Momentum Transfer in WTC

ghost707 said:
It's on the History Channel right now.

And you should have already done the math on your own before you started this thread Killtown.....I mean truthseeker.
Click to expand...
It's not Killtown. Killtown can still post here, he wasn't banned or even suspended.
 
Loss Leader said:
Wow! That is ... just ... wow.

Okay, so we finally have Truthseeker's hypothesis as to the colapse of the towers. Now, we can move on to question two and it is for all the points: Do you realize what you are asking us to believe?

Because you're asking us to believe a lot. You're asking us to believe:

1. That the government decided to win public support for a war against Islam through a false flag operation.

2. That the government studied possible targets and discarded any government buildings, monuments, military facilities, naval vessels or anything else that they could completely control.

3. That the government chose a civilian target in the most populous city in America.

4. That the government chose to execute the plan the day after a national holiday, ensuring thousands more casualties than if the plan had gone forward twenty-four hours earlier.

5. That the government studied how best to bring down the towers but no witness to such an engineering/demolition study has ever come forward.

6. That the government's plan for controlled demolition was unlike any other controlled demolition in engineering history, proceeding from near-the-top to the ground instead of from the ground up.

7. That, despite the fact that the 1993 WTC bombing was carried out from the ground and despite the fact that ground-up demolitions are better understood by experts, the government chose not to simulate a ground-floor bombing but an airplane strike.

8. That the government planted explosives in the Word Trade Center but no single witness has ever come forward to claim any part in the attack.

9. That the government made 45 degree cuts in crucial support structures before September 11 but with no apparant fear that this would cause any instability in the building until they were ready on 9/11.

10. That four passenger jets took off on 9/11 with 19 terrorists onboard, that their names were on the manifests, that airport personnel remembered them, that ground controlers heard speaking over radios, and that passengers called loved ones and described but that all of this was Not the cause of the collapse of the towers.

11. That two 767s hit the towers in exactly the right spots to correspond with the government's plan for a close-to-the-top-down controlled demolition either making the terrorist patsies the luckiest unwitting co-conspirators in history or showing that air force pilots can barrel in to a building at 400 mph at exactly the right altitude even though the pilot who struck tower one did so while turning.

12. That the government's plan which went so perfectly in execution got so botched up when Iraq, the country the government wanted to invade, turned out to be the one country none of the terrorists were from and the one country that never gave a cent to their terrorist organizations.

13. That all of this was accomplished without one single witness feeling guilt or remorse or admitting to anyone his involvement whereas the patsy, Osama Bin Laden, proudly proclaims his involvement whenever he gets the chance.

Did I miss anything?
Click to expand...


Excellent post Loss Leader.

The present administration can't even conduct covert overseas wiretapping without the whole world knowing about it, yet according to CT's we are supposed to believe that they arranged the destruction of the both World Trade towers involving hundreds if not thousands of people to pull it off.
 
ghost707 said:
The present administration can't even conduct covert overseas wiretapping without the whole world knowing about it, yet according to CT's we are supposed to believe that they arranged the destruction of the both World Trade towers involving hundreds if not thousands of people to pull it off.
Click to expand...
[tinfoil_hat]
That's just a smoke screen to distract from the heinous crimes of 9/11!
[/tinfoil_hat]
 
Kent, please tell me what you observe that allows you to believe that the flashes in the video I linked are reflections off of aluminum. THere is no debris visible. Please don't avoid. Please explain. i have asked many times and you are dodging.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Kent, please tell me what you observe that allows you to believe that the flashes in the video I linked are reflections off of aluminum. THere is no debris visible. Please don't avoid. Please explain. i have asked many times and you are dodging.
Click to expand...

He isn't equipped with x-ray vision like you are; therefore he cannot see that there is no debris in that voluminous cloud of dust and smoke. Also, if there is no debris in the area of the explosives, then how is the explosive charge being suspended in mid-air like that?

Perhaps you've finally found Christopheras invisicrete TM explosives?
 
Last edited:
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Kent, please tell me what you observe that allows you to believe that the flashes in the video I linked are reflections off of aluminum. THere is no debris visible. Please don't avoid. Please explain. i have asked many times and you are dodging.
Click to expand...


Truthseeker, you are the one dodging, among other things, my last post. Are you aware that you are asking us to believe the thirteen points I listed?
 
Okay so I've just had a look at truth's video...

Before I proceed I'd like to briefly outline my meagre crudentials. I don't consider myself an "expert" by a long shot. However I do consider myself more capable of photographic/video interpretation than probably 90% of the population.

I have a BPSA from Unitec Institute of Technology
Auckland, NZ

My Major was Film and Television, and my specialisations were Production and Cinematography.

It is the Cinematography specialisation I am focusing on here.

An important part of the course was photographic interpretation. For example, a common exercise was to be given a scene from a film. From the few collaborating shots (or sometimes, from a single shot) we would have to draw set plans and lighting plans, as well as determine any gripping arrangement (a camera crane, dolly, etc)

This would then be compared to actual plans of the actual set and lighting plan used for that actual scene.

In the process of these exercises, and many others, we learned about determining 3 dimensional space, the nature of different lenses, how easily images and deceive, and obviously, a great deal about how light behaves (the nature of light is the fundamental discipline of cinematography)

First, a number of things. The bright flash (which lasts a single frame and is no larger than a single pixel) occurs after collapse initiation.

It also occurs in the midst of some sort of failure at that point in the building - Truth's assertion that there is no debris there until AFTER the flash is false.

Lastly, the flash is far from unique. In fact, throughout the entire duration of the video similar flashes can be seen occuring all over the place - in other parts of the building, on the smoke cloud itself, and on tower 2.

I propose two most likely explanations:

1) Sunlight reflecting of something metallic in appearance
2) Digital drop-outs on the video tape

So what is a drop-out?

Until recently, all digital video cameras recorded material on magnetic tape. On well used tapes, or on cheaper consumer tapes, the magnetic particles on the tape literally "drop-out" - falling off the tape. This creates "spots" in the image, which usually appear as white dots.

-Andrew
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Kent, please tell me what you observe that allows you to believe that the flashes in the video I linked are reflections off of aluminum. THere is no debris visible. Please don't avoid. Please explain. i have asked many times and you are dodging.
Click to expand...
Does anyone else here think I haven't answered TruthSeeker1234 time and time again?
If I haven't would some please tell me.


Let's try something...do you see debris here flashing?
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc1dem7/911.wtc.1.demolition.north.03.avi

Would you agree it happens at the same time as this video from gordons site?
http://www.911eyewitness.com/truth/downloads/spirefinish.wmv
 
Last edited:
Kent1 said:
Does anyone else here think I haven't answered TruthSeeker1234 time and time again?
If I haven't would some please tell me.


Let's try something...do you see debris here flashing?
http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc1dem7/911.wtc.1.demolition.north.03.avi

Would you agree it happens at the same time as this video from gordons site?
http://www.911eyewitness.com/truth/d...pirefinish.wmv
Click to expand...

Actually, I do see it at the very top of the dust cloud in the first video. Its debris reflecting light.
 
No, Kent, you and others have done just fine.

TruthSeeker1234 said:
Unfortunately, given the utterly un-scientific nature of the NIST study, and the fact that NIST did not even study the collapses themselves, only the pre-collapse, I am not willing to accept the alleged conclusions of that authority.
Click to expand...

"TruthSeeker," obviously an ironic name, I took umbrage earlier when you accused me of being "unscientific," earlier in this thread and without basis. In light of the above, I guess you just use the term strangely. In fact, it now appears you were paying me a compliment.

Boy, I'm sure glad I spent the day at the target range instead of monitoring this dead-end thread.

For those of you going to Ground Zero tomorrow, be safe, live free, and keep it respectful and intelligent. Honor the victims by making this a better country.
 
I'm watching right now the documentary filmed by the French brothers. Both collapses were filmed at close quarters as they happened.

A slow rumble. But, where are the booms? Where is the controlled demolition? Where are the CD flashes and explosions?

They're not there because it wasn't a CD.
 
gumboot said:
Until recently, all digital video cameras recorded material on magnetic tape. On well used tapes, or on cheaper consumer tapes, the magnetic particles on the tape literally "drop-out" - falling off the tape. This creates "spots" in the image, which usually appear as white dots.
Click to expand...

Gumboot - On cheaper tapes, the first few inches of the tape sometimes didn't have any magnetic coating at all. Anything that you tried to record on that first part was lost. What was that first part of the tape called?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom