Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 11:21am PT
|
What do you think that large jagged steel structure sticking out of the debris cloud is Tony?
You think that there is only a single core column in the pic? Hilarious!
Do we get to add in the time for this part to collapse to the total collapse time?
Google for standing core. Some Truthers use this as proof of demo.
Off to work, but it's been fun.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 11:40am PT
|
can't find my good photos of the core and shell under construction, but the first one in this link isn't bad:
http://www.stj911.com/evidence/wtc.html#construction
the core had forty-some separate steel columns, bound together to give it unit strength. any destruction of the core where the planes hit would not have affected the structure below. weakening or melting from jet fuel is just another pleasant myth.
the shells were formed by interlocking units that had vertical, horizontal and diagonal strength. the best metaphor is a window screen. you don't poke a pencil through a window screen and have the whole screen fall apart.
again, that linked photo shows the strengths and weaknesses of tower structure. admittedly, the greatest weakness would be in the connections of each floor to the core and shell. there were attempts to assail that--there really wasn't anything wrong with them--which were abandoned when the ridiculousness of the pancake theory became apparent. your photo, monolith, should show the entire core standing and perhaps the entire shell as well.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 12:03pm PT
|
I will post this again. Anyone that wants to believe the math above, please take the time to not be fooled, and watch with your own eyes, a very capable individual explain it to you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_j1jAv1j3U
Best case scenario 42seconds.
You will see how the math above is flawed and misleading.
Again, it is no different than having a piece of pro that can hold 2-3 times body weight and falling on it from 10' above -- You will pull the piece, slow slightly, then accelerate to the next piece, and remember you already have velocity after the first piece pulls, so the acceleration will increase the velocity, thus the inertial load on the 2nd piece. In other words, accelerating all the way down.
What this guy is saying, and miscalculating, applied to the climber and his pro, is that the net force in such a fall is upward (from the pro), that the [static] piece exerts more force upward than you [dynamically] falling on that piece, and this is just plain false.
To put it simply... The static load of the floors below is overcome by the SIGNIFICANT dynamic load of the mass falling on it, increasing in mass and velocity [inertia] all the way down. Remember, what little resistance the floors below give does not arrest the fall to 0, so there is already velocity that is only added to as it falls to the next floor, gaining more mass and velocity as it crashes into the next floor, etc. Thus velocity and mass [inertia] will increase.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 12:18pm PT
|
the videos show floor-by-floor destruction of all three elements--core, shell and floors, not shearing and pancaking Look at the picture, Tony.
Then look at the word I put in bold in the quote of you.
Then admit that you are wrong, as you can clearly see the core standing in that picture.
I'll bet you can't do it... You just cannot admit that you are wrong, about any of this, even when given the evidence that you are.
Remember now... If the core is still standing after the rest of it fell, that means that the joists sheared away from the core, as the rest of it pancaked around the core. So we could even say that the core served to guide the failure all the way down, like pushing a sock down along your calf/ankle... Guess that helps to answer another of Jolly's concernes, why it fell straight down, so he'll have to ignore and deny that as well.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 12:29pm PT
|
More pictures of the standing core for your denial:
Note that this is a sillohette of the core while the building were under construction:
Notice the 2 shafts? Now go back up and look at the really big picture.
So, ummm... Why was it standing if it was purposely and professionally rigged for demolision? Did they not put explosives on the core too?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 12:48pm PT
|
All this controlled demolition argument is a waste of time and what truly distracts from ever getting the real truth behind 9-11. People spend so much time debating and analyzing this that the real red flags, that need serious investigation, get ignored. Perhaps this is the effect of disinformation or, if somehow those towers were really blown up, it was mainly to create this distraction too incredible to believe.
Nobody knows to this day who was behind burning the German Parliament building before Hitler's rise to power.
We are not being told the truth behind 9-11 but that truth will not come out of demolition arguments.
Rule #1: Follow the money idiots! The 9-11 commission refused to follow the money and we hear that the pages redacted from the public report were ones linking Saudi Royal money to the affair. WTF! The money wired to Atta is supremely relevant but nobody goes after it and makes it a big issue.
3 minute video here that says 100x more than all this controlled demo stuff put together
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owJluP_8dcM
#2 The stand down orders by Cheney, the history and details of the 9-11 war games that took the fighters away from the targets and created false blips on the radar screens. Who ordered that? This is something that's got to go directly back to any gov types interested in "letting 9-11" happen, but everybody wants to talk about missles hitting the pentagon.
