• 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.

Merged Freefall is not evidence for Controlled Demolition

Criteria said:
WTC7 was prepped to be a surprise demolition and therefore in the interest of stealth, none of the usual building safety and engineering efficiency protocols could be followed.
Click to expand...

Which includes noise and blast suppression. Example below. Without it, for example, every intact window would have been blown out.

You just made your already ridiculous case even worse.
 

Attachments

  • cd prep.jpg
    cd prep.jpg
    29.2 KB · Views: 99
GlennB said:
Which includes noise and blast suppression. Example below. Without it, for example, every intact window would have been blown out.

You just made your already ridiculous case even worse.
Click to expand...

Not only silent explosives but invisible as well.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Not only silent explosives but invisible as well.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah.

The high-tech case involves multiple shaped charges per cut, as well as torching the web of the column in advance. A pretty nutty idea really as we can gauge the extent of the work required in the photo below*. Not something to be achieved on the day itself for 192 column cuts, eh?

The Szambotian case just means one charge next to each proposed break, which is very inefficient in terms of delivery, but very efficient in terms of maximising noise and visibility. Bulky too. Looking at photos of column 79 I'd say it's at least as hefty as the one in this photo, if not heftier. What kind of single explosive charge would it take to demolish that?

*
 

Attachments

  • cutter charges.JPG
    cutter charges.JPG
    21.1 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
Chief Frank Cruthers and Chief Frank Fellini assessed that WTC7 was at risk for collapse, and mounted the effort to clear the area of the fallen WTC1 of firefighters.

*source: http://www.fireengineering.com/arti...d-trade-center-disaster-initial-response.html

Why would they make that call if fire could not cause a building to collapse?

If they were in on it (and by Troofer implication they would have had to be) then why clear everybody out and tip their hand?

Why hide the evidence of explosives? If the goal is to implement some kind set of draconian laws then their use by shadowy terrorists in 7 would have set precedent to dream up and inflict all kinds of nonsense.

Why hide CD when you can use explosives known to be used by Al Qaeda, to better frame them, or better yet - trace it back to an explosives lot sold to Iraq? If the goal is to invade Iraq, 9-11 is the worst frame-job in the history of the human race.
 
GlennB said:
Looking at photos of column 79 I'd say it's at least as hefty as the one in this photo, if not heftier. What kind of single explosive charge would it take to demolish that?
Click to expand...

According to NIST, IIRC, one that produced about 130dB at peak blast intensity. Enough to temporarily deafen anyone within half a mile, for just one column. Hard to imagine how anyone could have failed to notice that.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
According to NIST, IIRC, one that produced about 130dB at peak blast intensity. Enough to temporarily deafen anyone within half a mile, for just one column. Hard to imagine how anyone could have failed to notice that.

Dave
Click to expand...

That's right, thanks. And 192 times in one second according to the Szamboti theory.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Except in WTC1 and 2, for some reason, where even though the corners were blown up the perimeter still provided significant resistance. Yes, he's said that.

Dave
Click to expand...

re-writing a previous post that referenced a sitcom character's tag line and accent:

So in WTC1 & 2 it was important to blow the corner columns as well as the the core columns. Yet this did not result in free fall.

OTOH in WTC 7 it was unimportant to blow the corner columns, just the core columns and this was sufficient to cause a period of free fall at a point well after the entire structure was moving.
 
pgimeno said:
Nothing that a few windows couldn't stifle... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I've been away from the forum a few days. Did TSz ever get around to explaining the hush-a-boom? Did he regurgitate MM's 'windows will muffle the sound' nonsense? (after all that's why it was unimportant to blow the perimeter/corner columns in WTC 7. There'd be no windows to block the supersonic pressure wave,,,, therefore free fall:D
 
jaydeehess said:
I've been away from the forum a few days. Did TSz ever get around to explaining the hush-a-boom? Did he regurgitate MM's 'windows will muffle the sound' nonsense? (after all that's why it was unimportant to blow the perimeter/corner columns in WTC 7. There'd be no windows to block the supersonic pressure wave,,,, therefore free fall:D
Click to expand...

It is worse than that, Tony publicly admitted to backing Cole's intellectually dishonest experiments, in the I found the missing Jolt thread, ending any question of whether he should be practicing engineering or not.:)
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
It is worse than that, Tony publicly admitted to backing Cole's intellectually dishonest experiments, in the I found the missing Jolt thread, ending any question of whether he should be practicing engineering or not.:)
Click to expand...

That's nuts! The whole "upper part cannot destroy the lower, larger part" is demonstrably wrong simply by virtue of the fact that Verinage demolition works.
 
Dave Rogers said:
I've been on the forum nine years and he still hasn't explained it.

Dave
Click to expand...
About the same for me. They only one I recall replying to this is MM, who stated that a) the windows would muffle the sound and b) that a very loud sound will over mod the recording such that no sound is heard. (absolutely ridiculous and is a result of a video editor trying to pretend he's an audio tech)

The only other addressing of the lack of high explosive sounds is the invocation of thermite, which even TSz acknowledges could not possibly be timed to effect the destruction of multiple columns in a millisecond time frame. Then there was the thermite impregnated high explosive nonsense. Yes one can do this and yes it will result in greater heat in the expanding high explosive reaction gases, but no, it will not result in an subsonic pressure wave capable of cutting through heavy columns, ie. it will still be loud.

If I'm wrong and there exists a very fast acting high explosive that can cut a heavy column and produce less than 145 dBA, let's see it.
 
jaydeehess said:
About the same for me. They only one I recall replying to this is MM, who stated that a) the windows would muffle the sound and b) that a very loud sound will over mod the recording such that no sound is heard. (absolutely ridiculous and is a result of a video editor trying to pretend he's an audio tech)

The only other addressing of the lack of high explosive sounds is the invocation of thermite, which even TSz acknowledges could not possibly be timed to effect the destruction of multiple columns in a millisecond time frame. Then there was the thermite impregnated high explosive nonsense. Yes one can do this and yes it will result in greater heat in the expanding high explosive reaction gases, but no, it will not result in an subsonic pressure wave capable of cutting through heavy columns, ie. it will still be loud.

If I'm wrong and there exists a very fast acting high explosive that can cut a heavy column and produce less than 145 dBA, let's see it.
Click to expand...

The only way thermite would work is in an oxygen cutter to rapidly burn though steel, but you have to find a source of oxygen that would survive the fires.

That's the crux I can build an oxygen cutter with thermite to do it, but it would not survive the fires.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
The only way thermite would work is in an oxygen cutter to rapidly burn though steel, but you have to find a source of oxygen that would survive the fires.

That's the crux I can build an oxygen cutter with thermite to do it, but it would not survive the fires.
Click to expand...

Nor would it cut through those columns in milliseconds, nor would it be possible to time the cutting of 192 columns within a short ( <<1 second) time frame using thermite torch.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
The only way thermite would work is in an oxygen cutter to rapidly burn though steel, but you have to find a source of oxygen that would survive the fires.

That's the crux I can build an oxygen cutter with thermite to do it, but it would not survive the fires.
Click to expand...

jaydeehess said:
Nor would it cut through those columns in milliseconds, nor would it be possible to time the cutting of 192 columns within a short ( <<1 second) time frame using thermite torch.
Click to expand...
All of which is irrelevant because there was no CD.

We spend so much time chasing truther nonsense we seem to forget that the argument is arse about.

No CD == No need for any of the fancy Cutty Burny bits. Whether or not they exist, whether or not they were on site means nothing because there was no CD.

100tonne stockpiles of thermXte at ground zero would prove nothing in the absence of CD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom