• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A nice essay

Docker said:
that was a question I asked someone. Note the question mark on the end. I was refuting his assertion that the squibs were air.
Click to expand...

source??? anyone?


the puffs of smoke accelerated as air rushed out of the WTC! fact, not an explosion of RDX, an explosion of air rushing out gaining speed, not like an explosion slowing down as it expands, but air rushing out and more pressure as it increase and speeds up the air flow, not slowing, accelerating

air

you should be familar with air
 
Docker said:
I believe the squibs weren;t air hence it wasn't faster than gravity.
Click to expand...

You are the only one implying the "faster than gravity" term. Like I said, air pressure increased in the towers because the space for the air to go decreased, and the only way out was through the windows.
 
Garb said:
They were air. Air pressure increases when volume decreases. Simple chemistry.
Click to expand...

So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?
 
Not to be a party pooper, but what exactly is the topic of this thread? If it's the copy-and-pasted "essay" Docker brought over from LC, this thread should be closed as it was debunked 4 minutes after it was posted....
 
Last edited:
Docker when did the FBI say they had no hard evidence against Bin Ladin?
 
steve s said:
Point 1) "Squibs" is not a term used in the CD industry. They're called charges. Squibs are what they use in Hollywood to simulate bullet hits. By using the term squibs you're just exposing your ignorance of the subject.

Point 2) Those "squibs" you refer to are a handfull of windows getting blown out by the increasing air pressure due to the collapse.

Point 3) If those really had been charges, then the building would have started to collapse there. Watch the video. No collapse initiates at that point.

Steve S.
Click to expand...

A - 100 percent :) (concise, precise, excellent)
 
Docker said:
So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?
Click to expand...

It followed the path of least resistance. Obviously those windows had the least resistance. But I ask you again, please show me a controlled demolition where random explosions destroyed random supports.
 
Docker said:
So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?
Click to expand...

No, once a few of the windows were out the pressure would be relieved.
 
Docker said:
So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?
Click to expand...

Take a small, air-filled baloon and squeeze it until it pops.

Look at the remains. Why did it fail where it did?

Look at how dams fail. Why did they start leaking in one area?

There are hundreds of factors that cause that particular window(s) to fail and result in the one have the material. If you can't understand this you basicly have no concept of basic physics.
 
Garb said:
It followed the path of least resistance. Obviously those windows had the least resistance. But I ask you again, please show me a controlled demolition where random explosions destroyed random supports.
Click to expand...

When did I claim random supports were blown? You like misrepresenting me dont you straw boy
 
Docker said:
When did I claim random supports were blown? You like misrepresenting me dont you straw boy
Click to expand...

That is the idea of the "squbs seen during the collapse."

What is the reason for the squibs if it wasn't air? How is this an indicator of a government plot?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom