
these.

 

[Spanx]

From this pic:
[qimg]http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff475/TwitchingLima/911-body-part-graphic-fox-news.jpg[/qimg]
...looks like the maximun is actually more like 600 feet. Anyways I would be happy to see a gravity driven collapse with something bouncing +200 feet away. All pictures of collapsed buildings you can find are with stuff with about max 100 feet radius in one big pile of big chuncks of concrete. no dust. Take a look at
these.

So how far was wtc7 from wtc1 ?

 

[Oystein]

From this pic:
[qimg]http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff475/TwitchingLima/911-body-part-graphic-fox-news.jpg[/qimg]
...looks like the maximun is actually more like 600 feet. Anyways I would be happy to see a gravity driven collapse with something bouncing +200 feet away. All pictures of collapsed buildings you can find are with stuff with about max 100 feet radius in one big pile of big chuncks of concrete. no dust. Take a look at
these.

All these buildings are MUCH MUCH smaller - by a very large margin - than the twin towers. In terms of volume, height, mass, and most importantly potential energy.

Could you, as an exercise, pick one of those collapsed buildings that you found there and estimate
- its mass
- its volume
- its potential energy
- the radius about which small debris particles were spread

Then do the same for one of the twin towers.

Compare, and discuss!


In the meantime, look at this building collapse. Remember: 90% of the energy that cracked the structure came from gravity, and almost all of the dust that you see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzZBXuyIE28

or this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8DoSvCDsIg
Note that practically no dust and debris emenates as the explosions go off, Practically all of the dust is created subsequently, in the gravity-driven phase. Note how it spreads. Note that this building has only about 17% of the height, 0.5% of the volume and mass and 0.08% of the potential energy of WTC1.

 

[dafydd]

So how far was wtc7 from wtc1 ?

That is a trick question, for truthers.

 

[Jbui]

Is the core weightless?
Where did the spire buckle - at its very top, or closer to the bottom?
What, then, is the load on the region that bukcled - a) 0 b) >0

(Answer: Of course the spire buckled well below the top. The entire weight of the spire above that buckling region is the load you wanna look for)

You are right, the supposed buckling could have happened down in the dust cloud and the thick columns in the bottom could have buckled just from the weight of the upper core columns, now that there was no weight of the building on them -sound logical?

Alright.

Of course I can only speculate, as you have not provided me with sufficiently detailed information about these remains, for example their total volume, or which victims they belong to. The latter question is of interest, as I'd expect victims killed immediately by the plane crashes (passengers, and office occupants in its path) to show a markedly different distribution of body parts both in terms of particle size and geography.

147 passengers and crew were aboard the two planes, and hundreds were on the impact floors. As the plane was torn to shreds, so were the people caught in the crash, only worse. Some of their body pieces no doubt were carried out the other side of the towers by momentum, much of the rest came to rest inside the towers, with probably a good portion near the wall opposite to entry point.

So the collapse didn't have to rip these body parts.

As everybody could observe, and as happens every time a large building collapses, all kinds of pieces are caught in the stron air currents ("dust clouds") that are produced, and as all kinds of dirt from the towers were deposited all around, so were many of the light body parts from I just described.

Thanks for your post, so you are saying that all the small pieces were from plane passengers? An those 1000 people who were not found - in how big parts do you think they were and where did those parts go? And all the people furhter than 100 feet away are plane passengers?

And you think air current could blow a small body part say 600 feet away?

As you explained, only if the explosives were placed very near the people. As you explained yourself, and smart perpetrator would have placed the explosive charges at the connections of the steel structure, which are all away from the spaces for human occupancy.

So, following your logic, no, explosives would not easily explain the distribution of human remains.

I think the main reason for pulverizing / shredding of people was the flying molten iron, and all the small metals in the dust. The shockwave propably was not close enough for 99% of the people to be actually fragged by it.

But the question es well as my answer are irrelevant. There were no explosives.

So I guess we all agree silently that an explosive can throw people around, shred people in pieces by blast effect or flying hot iron / debris and it can also pulverize the concrete etc. And there is also a patented method to use nanothermite to do a less noicy demolition. And we do have a lot of sound that some call explosions and some call trains, and we all silently agree that it was not the trains.

So what is your 100% proof that there were no explosives?