Blown to Kingdom Come

TruthSeeker1234 said:
Yes, it will shatter. Correct. I'm looking for all that shattered concrete. It's not there. It turned into powder and was expelled across all of lower Manhattan before it ever had a chance to hit the ground and shatter.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that none of the tower hit each other before hitting the ground?

Isn't it possible that's where the concrete came into contact with another force?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Yes, it will shatter. Correct. I'm looking for all that shattered concrete. It's not there. It turned into powder and was expelled across all of lower Manhattan before it ever had a chance to hit the ground and shatter.
Click to expand...
at least you arent lookign for intact floor slabs anymore, your learning
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Seriously, acceleration downward on the near side, there is no force (F=ma).

Please explain to me what you think is causing the concrete to become pulverized into fine powder, and then ejected outwards away from the direction of the falling top.
Click to expand...

the building itself is the culprit, the building falling is releasing energy.

the energy is equal to 248 tons of TNT; you know 1000 500 pound bombs. as in like the energy of 1000 five-hundred pound bombs

and the building failing is releasing energy, that energy is crushing wallboard (dust), crushing the light weight concrete floors (dust), and anything else that makes dust.

the building is doing it, as the building falls it releases energy, it is equal to 248 tons of TNT, it is enormous amount of energy, it was at rest until the building fell. You can calculate this energy for yourself. E=mgh or something, you can do it, m=mass, g=gravity, h=height, you need to look it up if I am wrong, the 248 tons of TNT energy is real close, unless you have some better numbers

so after a big impact (equal to a ton of TNT) and a big fire started with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel (equal in energy to 315 tons of TNT), ….

what do you think destroyed the WTC?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Yes, it will shatter. Correct. I'm looking for all that shattered concrete. It's not there. It turned into powder and was expelled across all of lower Manhattan before it ever had a chance to hit the ground and shatter.
Click to expand...

Well, you didn't address any of the other issues I brought up, but how exactly do you accord this with your earlier statement:

TruthSeeker1234 said:
As far as "similar pieces of debris", I'm looking for acre-sized slabs, with a rectangular hole, like giant square donuts, 220 of them. Thus far I have found zero.
Click to expand...

So what are we looking for? How many pictures with pieces of concrete in them will convince you your 1/10th of 1% "generous estimate" is wrong? Clearly pictures are the only thing you will accept, as you have yet to discuss my earlier calculations in any detail.

Next, tell us why you expect anyone to have taken pictures of big piles of concrete and steel. I can't imagine why anyone would have.

There are other things I'd like you to explain, but since you seem to have trouble answering more thanone thing at a time, I'll stop now.
 
My God, BS is still on about microscopic concrete, mushroom clouds and pyroclastic flows. I guess nothing has sunk in, and he still has no idea what the explosives do in conventional building demolitions(Hint for BS1+2=4: Its not to blow the concrete and steel to "Kingdom Come". Its to cut the support columns.) or what he is implying by pointing out his mushroom cloud(apparently he's not a mini-nuke supporter).

They recently destroyed the Control Tower here in ATL. That structure is like 90% concrete. It was interesting because they blew the base first and the tower fell over sideways. Some of the concrete was turned to dust by the explosives. The rest was obliterated when it hit the ground. The dust cloud was friggin huge!
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Thank you for the pictures, I was looking for that one with the guys climbing the pile with the flag at the top. Yes, there is some macroscopic concrete in that one. I would say, generously, it represents 1/2000th of the total. I will include it in my rubble hunt.

Yes, 9/11 studies can be depressing.
Click to expand...

Here, let me give you a hand with that hunt...
 
beachnut said:
What do you think destroyed the WTC?
Click to expand...

So far we've narrowed his choices down to:

Shrinker said:
What's taking so long? The explosives made no bang, made no flash, made no shockwave, broke no windows, made no fireball, left no residues, required no detonators, required no wiring, were flameproof, were detonated with split second precision, could be installed without anyone noticing, and had a destructive power greater than 300 tonnes of TNT. They were undetectable before, after or during detonation. How many candidates can there be?
Click to expand...

or a Star Wars Beam Weapon.

It's left as an exercise for the student to determine which is more improbable.
 
TruthSeeker1234;2028520 said:
THe downward acceleration is on the other side. Since there is no acceleration downward on the near side, there is no force (F=ma).
Click to expand...

False. There is no NET force. There are still plenty of forces.
 
Dude, nanobots are awesome.

That's the most realistice explanation I can think of.
 
LashL said:
You might even find some more of that non-existent concrete in some of these photos.

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/6036.jpg

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5456.jpg

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5392.jpg

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/4153.jpg

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/5457.jpg

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/3997.jpg
Click to expand...
Obviously, since the videos show that 100% of the concrete was pulverized while it was still falling, these photos just show that the concrete powder re-clumped together into chunks later, probably by heat left over from the hydrogen bombs and molten steel.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
What evidence can you provide to substantiate your claims that does not rely on subjective interpretation?
Click to expand...

Truthseeker1234, please respond to my query. If you can not, or will not, present objective, verifiable evidence; then there is no point in continued conversation with you.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
There would be desks, and file cabinets.

We don't see anything like that.Even if the concrete somehow disintegrated, the steel floor pans would be stacked up. THere is simply no mechanism in your gravity collapse to explain the disintegration of the towers. So you rely on closeups of the mounds of dust, which only further confirm that the buildings were blown to kingdom come.
Click to expand...

desk and file cabinets dropped from 1300 feet, or hit by 5,000 tons per floor of junk, from 1300 feet, from 1290 feet, each floor was 5,000 tons of junk, you only have 110 floors falling from 10 feet to 1300 feet take your pick. What would they look like?

The gravity collapse of the WTC towers is the mechanism of the disintegration you see at the WTC. All you have to do is calculate the energy as in Energy=Mass times gravity times height

it is a big number, and it is the mechanism of destruction. simple energy makes a big mess
 
CurtC said:
Obviously, since the videos show that 100% of the concrete was pulverized while it was still falling, these photos just show that the concrete powder re-clumped together into chunks later, probably by heat left over from the hydrogen bombs and molten steel.
Click to expand...

Obviously.

;)
 
Last edited:
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Yes, it will shatter. Correct. I'm looking for all that shattered concrete. It's not there. It turned into powder and was expelled across all of lower Manhattan before it ever had a chance to hit the ground and shatter.
Click to expand...
You like pictures, right?

Can you look at this picture and tell me where some of the other steel and concrete might be? Have you ever been to Ground Zero and saw how deep it actually goes below ground level (And obviously this is not to scale)?



Anything? No?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
When the event is over, we observe shredded steel strewn about upon a vast field of dust. JREF members have shown pictures of rescue efforts and such that show pieces of concrete that escaped disintegration. My generous estimates are that these pictures show 200 tons, total. Tops. That would be 1/10th of 1%, using the figure 200,000 tons of concrete.
Click to expand...


Was skimming the thread on saw this. Just checking to see if TS bothered with the math.

From here: Desnsity of Concrete

Average concrete has a mass of 2300 kg/m3. 200 tons = 400000 lbs = 181436.9 kg. Dividing 181436.9 by 2300 we get 78.89 1 meter cubes of concrete. Taking the cub of that we get a giant cube that is 4.289 meters a side. Of for those of us in the US, that's 14.07 feet a side. So if TS can show that all of that concrete debris can fit into a single 15x15x15 foot cube, I'll be pretty darn impressed.
 
azazal said:
Was skimming the thread on saw this. Just checking to see if TS bothered with the math.
....

So if TS can show that all of that concrete debris can fit into a single 15x15x15 foot cube, I'll be pretty darn impressed.
Click to expand...

Trust me, TS hates math. And cubes, I think...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom