Loose Change - Part III

[Sentinel]

WTC Implosion

I just copied a show of the National Geographic Channel where the Controlled Demolition Group UK, showed how they take down steel structures. they use a combonation "Jelly Mix" something like Thermite but quicker on the steel member joints.


Nice map brainster




Sentinel

 

[Gravy]

Hey, now they have their own journal, open only to conspiracy nutbars of course. How "scholarly".

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

OMG. The "Flying Elephant" paper is a doozie. "Guess what I discovered was in the world's most heavily-traveled airspace at the time of the attacks in New York: airplanes!!!!!!!!!!"

I cannot believe how stupid these people are.

eta: Oops. You're all way ahead of me.

 

[CptColumbo]

Dubfan, you got banned?

Any idea why?

 

[dubfan]

Dubfan, you got banned?

Any idea why?

Nope, not banned. Merc just kept deleting my posts. My account was still active as of a few seconds ago.

Skeptics are forced to stay in their "cage" now. Seriously. That's the term they used.

 

[Gravy]

Which direction did WTC 7 fall? Was it south? Could some of the damage to the north of the complex be attributed to 7's collapse? Was collateral damage taken into account for this diagram?

I'm just asking for clarification.

It mostly fell, like the other buildings, straight down. Significant parts of it went across Barclay Street to the north and nearly destroyed 30 W. Broadway.

 

[dubfan]

OMG. The "Flying Elephant" paper is a doozie. "Guess what I discovered was in the world's most heavily-traveled airspace at the time of the attacks in New York: airplanes!!!!!!!!!!"

I actually laughed out loud at that. That, and 60hzxtl's earlier link to your secret CIA activities.

 

[CptColumbo]

Nope, not banned. Merc just kept deleting my posts. My account was still active as of a few seconds ago.

Skeptics are forced to stay in their "cage" now. Seriously. That's the term they used.

Are they still claiming to defend the Constitution (as long as you agree with them)?

 

[pgwenthold]

Which direction did WTC 7 fall? Was it south? Could some of the damage to the north of the complex be attributed to 7's collapse? Was collateral damage taken into account for this diagram?

I was concerned about WTC7, so when it comes to WTC1, I focused mainly on the west. The WFC2 and WFC3 buildings, in particular. Coincidentally or not, making the ring big enough to cover WFC3 puts it right out to about Murray St.

Not also that I assumed a circular area of damage, and it could easily be distorted one direction or another.

 

[JamesB]

I just copied a show of the National Geographic Channel where the Controlled Demolition Group UK, showed how they take down steel structures. they use a combonation "Jelly Mix" something like Thermite but quicker on the steel member joints.

Thermite is not even used in demolitions. It is not an explosive.

 

[pgwenthold]

Very helpful. Can I post this at LC? (or perhaps you would like to -- I'd encourage you to do so if you are so inclined)

I'd never waste my time there, so you can do it if you want.

In the end, though, you don't need my figure. Just show the original and ask, if it came down "in its own footprint," how did all that stuff get damaged so far away?

 

[dubfan]

I'd never waste my time there, so you can do it if you want.

In the end, though, you don't need my figure. Just show the original and ask, if it came down "in its own footprint," how did all that stuff get damaged so far away?

They like pictures over there.

 

[CptColumbo]

They like pictures over there.

Shiny, shiny pictures.

BTW I'm still suspended.

 

[Johnny Pixels]

Shiny, shiny pictures.

BTW I'm still suspended.

You ask too many questions captain.

 

[azazal]

You ask too many questions captain.

I thought you only had to ask one over there - "Can you explain you rules on banning?"

 

[Gravy]

I'd never waste my time there, so you can do it if you want.

In the end, though, you don't need my figure. Just show the original and ask, if it came down "in its own footprint," how did all that stuff get damaged so far away?

People who never visited the WTC have a very hard time envisioning how tall the towers were. Their height (more than a quarter-mile) made them very close to all the surrounding buildings, in terms of the potential energy available to eject debris. For example, some CTs make a fuss about WTC 7 being 300 feet away from the north tower. Well, that's less than 1/4 the height of the tower. It's REALLY CLOSE. The photo below gives a better idea of the scale of things than looking at a two-dimensional plan.

 

[Blackwell]

So as I implied in my last post, I really like the damage map provided by brainster. Kudos.

(...lots of explanation and map image edited out...)

nice work, pgwenthold. Is it possible to indicate the direction each plane took? (I'm not asking you to edit your image - a quick text explanation would suffice.) Thanks!

 

[Montoya]

Oh, now *this* is entertaining.

Merc the Jerk has claimed to have discovered the foolproof technique for silencing skeptics (which is basically, if jets are such effective tools for controlled demolition, why don't professional demolition experts bring down buildings by flying jets into them?).

It seems our dear friends have run out of ideas. Not exactly worthy adversaries. For some reason they do everything they can to avoid talking to skeptics, as if living under an evil government that kills thousands of its own people to advance a few vague goals is such a desirable notion. If I were a believer in 911 conspiracies, I'd be happy to let someone convince me it was only a few crazy arabs, and that our government can be trusted after all.

 

[JamesB]

Merc the Jerk has claimed to have discovered the foolproof technique for silencing skeptics (which is basically, if jets are such effective tools for controlled demolition, why don't professional demolition experts bring down buildings by flying jets into them?).

This is like saying, I could remove an infected tooth by repeatedly smashing you in the face with a wrench, so why don't dentists do that as it would be cheaper than oral surgery?

 

[pgwenthold]

People who never visited the WTC have a very hard time envisioning how tall the towers were. Their height (more than a quarter-mile) made them very close to all the surrounding buildings, in terms of the potential energy available to eject debris. For example, some CTs make a fuss about WTC 7 being 300 feet away from the north tower. Well, that's less than 1/4 the height of the tower. It's REALLY CLOSE. The photo below gives a better idea of the scale of things than looking at a two-dimensional plan.

"REALLY CLOSE" in a relative sense, I agree. But in terms of "in its own footprint" it's not really that close. WTC7 is almost 2 WTC1 diameters away from WTC1. Is falling on the ground three buildings away "in its own footprint'? If so, then they are using the word in a way that I don't understand.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

It seems our dear friends have run out of ideas. Not exactly worthy adversaries. For some reason they do everything they can to avoid talking to skeptics, as if living under an evil government that kills thousands of its own people to advance a few vague goals is such a desirable notion. If I were a believer in 911 conspiracies, I'd be happy to let someone convince me it was only a few crazy arabs, and that our government can be trusted after all.

Yes, but that wouldn't be as kewl, or gnarly, or whatever inane term the kids are using these days.

Welcome to the forum.