Then there's piles of other issues outside of the physical facts. air traffic controllers and so on.
Stuff like Bush lying about it, documented here, but never willing to testify under oath about it...WTF!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60&feature=related
It's amazing what we don't know about 9-11. We need to call for more investigation based on reasonable gaps in our knowledge that haven't been addressed. The towers could have been vaporized by alien spacecraft in league with the NWO for all I know, but that would be a pretty stupid drum to beat if you ever want reality to shine on this event.
Peace
Karl
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 01:10pm PT
|
OK Karl...
You seem keen on going the Bush Administration route, so, care to take a stab at this:
Now... Think about this... Either way, terrorist conspiracy or inside job, the planning and initiation of this plan started when Clinton was president, not Bush.
So, to keep using GWB as the key to all this is pretty absurd, as do you really believe ALL of that planning, preperation, and execution could have been done in so little time (just 8 months) by this guy?
Is that belief REALLY very 'reasonable or logical'? Nope... Buit it is a CONVENIENT belief.
Point being... Even if Al Gore had won the Presidency, the attack would still have happened. That's 'An Incovenient Truth, huh? (All pun intended)
C'mon now... Apply some reason and logic here, buddy.
So which is it:
a) ALL (think about what 'all' means) of this was planned and executed in just 8 months.
b) The planning of this started when Clinton and Gore were in office.
You can't have it both ways. You can't ignore the above, yet continue to invoke the Evil Bush Emopire, unless of course you choose option 'a'.
Mind you... I believe that there is lot that hasn't been disclosed, but it is limited to "who knew what and when", as in the complete and utter failure of the inteligence agencies to prevent this, despite plenty of 'red flags'. But I see absolutely no preplanned malice against by anyone in any US administration... I believe there are plenty of people who failed to effectively do their jobs covering their asses. In other words, many were incompetant, and are acting without integrity after the fact as a form of damage control to them or their organizations.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 01:34pm PT
|
rrrAdam -- "I believe there are plenty ..."
You're just like the Christians you continually bash.
You're just guessing .....
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 01:43pm PT
|
Uhhh... OK...
"I readily accept that there are most likely plenty..."
Happy now? I'll bet not. (wink)
Gotta go... They are starting to 'press up' the systems, so hopefully I can walk this stuff down and go home tonight.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 01:46pm PT
|
you're right, karl, there are many more aspects to 9/11 evidence than wtc destruction. quite often it all focuses on narrow things. that plays into "their" hands--get embroiled in the details of one area and forget about anomaly after anomaly in every aspect of what went on that day.
arguing with rrradam here, we forget all about norman mineta, a cabinet-level eyewitness to dick cheney's behavior that day. mineta has pretty much been silenced, although his unpublished testimony to the 9/11 commission has been widely distributed. we'll hear more from "them" after they've had their thinking caps on long enough to cook up an explanation for why cheney wasn't scrambling dozens of F-16s from andrews afb as the airliner approached washington. he was certainly getting minute-by-minute reports of its approach.
rrradam, those photos still underscore the probability of controlled demolition. the towers were sound and standing after the air strikes. your backlit construction photo shows the elegance of their three-part design. your destruction photo shows how instantaneously it was torn apart. the incredible amount of dust showed up early in the destruction sequence, spewing upward into the air. not a gravity collapse.
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 02:13pm PT
|
Ummm...the videos show floor-by-floor destruction of all three elements--core, shell and floors, not shearing and pancaking Look at the picture, Tony.
Then look at the word I put in bold in the quote of you.
Then admit that you are wrong, as you can clearly see the core standing in that picture.
I'll bet you can't do it... You just cannot admit that you are wrong, about any of this, even when given the evidence that you are.
I knew you couldn't do it. You cannot even bring yourself to admit that what you said was wrong, even when directly shown that what you said was wrong.
So... Tell me... How can anyone discuss this with you, when even shown where you are wrong, you cannot acknowledge it. This is not the first time you have ignored direct evidence that shows you are wrong in items you believe to be true.
See... You just want to ask all the questions, ignore the answers, and even ignore the questions posed to you. That is not a discourse, it is a monologue.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 02:16pm PT
|
How long was that so called core standing there after that photo was taken.
:-)
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 02:20pm PT
|
OK Karl...
You seem keen on going the Bush Administration route, so, care to take a stab at this:
Now... Think about this... Either way, terrorist conspiracy or inside job, the planning and initiation of this plan started when Clinton was president, not Bush.
So, to keep using GWB as the key to all this is pretty absurd, as do you really believe ALL of that planning, preperation, and execution could have been done in so little time (just 8 months) by this guy?
Make no mistake, I don't know what happened on 9-11, if it was an inside job or if it were allowed to happen, or if they are just covering their incompetence.
It wasn't done by Bush, that's for sure! Presidents, as Obama continues to prove, are merely pawns of the status quo power structure. The telegraphing of 9-11 was published by the Project for a New American Century. The same guys who were with Bush 1 have been working on stuff for decades.
So I'm not pointing at some specific plot that I know happened. Just that we're being lied to so let's take the cover off the septic tank and pump some sh#t out
Peace
Karl
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 02:47pm PT
|
i see maybe half of a core standing, rrradam, destroyed instantaneously. does that help? i see lots of dust and pulverization, such as would never happen in a gravity collapse, and the destruction, in a matter of seconds, of thousands upon thousands of the strong ties which held it all together. something you're not seeing, buddy.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 02:50pm PT
|
I see bogeymen...The They...everywhere!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 02:58pm PT
|
That's the crux of it Tony.
They believe what they're told, (those who support the govt. version).
Totally contradicts their own selves because those same people are always arguing that fools "believe" and should "think for yourselves" yet they do the exact opposite when they so deem.
Goes to show exactly why you can't trust anyone with this.
When the CIA and FBI HQ deliberately withheld vital information and shut down the FBI criminal investigators that this is criminal and implicates direct US involvement in letting the attacks take place.
Inside job .......
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 03:10pm PT
|
karl said, or if they are just covering their incompetence.
I work for the government, and am a licensed engineer, and am building fireprotected steel nuclear structures. While there are a number of committed and qualified employees within the government, there are just as many who are afraid of being held accountable.
Karl's statement above rings truer than any other argumnets on here in terms of the motivations for discrepancies in testimonies, etc. from that fateful day.
BTW, rradam's analysis off the video is correct. I would put my engineers stamp on that one....
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 03:29pm PT
|
golsen, there are 1,225 engineers and architects who have put their stamps otherwise.
http://www.ae911truth.org
as in any jury trial, it isn't the credentials or number of experts, but the ability of experts to come across to ordinary people. there was nothing simple about the towers' demise, and what gives the lie to all the hocus-pocus is building 7. rrradam can't always remember everything he puts out here, but one of his own fantasy websites admits that no steel skyscrapers ever came down this way before.
now we're talking about revising a perfectly good building code to fit the "facts" of 9/11. are you going to put your stamp on that too? that code developed over a long time and is successful in every big downtown the world over, where buildings hold up perfectly well to storms, fires and aging. and if you like airplane attacks, check out what happened to the empire state building in 1945. like karl says, it's time to take the lid off the septic tank and pump out the crap.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 04:05pm PT
|
Q: Why did Bush oppose creating a commission to look into the attacks?
Q: Why did it take so long to create the commission and why was it so ill-funded?
Q: How long do you think it would have taken you to create a commission to look into the 9/11 attacks if similar attacks happened on your watch as POTUS?
If it smells like a fish, it could possibly be a fish.
Dirtbag, it's not that I see boogie men everywhere, but something is rotten in Rotterdam.
If, after looking at all the evidence shown in this thread of cover-up by the 9/11 Commission, you don't see any cover-up, then I have to say you don't want to see much.
It ain't that the answers are known us commoners, but as Baba implied, I do know that I (we) have been lied to. Are you not curious to know why?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2010 - 04:09pm PT
|
k-man,
Do I think it is likely that several officials f*#ked up?
Yep.
Do I think several officials have not been forthcoming about what they knew or didn't know and how diligent they were in preventing such attacks?
Yep.
Do I think this sort of thing is common in government?
Yep.
Does all the evidence point to some vast, vague, nebulous, and enormously complicated, and riduclous conspiracy involving ill-defined governmental and quasi-governmental involvement?
Get real.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!