Top Down Demolition.

TruthersLie said:
that one is the most damning yet... because you can clearly see it is only 4 or 5 floors crushing down over 8 floors..

funny how that works.

It must be a new type of NEWTONS laws... they only work in France. (and the WTC complex) they obviously don't work wherever heiwa or Bill S. are.
Click to expand...

I agree that is great example. TOTALLY destroys the whole truther claim that the bottom section should have held the weight of the top part.
 
TruthersLie said:
OH Heiwa... and other twoofs.

http://www.strimoo.com/video/12509995/Mort-d-un-batiment-MySpaceVideos.html

pay particular attention from 1:40 to 2:05
and 2:21 to 2:25

Good slow motion starts at 2:30 and goes until 2:50.

My french isn't the greatest, but it looks like it says soemthing about the subbasements...

(so yet again Heiwa, you show that you have done NO research into this collapse (like ronin point) and are just spewing garbage. Tsk tsk tsk. come ths unprepared to my classes and you would FAIL.)

I believe the word is... OWNED.

Is there a crush up at the end.. is the top crushed? Is that RUBBLE I see on the top of a GRAVITY DRIVEN COLLAPSE?

Oh my.... I think you owe them $1,000,000 Heiwa... because that definately met the Heiwa Challenge.
Click to expand...

The collapse didn't slow down until it reached the bottom floor and yes, there was a crush up/crush down.
 
Heiwa said:
Can't you see that they destroy the lower part of the structure first? And that the intact top drops down into the rubble? This is classic controlled demolition from bottom up! And it actually looks like WTC 7!
Click to expand...
No. They destroyed one or two floors, and the top crushed all the remaining floors down to the radically different, thus collapse-arresting, ground floor.

And it was done without explosives.

And it creatred the same kinds of ejecta as the towers.

And it sounded just the same.

Your shiment of fail has arrived.
 
Hah.

"Truthers are so dumb."
"How dumb are they?"
"Truthers are so dumb they happily post evidence that proves them wrong while thinking it proves them right."

Someone's got their brain in backwards.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
Hah.

"Truthers are so dumb."
"How dumb are they?"
"Truthers are so dumb they happily post evidence that proves them wrong while thinking it proves them right."

Someone's got their brain in backwards.
Click to expand...

not only is the OP a giant ball of failure
but he dragged heiwa down too
lol
whod ever think wed have the french to thank :) lol jk
 
Mancman said:
Another verinage video:
http://www.dailymotion.com/playlist...i32e_demolition-dimmeuble-a-vandoeuvrele_news

You can actually see the machinery pull the walls out, top block of only 3 floors breaks free and pulverises the rest.
Click to expand...


That is the best one yet! It's difficult to get an accurate count of how many storeys tall that building is in that particular video, but it looks to be about 15-16 storeys.

I, too, am surprised that nobody here had ever stumbled across these videos before, but wow, I'm glad they have come to light now. Vive la France.
 
Some obvious questions are
1. How long does it take to prepare a building for CD?
2. Can it be done while people are inside and these people not know what is happening?
3. Can it be done while the lifts are out of order and the stairs partly blocked by people trying to get out and fire fighters trying to get in?
 
Press briefing from Ferrari Demolition about what they did.

Google translation

The technique of jacking is a building collapse on itself by
poussée hydraulique, horizontale ou oblique. hydraulic thrust, horizontal or oblique. Des vérins hydrauliques, commandés Hydraulic actuators, controlled
à distance, mettent en mouvement la partie supérieure de l'immeuble, qui en se distance, set in motion the upper part of the building, which is
déplaçant latéralement s'effondre sur la partie inférieure en provoquant moving laterally collapsed on the bottom, causing
l'écrasement de celui-ci à la façon d'un château de cartes, dans une direction crushing it in like a house of cards in a direction chosen and a low amplitude. There is no explosive implemented or horizontal projection of rubble, this qui permet de réduire le périmètre de sûreté de 50 à 70 mètres environ du which reduces the security perimeter from 50 to 70 meters of
bâtiment, et limite considérablement le nombre de personnes à évacuer. building, and severely limits the number of people to evacuate.
Click to expand...

Compare.

Ferrari Demolition website for any further questions.

ETA: Copy/paste from Google translation faulty. Look it up for yourself.
 
Last edited:
I think it's time for a new improved axiom.

"A smaller part of an isotropic or composite 3-D structure, when dropped on and impacting a greater part of same structure by gravity, cannot one-way crush down the greater part of the structure."
 
Astute Perspicuous said:
Well, I have heard a bunch of so-called, self proclaimed "debunkers" bring up that they have never seen a top down implosion.

Well, here is your chance. Wow, how close it does resemble something we saw 8 years and 15 days ago.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=syzKBBB_THE

Have an excellent day.

P.S. Do you list "debunker" on your resumes and applications?
Click to expand...
Great math, does it help you form rational ideas on 911? Bad math, no point made; very astute, Astute.
The video proves Heiwa's axiom is moronic.
 
TexasJack said:
It really is funny how the truthers have tucked their tails and fled the thread.
Click to expand...


170604790ea2c9af4f.jpg


"When danger reared its ugly head/He bravely turned his tail and fled"
 
This is a good thread to discuss top-down collapse of buildings. Here we have several examples:





I also looked up the website of BCT Demolition, the French company which performed this top-down collapse:

http://www.dailymotion.com/playlist...i32e_demolition-dimmeuble-a-vandoeuvrele_news

I believe the building had about 13 floors (I tried to count them, so it could be 12 or 14). You had 4 floors crushing down all the remaining floors, so roughly 33% or a 1 to 3 ratio of crushdown.

There is no reason, based on physics, to believe that you couldn't apply this model to a taller building. The reasons have been discussed many times on other threads by those with engineering and physics training.

Here's what the company says:

Demolition of City Bird Bldg. PICS à Vandoeuvre (54) PICS at Vandoeuvre (54)
Démolition d'un bâtiment logement en milieu urbain accolé à un autre bâtiment d'une hauteur de R + 9 d'une surface de 250 ml x 15 ml avec tri sélectif primaire et évacuation de 70% des décombres et concassage de 30% destinés à la réalisation de plateformes
Demolition of a building housing in urban areas contiguous to another building with a height of R + 9 of a 250 ml x 15 ml primary sorting and disposal of 70% of debris and crushing 30% for implementation platforms

http://www.bct-demolition.com/ref.html
 
Oh wow. It must be so awful and really hurt to have something you have invested so much time and energy in to come crumbling down with video evidence which completely debunks what you have been claiming all this time.

I'm so sorry to see this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom