Split Thread 7WTC - controlled demolition or fire and damage induced collapse?

[Miragememories]

And yet, the much louder noise of demolition charges wasn't picked up, even though the collapse was. Why is that?

And why would they have been "much louder" than the complete collapse of the whole 47-story, WTC7?

MM

 

[Christopher7]

Microphone technology aside, I'd be expecting people in the street to be jumping out of their skins when C7's 600+ explosions* ring out around the building.

* Note: all along I've been underestimating C7's CD requirement. 8 floors at some 80 columns per floor would be 600+. But of course each cut requires a pair of shaped charges, = 1,200+ total. But then he requires removal of columns, not mere severing, so that makes a pair of charges both top and bottom of each column.

Grand total 2,400+ explosions in the 130db range, most of them packed into < 2 seconds.

How does Chris fit this kind of stuff into his head ?

Give it up. You are not an CD expert and you have no idea what options were available.
You jump between 130db and hush-a-boom as if there was nothing in between.

ETA: In order to conform with the laws of physics, all the supporting structure on 7 to 8 floors had to be REMOVED for FFA to occur. Come up with another explanation of accept that the only possibility is explosives.

 

[Scott Jurgenson]

And why would they have been "much louder" than the complete collapse of the whole 47-story, WTC7?

MM

Have you ever seen a controlled demolition live?

I watched the J.L. Hudson's Building get demo'd in Detroit. It was one of the most recognizable sounds you'll ever hear. It also left my ears ringing for a few minutes afterwards. BOOM BOOM BOOM, (mr boombostic, simply fantastic) before, then silence, then BOOOOM and collapse.

 

[triforcharity]

Give it up. You are not an CD expert and you have no idea what options were available.

Neither do you Chris.

You jump between 130db and hush-a-boom as if there was nothing in between.

Show us something inbetween. I mean, actually SHOW us. Present your facts, your numbers, and your calculations.

We'll wait..................

 

[carlitos]

Really, this tool isn't worth engaging. He won't answer questions, he dashes off replies in seconds, with pithy "denial" etc. Until he posts an alternative explanation that explains the events of 9/11, just ignore him / her.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Thermite, maybe they used Thermite to cut through the beames. That wouldn't make a loud boom and any residue would just be melted Iron, that's what you would expect to find in a building that had collapsed due to intense fires.

 

[Scott Jurgenson]

Thermite, maybe they used Thermite to cut through the beames. That wouldn't make a loud boom and any residue would just be melted Iron, that's what you would expect to find in a building that had collapsed due to intense fires.

#1 you wouldn't expect to find melted iron in a building that collapsed from fire, a thermite reaction would leave melted iron. So they are not similar.

#2 then why do all the troofer presentations use first responder video of them talking about "Explosions" and "Booms".

Contradictions. But when faced with mounting evidence against one's cause all you have to do is change "9/11 was an inside job" and all is well.

 

[excaza]

Give it up. You are not an CD expert and you have no idea what options were available.
You jump between 130db and hush-a-boom as if there was nothing in between.

ETA: In order to conform with the laws of physics, all the supporting structure on 7 to 8 floors had to be REMOVED for FFA to occur. Come up with another explanation of accept that the only possibility is explosives.

In order to conform with the laws of physics, to have a CD you need explosives. What explosives were used? How much explosives were used? Why is there no evidence of any demolition equipment? How were the explosives rigged without anyone noticing? How were they detonated without anyone noticing or being injured by the blasts? If it was thermite/ate (which isn't an explosive), why is there no evidence?

It's been 9 years, why haven't you truthers managed to come up with a coherent hypothesis? If it's soOOooOoOoO obvious, why is it so difficult to present evidence?

 

[Christopher7]

Give it up. You are not an CD expert and you have no idea what options were available.

Neither do you Chris.

Correct

Show us something inbetween. I mean, actually SHOW us. Present your facts, your numbers, and your calculations.

Silly boy, You just said I don't know and then you ask me to tell you what you know I don't know.

We'll wait.................

Try holding your breath.

 

[carlitos]

My post above was prescient, I see. Obvious troll is obvious. Let it go.

 

[Christopher7]

Really, this tool isn't worth engaging. He won't answer questions, he dashes off replies in seconds, with pithy "denial" etc. Until he posts an alternative explanation that explains the events of 9/11, just ignore him / her.

Since yopu have nothing of substance to offer I think you should take your own advise and ignore me.

 

[carlitos]

...you have nothing of substance to offer

Incorrect, I have a working hypothesis that explains the events of 9/11/01. It conforms with available evidence, and fits with the observed events of the day.

ignore me.

Done.

 

[Miragememories]

"And why would they have been "much louder" than the complete collapse of the whole 47-story, WTC7?"

"I watched the J.L. Hudson's Building get demo'd in Detroit. It was one of the most recognizable sounds you'll ever hear. It also left my ears ringing for a few minutes afterwards. BOOM BOOM BOOM, (mr boombostic, simply fantastic) before, then silence, then BOOOOM and collapse."

Non-secretive explosions from inside a building with all its windows removed, are expected to be loud.

How often do you hear sound, any sound, from inside a sealed office building?

A building demolished by a combination of explosives and thermite [WTC7] would have a significantly reduced sound signature.

Few people, and no recording devices on the outside, reported the WTC7 explosions that Barry Jennings witnessed while he was trapped inside.

This classic demolition explosion was recorded in the area of WTC7, but in spite of its inside job significance, was largely ignored.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw

You might like to go and re-listen to the Coast to Coast AM Debate- August 21, 2010.
Here is a link to the whole show.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6254919&postcount=493

And afterwards you might enjoy;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSBYdRRuLxI


MM

 

[Christopher7]

In order to conform with the laws of physics, to have a CD you need explosives. What explosives were used?

I don't know

How much explosives were used?

I don't know

Why is there no evidence of any demolition equipment?

The evidence was destroyed.

How were the explosives rigged without anyone noticing?

I don't know

How were they detonated without anyone noticing or being injured by the blasts?

There was no one in WTC 7

If it was thermite/ate (which isn't an explosive), why is there no evidence?

There is evidence

It's been 9 years, why haven't you truthers managed to come up with a coherent hypothesis?

We have: WTC 7 + FFA = CD
Simple and easy to understand. [Unless you are in denial]

If it's soOOooOoOoO obvious, why is it so difficult to present evidence?

I present evidence all the time. Y'all deny it.

 

[Disbelief]

How often do you hear sound, any sound, from inside a sealed office building?

Doesn't the gaping hole in the building kind of prove that it wasn't sealed. The smoke pouring out of it is also another hint that it wasn't sealed.

A building demolished by a combination of explosives and thermite [WTC7] would have a significantly reduced sound signature.

Why would you use both? Need to throw in more complexity? Also, prove you can use thermite to CD anything - you know one of those "first time in history" things you guys are so fond of using.

Few people, and no recording devices on the outside, reported the WTC7 explosions that Barry Jennings witnessed while he was trapped inside.

And Hess? What does he say?

This classic demolition explosion was recorded in the area of WTC7, but in spite of its inside job significance, was largely ignored.

MM

Wait, if it is a classic demolition explosion, why would they have used thermite? I thought you would want to reduce the sound signature, not leave a telltale explosion.

 

[Christopher7]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdwhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSBYdRRuLxI
MM

Everything else aside, that's a great track and vocals. worth a listen.

 

[excaza]

I don't know

Yet you pretend you do.

I don't know

Yet you pretend you do.

The evidence was destroyed.

How convenient.

I don't know

Yet you pretend you do.

There was no one in WTC 7

You can only hear explosions inside? Cool.

There is evidence

Really? I thought you said it was destroyed? Where is the melted metal that would be indicative of thermite? How much thermite/ate would be required to take down a building? Where is it demonstrated that thermite/ate can be used as a cutting charge? You do realize thermite/ate isn't an explosive?

We have: WTC 7 + FFA = CD
Simple and easy to understand. [Unless you are in denial]

Simple and easy to understand, but completely lacking any supporting evidence.

I present evidence all the time. Y'all deny it.

Your 'evidence' is "WTC 7 + FFA = CD." You have presented no evidence of CD.

 

[Christopher7]

And Hess? What does he say?

Ya mean the lawyer who couldn't find his way downstairs?

He said the same thing Mr. Jennings said on 9/11. "There was an explosion and we were trapped on the 8th floor". This is the only thing they agree on. Statements made years later to the contrary cannot be considered reliable.

 

[Gamolon]

We have: WTC 7 + FFA = CD
Simple and easy to understand. [Unless you are in denial]

Shouldn't that be WTC7 + PARTIAL FFA =CD?

 

[Gamolon]

Wrong. Dr. Sunder is referring to FFA.

Wrong!
What part of
"[FONT=&quot]the[/FONT][FONT=&quot] north face descended at gravitational acceleration, . . . This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft)[/FONT]
don't you understand?

Wrong again.

Here is Chandler's question that was read to Shyam in the video.

Any number of competent measurements using a variety of methods indicate the northwest corner of WTC7 fell with an acceleration within a few percent of the acceleration of gravity. Yet your report contradicts this claiming 40% slower than free fall based on a single data point. How can such a publicly visable, easily measureable quantity get set aside?

Christopher7,

Can you please explain Chandler's statement above that NIST contradicts the 100ft (2 sec) free fall drop on the northwest corner by stating the time of the viewable roof line drop took 40% longer than free fall.

I watched the video and I see 5.4 sec. In order for the entire roof line collapse to be considered a free fall descent, the roof line would have to have dropped out of sight in 3.9 seconds.

How is NIST's 40% slower than free fall contradicting the fact that there was 2 sec of free fall incorporated into that 5.4 sec collapse? I mean 5.4 sec -40% = 3.9 sec right?

You said yourself that 2 sec of free fall does not make the entire collapse free fall.