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

was iit thermite or explosives then?

In some posts thre is a claim of one, then in the next post a claim of the other. I have seen both claimed in the same post!
 
Miragememories said:
Why was that sound not picked up by one of those microphones which you so inexpertly claim;
"... the microphones pick up any sound without prejudice, how is it that they uniformly pick up ambient sounds, yet no explosions?"

Clearly the externally collapsing East Penthouse must have made a horrifically loud sound. But not one single microphone was able to detect it.

MM
Click to expand...

Two interesting statements MM

1) I am an expert on audio. That's just too bad for truther's phony excuses.

2) And your expertise on what the structural failure below the E. PH is....?
Please give your professional expertise in structural engineering and acoustics.

I've studied acoustics at university and am a professional audio engineer, amongst other things. Careful boy.
 
Miragememories said:
Clearly the externally collapsing East Penthouse must have made a horrifically loud sound. But not one single microphone was able to detect it.
Click to expand...
How about you operationalize a "horrifically loud sound" for us so it doesn't become another meaningless truther term.
 
UNLoVedRebel said:
How about you operationalize a "horrifically loud sound" for us so it doesn't become another meaningless truther term.
Click to expand...

Isn't it enough that he claims to have been in the broadcasting industry for 40 years? I mean, do you really need evidence as well? Sure, Alienentity provided evidence for his assertions, but you don't really need that from someone who has been in the broadcasting industry for 40 years?

:p
 
MM, you don't get to decide what my professional training and credentials are.

What you can do is offer your own qualifications.

All you're doing is to try to attack me personally instead of attacking the arguments made.
The argument is that cardioid mic patterns are not rigidly directional in real-world situations, and that off-axis sounds are attenuated but still present.

If you would like to intelligently debate that point, please do so now. Personal attacks on my qualifications are not intelligent debate, nor is lying about microphone characteristics.

Perhaps you can rebut the points with references to manufacturer specs, as I have already done. If you were professional, this would be your course of action.
 
BTW, I recently engineered the strings for a CD released by a major Hong Kong singer.

Your real problem is that I DO have the required expertise in audio.

What was your training and expertise in audio? How many recordings have you produced?
I've produced 50 soundtracks for corporate clients. And you?

ETA what is it with truthers and lies?
 
Last edited:
Do you have any actual evidence that microphones behave the way you think they do?
 
What did you do in broadcasting for 40 years? I know people who have worked for the BBC for that length of time and never even saw a microphone.
 
Funny, the cheap camcorder mics that people use at controlled demolitions never have any trouble at all picking up the explosions, even from several blocks away.

But mysteriously NONE of the mics on 9/11 picked up anything more than a rumble.

How many db was the internal collapse of WTC7 from 3 blocks away, MM?
How many db is a typical high explosive demolition charge from the same distance?

You should know these figures if you are making a serious claim. You don't, and you aren't. You're just making it up as you go.

How much audio experience do you actually have? I gave you some of my qualifications, nothing from you. Yet you make the accusations......hmmm. bit of a double-standard huh?
 
Miragememories said:
Try and explain your question so those of us who speak english might understand what you are asking?

Or is that too difficult a challenge for you TSR??
Click to expand...
.
Which of the words is confusing you? No one else seems to be having any problems...

Here, let me type it slowly for you:

Y o u . h a v e . s a i d . t h e r e . s h o u l d . h a v e . b e e n . s o u n d s . b u t . t h e y . w e r e . n o t . r e c o r d e d .

W h a t . i s . y o u r . g u e s s . a s . t o . w h y . t h e y .w e r e . n o t ?

And I'd drop the personal attacks -- they aren't doing what little credibility you have any good.
.
 
Last edited:
MM:
You never answered if you agreed with C7 that the "white smoke" was proof of "thermite"? You wouldn't want to get accused of just "toeing" the line and not standing up for yourself.
 
Watch MM try to evade this info:



In case MM doesn't comprehend how badly he's been pwned, listen to the 'rumble' as WTC2 collapses almost directly onto WTC1. The microphone picked up that sound just fine, but no explosions. Doesn't sound that loud on this recording either, until it's almost directly on top of them.
With WTC7 it's exactly the same kind of rumble, and not particularly loud.

Gee, all the mics were faulty that day, huh? LOL
 
Last edited:
alienentity said:
"Funny, the cheap camcorder mics that people use at controlled demolitions never have any trouble at all picking up the explosions, even from several blocks away.

But mysteriously NONE of the mics on 9/11 picked up anything more than a rumble.

How many db was the internal collapse of WTC7 from 3 blocks away, MM?
How many db is a typical high explosive demolition charge from the same distance?

You should know these figures if you are making a serious claim. You don't, and you aren't. You're just making it up as you go.

How much audio experience do you actually have? I gave you some of my qualifications, nothing from you. Yet you make the accusations......hmmm. bit of a double-standard huh?"
Click to expand...
All you've done is reiterate my point about how difficult it is to acquire good sound recordings in a big city environment.

Most of the demolition videos that I've listened to, were lacking that NYC cacophony of street sound. Probably because there was an informed audience anxiously awaiting the occurrence of the event.

It is you that is avoiding the issue.

Of course there are sound recordings of the collapses at the WTC on 9/11. Some of them quite loud.

But we don't have good recordings that disprove the existence of internal demolitions inside sealed buildings.

In spite of all the media coverage, we don't even have a camera mic recording of the WTC 7 East Penthouse collapse. Obviously, recording conditions were less than ideal or we would have it along with the video.

All you have proved by your little video is that 'some' audio was recorded.

A point I've never disputed.

MM
 
DGM said:
MM:
You never answered if you agreed with C7 that the "white smoke" was proof of "thermite"? You wouldn't want to get accused of just "toeing" the line and not standing up for yourself.
Click to expand...
White smoke is proof of white smoke.

I don't believe it was steam or water vapor.

It could be evidence of thermite.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
But we don't have good recordings that disprove the existence of internal demolitions inside sealed buildings.
Click to expand...
.
And what can be expected to happen, physically, to a sealed building when you set off CD-type explosives inside?
.
 
Miragememories said:
All you've done is reiterate my point about how difficult it is to acquire good sound recordings in a big city environment.
Click to expand...

No, all I've done is REFUTE your point by showing you that all the mics captured the sound of collapsing buildings very faithfully.

Of course there are sound recordings of the collapses at the WTC on 9/11. Some of them quite loud.

But we don't have good recordings that PROVE the existence of internal demolitions inside sealed buildings.

MM
Click to expand...

Corrected your misleading statement. ALL of the recordings with audio captured the sound of collapsing buildings, without exceptions.

NONE, not a single one, captured typical controlled demolition explosions, nothing at all like any that are available online.

This simply disproves that there is any evidence to support your claim.
It's that simple. No need for your personal attacks.

You have no evidence.
 
Last edited:
MM tries to lead the argument into proving a negative. Of course there are zero recordings of things which NEVER happened.
That's childishly simple.

What you can NEVER do is to provide actual proof, using audio, that there were demolitions explosives used. You will always fail in this effort. Mark my words - it's hopeless for you.
 
Miragememories said:
...But we don't have good recordings that disprove the existence of internal demolitions inside sealed buildings...
Click to expand...


First of all, define sealed.

Second of all, any blast powerful enough to sever any steel structural members would have blown out windows of the WTC towers, and likely any nearby buildings, which didn't happen.

Plus, how the hell could anything disprove a fantasy that has no evidence to support it in the first place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom