• 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.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
geggy said:
It's funny when people say the top portion is heavy and thick with concrete and steel yet the bottom portion of the building is 95 percent air. :boggled:
Click to expand...
It's even funnier when people shout...
geggy said:
EXPLOSIVE CHARGES WERE USED, NOT CUTTER CHARGES
Click to expand...
without a shred of genuine evidence.

Note: making wild a$$ed guesses based on videos is not evidence.
 
I know many of you have said that the buildings are stripped and furnitures, office supplies are removed before they set off the explosives. One of the reasons for that is to reduce the volume of dust while the building is being imploded.

Demolition crew would wrap chain links and mats around the concrete core to reduce flying concretes as they are blasted.

I also want to mention that someone with great experience in physics would only require basic understanding of building structures for implosions.
 
geggy said:
YES IT WAS



EXACTLY MY POINT



EXPLOSIVE CHARGES WERE USED, NOT CUTTER CHARGES



YOU LEFT OUT THE CENTRAL STEEL CORE.

It's funny when people say the top portion is heavy and thick with concrete and steel yet the bottom portion of the building is 95 percent air. :boggled:
Click to expand...
According to the evidence, geggy is either 14 years old or a special ed graduate. Any other option is impossible.
 
geggy said:
I know many of you have said that the buildings are stripped and furnitures, office supplies are removed before they set off the explosives. One of the reasons for that is to reduce the volume of dust while the building is being imploded.

Demolition crew would wrap chain links and mats around the concrete core to reduce flying concretes as they are blasted.
Click to expand...

...and yet there is still an enormous volume of dust produced by a planned demolition (please see the video I linked to above.)

How does this reconcile with your contention that the volume of dust from the WTC towers collapse was too high?
 
geggy said:
I also want to mention that someone with great experience in physics would only require basic understanding of building structures for implosions.
Click to expand...

No. That is completely wrong.

Stephen Hawking may be one of the smartest people on Earth, but I wouldn't want to use a skyscraper designed solely by him. Conversely, I would not want quantum aspects of stellar death explained by the guy who put up the WTC. The fields have some overlap, but they concentrate on different things.

Demoltion requires a lot of training, a lot of experience, and a host of structural factors that most physics professors and students only lightly touch on.

So far, the physics people from the Scholars for 911 truth have yet to even demonstrate competent physics, let alone engineering.

JayUtah, on the BAUT forum stated the problems with planted demolitions best:

We're literally talking about coming back from a fire drill and noting that the wall of your office is missing and massive steel structural members behind it have been exposed, the fireproofing cleaned away, and portions of it removed with a torch. What are you supposed to do then, hang the picture of your family from the jagged metal edge and go on like nothing happened?
Click to expand...

:D
 
geggy said:
YES IT WAS



EXACTLY MY POINT



EXPLOSIVE CHARGES WERE USED, NOT CUTTER CHARGES



YOU LEFT OUT THE CENTRAL STEEL CORE.

It's funny when people say the top portion is heavy and thick with concrete and steel yet the bottom portion of the building is 95 percent air. :boggled:
Click to expand...


Send us a postcard from that land of irrationality you're in; because it's clear you've left the country of intelligible posts.
 
geggy said:
...I also want to mention that someone with great experience in physics would only require basic understanding of building structures for implosions.
Click to expand...
And yet 100% of those with "great experience" in structural engineering agree the towers were destroyed just as they were, and not by controlled demolition, pretty much trumping your "basic understanding" physicist.
 
Forget about "common sense", Geggy. The problem with common sense is that it's really not all that common.

Seriously, "common sense" doesn't work in these situations simply because these situations are not all that common. When something very unusual like this happens, it is tempting to compare it to something we are more familiar with, like comparing a "toppling over tower" to a wooden block. But the situations are not analogous, so "common sense" won't apply.

If all we had to do was listen to common sense, then quantum mechanics wouldn't stand a chance of working out. But it does. Consistently and repeatedly.
 
geggy said:
Compare...
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/building-implosion-9.gif
This was controlled demolition, inc's project. The top portion was deliberately brought down with explosives. The bottom portion were cut by workers with charges in order to weaken the structure fdor the top portion to act as a hammer.

http://www.blackcat.ca/lifeline/KB/images/WTCTERROR,south_tower_collapse.jpg
This was the beginning of south tower collapse. The dust ring surrounding the towers were excessively high in volumes.
Click to expand...
Again, this is an "affirming the precedent" logical fallacy.

You can't compare what the WTC looked like as it fell to what a controlled demolition looks like to conclude that the WTC was a controlled demolition.

You have to compare what the WTC looked like to what an uncontrolled demolition doesn't look like to conclude that the WTC was a controlled demolition.

Otherwise, you end up proving that parakeets are cats because they both have claws on their feet.
 
geggy said:
YES IT WAS
Click to expand...

So the debris falling on the outskirts of the collapse were falling faster than freefall? How?

It's funny when people say the top portion is heavy and thick with concrete and steel yet the bottom portion of the building is 95 percent air. :boggled:
Click to expand...

Here's something to keep you awake at night: The bottom portion was also thick with concrete and steel. The top portion was also 95% air.

Did I blow your mind? ;)
 
aggle-rithm said:
So the debris falling on the outskirts of the collapse were falling faster than freefall? How?
Click to expand...

Come on, aggle - it's obvious! Each of those particles was being controlled by a nanojet! Once the particles landed, the nanobots went to work, breaking down every remaining speck of explosive residue and wiring. Der!
 
drywalls and everything else but concrete are removed for safer reason and less clean up after the building are imploded. When drywalls, absestos are pulverized into smaller particles, it can be hazardous to your health as you breath in the dangerous toxins inside the fine dust. Which is basically why tens of thousands of volunteers, rescure team and clean up crew are ridiculed with health problems from breathing in toxins from the dust from materials that used to be what was inside the building after the EPA (or was told by the white house) lied to the ground zero crew that the air was safe to breath.
 
geggy said:
drywalls and everything else but concrete are removed for safer reason and less clean up after the building are imploded. When drywalls, absestos are pulverized into smaller particles, it can be hazardous to your health as you breath in the dangerous toxins inside the fine dust. Which is basically why tens of thousands of volunteers, rescure team and clean up crew are ridiculed with health problems from breathing in toxins from the dust from materials that used to be what was inside the building after the EPA (or was told by the white house) lied to the ground zero crew that the air was safe to breath.
Click to expand...

Why didn't the white house tell them the air was unsafe? Wouldn't that have been a great way to keep people away from the crime scene? Then they could demolish more random empty buildings, steal more non-existant treasure, and perform more bizarre and pointless deeds.
 
geggy said:
drywalls and everything else but concrete are removed for safer reason and less clean up after the building are imploded. When drywalls, absestos are pulverized into smaller particles, it can be hazardous to your health as you breath in the dangerous toxins inside the fine dust. Which is basically why tens of thousands of volunteers, rescure team and clean up crew are ridiculed with health problems from breathing in toxins from the dust from materials that used to be what was inside the building after the EPA (or was told by the white house) lied to the ground zero crew that the air was safe to breath.
Click to expand...
Which, if true (the screening program hasn't been implemented yet, so we don't know the extent of the Ground Zero health problems yet) then it's horrible and tragic...but it has nothing to do with the cause of the collapses, so what's your point?
 
Shrinker said:
Why didn't the white house tell them the air was unsafe? Wouldn't that have been a great way to keep people away from the crime scene? Then they could demolish more random empty buildings, steal more non-existant treasure, and perform more bizarre and pointless deeds.
Click to expand...
Either way, the CTs can use it as "evidence"--brilliant!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom