• 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.

WTC dust

Status
Not open for further replies.
bill smith said:
I think it just drove there too. Lucky there was no half-million tons of rubble to bar it's path eh ?
Click to expand...

right, because the towers were "dustified" and all the rubble was a gigantic hologram :rolleyes:


did you look at a map yet?
 
excaza said:
right, because the towers were "dustified" and all the rubble was a gigantic hologram :rolleyes:


did you look at a map yet?
Click to expand...

What rubble ? (No close up photos accepted. Only aeriel or panoramic views with other buildings for reference needed )
 
Bill SMith.

This is pathetic.

Where did the rubble go if it wasn't at Ground Zero?

You don't believe any of this 'dustification' and missing steel crap any more than we do.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Bill SMith.

This is pathetic.

Where did the rubble go if it wasn't at Ground Zero?

You don't believe any of this 'dustification' and missing steel crap any more than we do.
Click to expand...

The steel and rubble are gone. That proves that something exptic happened on 9/11 requiring an in depth independent investigation.

That says it all I think.

Let's open up the whole bag of snakes again under the cameras this time.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Yes something happened. It was loaded onto trucks and shipped away.
Click to expand...

The nine million square feet of wire mesh matting that was the floor reinforcement too ? What about the four million square feet of floorpans into which the concrete floors were poured ? They're gone too. China maybe ? lol
 
so tell us where you think they went?

Why can't any of the truthers just get to the point, always the endless pages of hinting and suggesting but never getting anywhere.
 
bill smith said:
Would it make a difference to you if I was talking about weathercasts from before the first plane ?
Click to expand...
Ley me get this straight. A mega-corporation has the ability to tap a hurricane for power, but cannot figure out how to make bazillions a day more by selling or licensing the tech around the world than they could by keeping it secret to advance a plot by an evil government?

Did you get some contaminated cholly weed?

Edited to correct garbled word order. Must have coffeee soon.
 
Last edited:
If ever we needed more proof that Bill Smith is just a troll, this thread is it.
 
I stopped responding to bill smith like a year ago. I advise everybody to do the same thing.
 
leftysergeant said:
Ley me get this straight. A mega-corporation has the ability to tap a hurricane for power, but cannot figure out how to make bazillions a day more by selling or licensing the tech around the world than they could by keeping it secret to advance a plot by an evil government?

Did you get some contaminated cholly weed?

Edited to correct garbled word order. Must have coffeee soon.
Click to expand...

Why make billions when you can make....millions?


Bwahahhahhhahhahhahhha


:p
 
aggle-rithm said:
Believe it or not, I found a VIDEO!

It was actually destroyed in 1973, when I was ten.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/video/4RqcBiBc4fo-medical-arts-building-implosion-fort.aspx

One of the interesting things is that, in the wake of the collapse, there was a Medical-Arts-Building-shaped column of dust left in its place, exactly like the one left when the final interior columns of the WTC collapsed. This has been shown by truthers as evidence that the building was "dustified" by ray guns from space.

ETA: The collapse begins at about 1:30.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to compare the footage you posted to that taken on 9/11.
First, that building was taken down with explosives. Second, that building was not on fire at the time it was demolished. Third, the dust isn't the same.

The dust/fumes from the destruction of the WTC lasted an entire year. That isn't normal dust from a building implosion.
 
sabretooth47 said:
Perhaps you haven't actually read her website? From her "Conclusions" page:



In other words, we have no idea about the "who-what-where-when-why", but, by golly, it was definitely a DEW!
Click to expand...

"Consistent with DEW."

It might be something other than DEW, but it certainly wasn't an airplane.
 
Oystein said:
About 1/3 of the potential energy of the towers was converted into fracture energy while the towers fell.

150000000000 Joules are plenty to bend and break a lot of steel and pulverise a lot of gypsum and concrete on top of that.

Most of the remaining 350000000000 Joules of formerly potential energy produced even more dust and debris.

Pretty much the same that happened in these videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5iFW89tw2k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prwvj-npt5s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW9z08ml230
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1X8j53U1So
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwjcQOlX8Xw

I chose those because they don't involve any or much explosives
In the next, you will notice that the explosions create only little dust, by far the most is created by the collapse itself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOdjOrnnWg0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbauH-mvmDw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsePUn5-88c - even though it collapsed only half!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LArxg0zMANQ

etc. etc. etc.
Click to expand...


"Fracture energy"?

OK. You sort of bring up a good point.

Since we know the height of the building (1368 feet) and we know how fast things fall from that height, we can talk about how fast the buildings were destroyed, compared to what can be expected from a "concrete floors crashing onto other floors" scenario.

The fastest an object could possibly fall from 1368 feet is about 10 seconds. Acceleration is important, here, because this value assumes no interference from any slowing force.

I say the steel beams of the WTC should have provided some resistance to the fall, but the speed of the destruction says this can't have happened. The buildings fell almost as fast as they would have if zero resistance were supplied by the walls of the building.

I say that a steel building would have resisted any collapsing floors, at least enough to show a difference in fall time. If the floors resisted to any significant degree, the buildings wouldn't have fallen as fast as they did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom